Page 3 of 3
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 25 Feb 2021, 17:54
by Tuan_Jim
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑25 Feb 2021, 15:23
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑23 Feb 2021, 14:45
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑23 Feb 2021, 11:34
One of the most inaccurate statements ever written on Boxrec.
It is absurd that the Cooney fight even gets mentioned. Some people just don't understand the sport.
Even with Shavers, he was 35 years old and facing the hardest puncher in the history of the sport. Not exactly damning evidence against him.
Watch the fights with Ledoux and Cobb, which were between Shavers and Conney. Watch his fights between 1973-1978. There is no comparison.
Many guys are retired by this time. Almost without exception, the rest are far past their best.
Ali I, Ali II, Ali III. Quarry. Bobick. Young. Holmes. More than enough evidence.
No doubt he was past his prime. But it still certainly doesn't bode well that he lost decisively to Cooney and Shavers at that stage in his career.
Frankly there are plenty of past prime heavyweights I would pick to beat Cooney and Shavers some well past the age of 37.
I don't see Cooney or Shavers scoring quick kayo wins over the 2002 Holyfield who was nearly 40 years old and with far more brutal fights to his credit than Norton had.
Holyfield while still durable was going down against men like John Ruiz and James Toney, which is clear evidence of decline.
It's telling that you have to pick the handful of logic -defying anomalies like Holyfield, Ali and Foreman--three of the best chins ever--to argue your inconceivably stupid idea that boxers' punch resistance doesn't start to go in the mid-30s.
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 02:00
by margaret thatcher
norton did officially beat ali, and on my card, which is the most important of all cards, should have a win over an unbeaten holmes too. that's pretty huge.
the rest of his record isnt really special, but it's solid enough that along with those above fights he's earned a spot.
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 02:02
by margaret thatcher
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑23 Feb 2021, 14:45
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑23 Feb 2021, 11:34
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2021, 10:26
The late career defeats for Norton understandably are of concern because the brutal decisive nature of his losses to Cooney and Shavers strongly suggest he loses to them prime for prime.
A fighters durability doesn't just disappear when they hit their mid late 30s. If he was able to beat either of those guys at his best the fights should have been far more competitive.
One of the most inaccurate statements ever written on Boxrec.
It is absurd that the Cooney fight even gets mentioned. Some people just don't understand the sport.
Even with Shavers, he was 35 years old and facing the hardest puncher in the history of the sport. Not exactly damning evidence against him.
Watch the fights with Ledoux and Cobb, which were between Shavers and Conney. Watch his fights between 1973-1978. There is no comparison.
Many guys are retired by this time. Almost without exception, the rest are far past their best.
Ali I, Ali II, Ali III. Quarry. Bobick. Young. Holmes. More than enough evidence.
Bobick ... wtf man, did you really add a win over Bobick to the 'hall of fame evidence' pile
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 12:43
by Ambling Alp II
That was actually a big fight going in. A lot of people thought Bobick would win. Norton destroyed him in less than a minute. He looked great in that fight.
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 15:28
by margaret thatcher
oh sure, give him whatever false hype points you want, lots of fighters get that, but Bobick was
actually a bit of a patsy as a pro and kinda a bit of a joke, the win does nothing in terms of hof credentials, a bit hilarious to see his name in there, especially from such a strict critic of opposition when it comes to other fighters
youve at least interested me in duane bobick fantasy matchups, who is bad enough for him to beat!
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 18:59
by oogiebe
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑07 Mar 2021, 12:43
That was actually a big fight going in. A lot of people thought Bobick would win. Norton destroyed him in less than a minute. He looked great in that fight.
Three other fighters looked great vs Bobick. None are HOF worthy. Fall on your sword and delete Bobick from your point.
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 20:36
by Ambling Alp II
I'm not saying Bobick was a great fighter. My main point was that Norton performed great in that fight. Do you remember this fight? It was broadcast primetime as the main event on national TV. It was a big deal at the time. Yes, Bobick fell apart after that fight. Still a strong performance on Norton's part.
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 20:40
by margaret thatcher
l like that bob vs price matchup, someone's glass must shatter
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 21:04
by oogiebe
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑07 Mar 2021, 20:36
I'm not saying Bobick was a great fighter. My main point was that Norton performed great in that fight. Do you remember this fight? It was broadcast primetime as the main event on national TV. It was a big deal at the time. Yes, Bobick fell apart after that fight. Still a strong performance on Norton's part.
I saw that fight. Also saw bobick vs Knoetze and Tate. Missed Bobick's fight vs Chaplin. He lost all three...badly. After watching Bobick beat Stevenson in the pan am games, I thought he'd be next in line of great American HW gold medal winners, however after dominating Teofilo for two rounds in Munich, he fell apart and was blown away. Much like he did four times in the pros. My point? Didn't take much to look good against Bobick in the pros.
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 07 Mar 2021, 21:06
by margaret thatcher
it's simple, bobick and 'evidence of hall of fame accomplishments' should never ever go together, no more than beating audley harrison would realy. audley was olympic champ baby
pretty hilarious to see that post from someone who is usually a super critical nitpicker of guys opposition
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 08 Mar 2021, 13:04
by AntonioMartin
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑07 Mar 2021, 20:36
I'm not saying Bobick was a great fighter. My main point was that Norton performed great in that fight. Do you remember this fight? It was broadcast primetime as the main event on national TV. It was a big deal at the time. Yes, Bobick fell apart after that fight. Still a strong performance on Norton's part.
That's true....but so was Larry Holmes' against Marvis Frazier.....
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 08 Mar 2021, 15:22
by Bodyshot3
Always loved the Clones Cyclone......and have got his book on the go again and right now
I am pleased he is there - I don't him begrudge him that for a moment - but the Cruz fight was a catastrophic, impatient mistake by Eastwood and it kind of finished Barry very early on as a fighter.
They should have said no thanks to a fight at that time, in that place against a late, dangerous substitute.
We never got to see what Barry could do with a few more defences under his belt and a better planned move up to Super Feather. Eastwood got too big for his boots forgot that champions also need to learn and build
Re: Do think Ray Mancini Ken Norton Barry McGuigan and Arturo Gatti are really legitimate Hall of Famers?
Posted: 08 Mar 2021, 15:39
by AntonioMartin
Bodyshot3 wrote: ↑08 Mar 2021, 15:22
Always loved the Clones Cyclone......and have got his book on the go again and right now
I am pleased he is there - I don't him begrudge him that for a moment - but the Cruz fight was a catastrophic, impatient mistake by Eastwood and it kind of finished Barry very early on as a fighter.
They should have said no thanks to a fight at that time, in that place against a late, dangerous substitute.
We never got to see what Barry could do with a few more defences under his belt and a better planned move up to Super Feather. Eastwood got too big for his boots forgot that champions also need to learn and build
It was Las Vegas..in the fantastic United States, richest country in the world so they were seeing green for sure, those Irish eyes...