BoxRec

Nice pics!... Loi's record impresses me, its very simular to Loches... Loi was the top contender for the Lightweight title for some years in the mid and late 50s but had to go up to light-welter to get a title shot... hs wins over Ortiz make me think he could probably have taken the 135 Title had he got the chance...

I was trained very briefly by a man named Frank Tomasso who was the trainer of Eddie Perkins . I believe he fought Loi a few times. But, I have never seen any of Eddies fights. Frank spoke so highly of him all the time.Maybe someone can give me a little info on Perkins.

expug wrote:I was trained very briefly by a man named Frank Tomasso who was the trainer of Eddie Perkins . I believe he fought Loi a few times. But, I have never seen any of Eddies fights. Frank spoke so highly of him all the time.Maybe someone can give me a little info on Perkins.

Perkins was a very useful fighter himself, he drew with Loi for the 140 title in '61 then won it off him in '62 before losing it back to Loi 3 months later (all on points)... Loi then retired still champ and Perkins then regained the vacant title with a win over Roberto Cruz. If my memory serves me well Perkins was a good technician who fought out of a crouch I think... he lost the 140 title finally to Carlos Hernandez (another good fighter) but carried on fighting till the mid 70s, mostly at 147....

silkov wrote:

expug wrote:I was trained very briefly by a man named Frank Tomasso who was the trainer of Eddie Perkins . I believe he fought Loi a few times. But, I have never seen any of Eddies fights. Frank spoke so highly of him all the time.Maybe someone can give me a little info on Perkins.

Perkins was a very useful fighter himself, he drew with Loi for the 140 title in '61 then won it off him in '62 before losing it back to Loi 3 months later (all on points)... Loi then retired still champ and Perkins then regained the vacant title with a win over Roberto Cruz. If my memory serves me well Perkins was a good technician who fought out of a crouch I think... he lost the 140 title finally to Carlos Hernandez (another good fighter) but carried on fighting till the mid 70s, mostly at 147....

Thanks alot Silkov . Like I say Frank used to talk all the time about what an excellent fighter Eddie was. They had a real good relationship those two. Its nice to see that.I think Frank was with him start to finish.He was a real good trainer and a real good guy.

expug wrote:

silkov wrote:

expug wrote:I was trained very briefly by a man named Frank Tomasso who was the trainer of Eddie Perkins . I believe he fought Loi a few times. But, I have never seen any of Eddies fights. Frank spoke so highly of him all the time.Maybe someone can give me a little info on Perkins.

Perkins was a very useful fighter himself, he drew with Loi for the 140 title in '61 then won it off him in '62 before losing it back to Loi 3 months later (all on points)... Loi then retired still champ and Perkins then regained the vacant title with a win over Roberto Cruz. If my memory serves me well Perkins was a good technician who fought out of a crouch I think... he lost the 140 title finally to Carlos Hernandez (another good fighter) but carried on fighting till the mid 70s, mostly at 147....

Thanks alot Silkov . Like I say Frank used to talk all the time about what an excellent fighter Eddie was. They had a real good relationship those two. Its nice to see that.I think Frank was with him start to finish.He was a real good trainer and a real good guy.

He sounds like just the sort of trainer a fighter needs... looking at Perkins record he fought all over the world, Milan, Tokayo, Mexico, Jamacia etc the sort of thing that you don't see today from top fighters... I've got quite a bit on him in old Rings of the time and will have a browse and see if I can come up with anything interesting on him... I think I have a profile of him in one of the mags...

Thanks. I have heard that Frank passed away a number of years ago , but Im not sure. Sadly I lost contact with him . He gave me a copy of a ring record book from 1976. I still brouse through it all the time. The funny thing is , in the P section of the book, there are a bunch of pages missing. Of course its Eddies record . He took the pages right out of the book to save as a keepsake.

silkov wrote:Pryor would be too fast for Chavez... look at what Taylor did to Chavez... Pryor was faster and more powerful than Taylor and had a better defense when he wanted...

I totally AGREE!!!

Ok I've held back but elmersalsa has needlessy pushed this thing into crises mode......

I'm posting a warning, any more Patterson and Pryor fans come in to the fighters of the past forum spreading false information, and the whole shabang goes into total lockdown for a week, with no food or water, until such time as discipline returns. It's either that or I have to learn how to listen to other points of view.......and I know none of you would want that.

elmersalsa wrote:

silkov wrote:Pryor would be too fast for Chavez... look at what Taylor did to Chavez... Pryor was faster and more powerful than Taylor and had a better defense when he wanted...

I totally AGREE!!!

And I agree with you agreeing!!! 8)

et to Silkov?

BoxBuzz wrote:et to Silkov?

Eh?... 8)

BoxBuzz wrote:Well how does he stack up in your estimation against the two champions "pryor" to him?

And just beating a world beater is not your ticket to greatness. Ken Norton comes to mind here. Anyway, I'm not trying to change minds I think he turned in some magic on a couple of extremely remarkable fights and countless people have viewed it. His legacy is built on his great moments. If his loss and his draw (gift) were as well viewed as well as a few of his "so so" fights being witnessed it would add balance. OH and Alexis was moving up in weight. Sort of like Bob Foster stepping up and losing to Frazier or Ali, and yet that's not where Joe or Muhammad made their greatest impressions.

Did you know that the Pryor Arguello fights are amoung the most viewed fights in history? It continues to be very good advertizing for the Hawk.

I guess I have to strongly disagree with the comparison of going from lightweight (135 pounds) to Jr Welter (140 pounds) as being similar to going from lightheavyweight to heavyweight.

Bob Foster was giving up more than 30 pounds when he fought Frazier and Ali.
Arguello was only going up 5 pounds when he fought Pryor. Fighters rountinely move up in these lower weight classes.

It was much more impressive for Pryor to beat Arguello than it was for Frazier and Ali to have beat Foster.

I just wanted to address some the other commments made by different people on Pryor.

Arguello had showed no signs of declining before he fought Pryor, and he fought very well against Pryor. It was a big achievement for Pryor to beat Arguello. It took a great fighter to beat Arguello in those two fights.

Having said that the rest of Pryor's competition wasn't that impressive. He beat a few other good fighters, but he could have had a more impressive career if he would have fought the top guys such as Billy Costello, Leory Haley, or even Mamby.
He probably would have beaten them (maybe he would have fought them if his prime wasn't cut short because of his drug problem) ; but the fact remains that he didn't.

So judging Pryor's career is more difficult than judging most other boxers. He shouldn't as quite as high as fighters who beat more great fighters and were great for a significantly longer time.
Still, when you factor in his wins over Arguello, some convincing wins over good fighters, the fact that he never lost in his prime, it seems he did enough to be regarded as a truly great fighter.

Alp, I think you help make my point actually. Not sure we disagree. I would say being in or near the top 10 all time in your weight class is truly a mark of distinction. I sometimes get carried away with subtle nuances.

I find that Pryors name comes up so often as the VERY best in this weight class and this is where I get interested in just how someone comes to that conclusion. Other than unsubstantiated hype along