BoxRec

Kalan, Ismael Laguna kicked the great Carlos Ortiz' ass! It was Laguna's greatest win.

elmersalsa wrote:Kalan, Ismael Laguna kicked the great Carlos Ortiz' ass! It was Laguna's greatest win.

I wasn't impressed... In a 2-fight series the the guy who wins last wins best -- especially when you have an immediate rematch and win a UD.

Carlos Ortiz was a good boxer, but I never thought he was that all fired great like some people.. He lost his share of fights for a champ.. He boxed because his dad took him to the gym all the time as a kid and he wanted to please his dad, but he never fell for it... His friends had Boxing on and he wanted to watch a ball game... He told them to close the door if they left and went over to a neighbor's to catch the game...

A lot of boxers aren't fans of the sport. Denny Moyer told me, "I don't like Boxing. It's a good living, but I don't follow Boxing at all. I don't know who the fighters are. They book 'em I fight 'em." ... For a guy who fought 150 fights I thought that was amazing.

Kalan wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Kalan, Ismael Laguna kicked the great Carlos Ortiz' ass! It was Laguna's greatest win.

I wasn't impressed... In a 2-fight series the the guy who wins last wins best -- especially when you have an immediate rematch and win a UD.

Carlos Ortiz was a good boxer, but I never thought he was that all fired great like some people.. He lost his share of fights for a champ.. He boxed because his dad took him to the gym all the time as a kid and he wanted to please his dad, but he never fell for it... His friends had Boxing on and he wanted to watch a ball game... He told them to close the door if they left and went over to a neighbor's to catch the game...

A lot of boxers aren't fans of the sport. Denny Moyer told me, "I don't like Boxing. It's a good living, but I don't follow Boxing at all. I don't know who the fighters are. They book 'em I fight 'em." ... For a guy who fought 150 fights I thought that was amazing.

Well, if you wasn't impressed in Ismael Laguna win over the great Carlos Ortiz, then, that is your opinion. Laguna showed that night tremendous boxing skills. He was terrific!
A two-fight series doesn't mean that the guy that wins the second fight is the better fighter. Where do you come up with that? Ortiz got whuupped in Panama City and that was all to it. No excuses! It could have been the first, second or fifth fight...He got whuupped!

elmersalsa wrote: A two-fight series doesn't mean that the guy that wins the second fight is the better fighter. Where do you come up with that?

Because they both had a fight to learn everything about their opponent -- and to put that knowledge to great use in improving on their performance.

Kalan wrote:

elmersalsa wrote: A two-fight series doesn't mean that the guy that wins the second fight is the better fighter. Where do you come up with that?

Because they both had a fight to learn everything about their opponent -- and to put that knowledge to great use in improving on their performance.

What if the guy that won the first fight ain't at his best? Winning the second fight does not mean anything. The great Carlos Ortiz just got whuupped by Ismael Laguna in Panama and that's all to it.

If he wasn't at his best he has an even better chance to win the rematch... And if he does he's probably the better fighter... They both know what's up by then

Kalan wrote:If he wasn't at his best he has an even better chance to win the rematch... And if he does he's probably the better fighter... They both know what's up by then

What you're saying it doesn't bare no sense whatsoever. I'll give you examples that the winner of the second fight not necessarily is/was the best:
Riddick Bowe vs Evander Holyfield....Who won the rubber match? Didn't Bowe win the first fight?

Barney Ross vs Jimmy McLarnin...This is another example of your theory that's wrong. Ross won the 1st and 3rd fights. Was McLarnin the better boxer?

Chartchai Chionoi vs Efren "Alacran" Torres...Same thing. Chionoi won the rubbermatch after losing the second fight.

Tony Zale vs Rocky Graziano...Is another example that Tony Zale was better.

The winner of the second fight is not necessarily the better fighter, Kalan.

elmersalsa wrote:

Kalan wrote:If he wasn't at his best he has an even better chance to win the rematch... And if he does he's probably the better fighter... They both know what's up by then

What you're saying it doesn't bare no sense whatsoever. I'll give you examples that the winner of the second fight not necessarily is/was the best:
Riddick Bowe vs Evander Holyfield....Who won the rubber match? Didn't Bowe win the first fight?

Barney Ross vs Jimmy McLarnin...This is another example of your theory that's wrong. Ross won the 1st and 3rd fights. Was McLarnin the better boxer?

Chartchai Chionoi vs Efren "Alacran" Torres...Same thing. Chionoi won the rubbermatch after losing the second fight.

Tony Zale vs Rocky Graziano...Is another example that Tony Zale was better.

The winner of the second fight is not necessarily the better fighter, Kalan.

McLarnin was a better boxer and puncher than Ross. He was robbed in the rubber... Zale was much better than Graziano, but was nailed with a lucky shot in the rematch when Graziano was half blinded... Holyfield was better than Bowe and would have won 3 of 5 if they continued their series. He was too skinny for their 1st fight and had a heart problem for the 3rd fight -- which apparently corrected itself vs Tyson and others.

More representative trilogies were Nelson-Gans... Patterson-Johansson... Ali-Frazier... Ali-Norton... Leonard-Duran... Carbajal-Gonzalez... Gatti-Ward... Barrera-Morales... and Tiger-Fullmer... Tiger won all 3. The draw rematch was a joke as Fullmer was running all night... The boxer who prevails in the rematch usually wins the 3rd.. It's very true he doesn't always win the rubber match, as you say -- but the odds are with him because he's generally the better boxer. BTW, I had Marquez winning all 4 Pacquiao fights but they gave him 1, or rather he took it. Manny was the more popular figure and it's tougher to beat a guy like that.

Barney has a 2-1 fair, the first fight SD won, as the second in the same way lost. Ross was better than McLarnin.He was not robbed .

Kalan wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

Kalan wrote:If he wasn't at his best he has an even better chance to win the rematch... And if he does he's probably the better fighter... They both know what's up by then

What you're saying it doesn't bare no sense whatsoever. I'll give you examples that the winner of the second fight not necessarily is/was the best:
Riddick Bowe vs Evander Holyfield....Who won the rubber match? Didn't Bowe win the first fight?

Barney Ross vs Jimmy McLarnin...This is another example of your theory that's wrong. Ross won the 1st and 3rd fights. Was McLarnin the better boxer?

Chartchai Chionoi vs Efren "Alacran" Torres...Same thing. Chionoi won the rubbermatch after losing the second fight.

Tony Zale vs Rocky Graziano...Is another example that Tony Zale was better.

The winner of the second fight is not necessarily the better fighter, Kalan.

McLarnin was a better boxer and puncher than Ross. He was robbed in the rubber... Zale was much better than Graziano, but was nailed with a lucky shot in the rematch when Graziano was half blinded... Holyfield was better than Bowe and would have won 3 of 5 if they continued their series. He was too skinny for their 1st fight and had a heart problem for the 3rd fight -- which apparently corrected itself vs Tyson and others.

More representative trilogies were Nelson-Gans... Patterson-Johansson... Ali-Frazier... Ali-Norton... Leonard-Duran... Carbajal-Gonzalez... Gatti-Ward... Barrera-Morales... and Tiger-Fullmer... Tiger won all 3. The draw rematch was a joke as Fullmer was running all night... The boxer who prevails in the rematch usually wins the 3rd.. It's very true he doesn't always win the rubber match, as you say -- but the odds are with him because he's generally the better boxer. BTW, I had Marquez winning all 4 Pacquiao fights but they gave him 1, or rather he took it. Manny was the more popular figure and it's tougher to beat a guy like that.

If you want to say that the great Jimmy McLarnin was robbed, well, I say that Ken Norton was robbed in second and third fight with The Greatest.

Pac man in my view beat the great Juan Manuel Marquez in the first and second bouts in my view.

And Smokin' Joe was already shot when he fought the great Muhammad Ali the second time in my view.

Sugar Ray wasn't the better fighter against the Hands of Stone. He caught Duran in an OFF NIGHT.

More examples that the winner of the second fight is not better, Kalan:

Frankie Randall vs Juan Martin Coggi
Vinny Pazienzia vs Greg Haugen
Sugar Ray Robinson vs Jake LaMotta
Gene Fullmer vs Sugar Ray Robinson
Beau Jack vs Bob Montgomery
Sandy Saddler vs Willie Pep
Harry Wills vs Sam Langford
Jack Britton vs Ted "Kid" Lewis
Maxie Rosenbloom vs John Henry Lewis
Ruben Olivares vs Chucho Castillo

Boxing history is proving you wrong, Kalan!

Chavez was past his prime by the time of the second fight with DLH and was beginning to show his age. Duran was, arguably, still in his prime by the time of the Leonard fights, though near the end of it. In this matchup, Duran is the superior boxer and Chavez did not have Leonard's speed or skill. This is really close because I think Chavez could win on a late stoppage. Prime Chavez was pretty much KO-proof so Duran would have to beat him with boxing and Duran could most definitely outbox Chavez or Duran could be goaded into a war and end up like Taylor. However, after seeing a declining Duran hang with Hagler for all 15 rds, I believe Duran does the same with Chavez and wins on points.

For me, Chavez was at his peak at LW. I think he would outwork Duran on the way to a close points win. Although I rate Duran a lot higher as an all time LW.

Chavez takes a competitive beating. Like Duran/palomino. Wide ud, Julio's style is made for Duran.

elmersalsa wrote:More examples that the winner of the second fight is not better, Kalan:

Frankie Randall vs Juan Martin Coggi
Vinny Pazienzia vs Greg Haugen
Sugar Ray Robinson vs Jake LaMotta
Gene Fullmer vs Sugar Ray Robinson
Beau Jack vs Bob Montgomery
Sandy Saddler vs Willie Pep
Harry Wills vs Sam Langford
Jack Britton vs Ted "Kid" Lewis
Maxie Rosenbloom vs John Henry Lewis
Ruben Olivares vs Chucho Castillo

Boxing history is proving you wrong, Kalan!

Pep wasn't the same fighter after the plane crash that almost killed him, knocked him unconscious for hours, and left him in a body cast for over 4 months... Pep was a better fighter than Saddler.. But the Pep of his first 109 professional fights was the real Willie Pep.. The plane crash left one leg shorter, damaged many of his internal organs, made him chinny, and forced him to make many adjustments.. He finished with 241 fights so most of his fights came AFTER the crash -- MOST of his KO victories came BEFORE the crash... ALL of his KO losses came AFTER the crash... and 10 of his 11 losses came AFTER the crash.

I agree that Norton beat Ali all 3 times -- and Frazier was headed down hill by the time he met Ali.. But if you searched out 1000 rematches, you would find that about 65% of them have the better fighter winning---often a 3rd fight isn't necessary because it's settled... But in trilogies the fighter winning the rematch more often wins the 3rd as well.. The better fighter will normally learn more from the 1st and 2nd encounters.

golden oldie wrote:

jbizzle20 wrote: Prime Chavez was pretty much KO-proof

With respect, Duran was TOTALLY K.O. proof at 135, and if anyone was going to dispute that opinion it certainly wouldn't be the methodical J.C.C.

Yes, I could believe that. I cited his survival of Hagler at MW as strong proof that he could survive Chavez. Fighting it out to the end with Hagler, who is a absolute bull that can wear you out, at Middle when you are naturally 20 lbs lighter was one of the ballsiest things Duran has ever done. I just have a lot of respect for Chavez. He was a dangerous opponent who you could never take for granted. Seeing Taylor wail on him for 12 rounds only to have Chavez just shake it off and drop Taylor at the end was awe-inspiring.

I didn't think it was so awe inspiring...Chavez was beating Meldrick up and killing him.. I had Chavez well ahead on my card because he was landing way more damaging punches.. Meldrick was landing nothing but fluff.. I was disgusted they didn't stop it because Taylor was hurt really bad.

Whitaker beat Chavez very easily and I was flabbergasted when the verdict was announced... It was a joke... Duran would have jabbed Chavez to death.. And the straight right was a good weapon versus Chavez.. Duran had a lot more power than Pernell Whitaker... Duran would fight like De Jesus III.

Everything says Duran should win it but there's a nagging feeling that JCC doesn't get full credit for his ability because of the faked attempts to get to 100 wins and the later losses when he was miles past his best. In his prime neither is likely to stop the other and both could have gone 15 rounds, I'd probably go with Duran by very close decision.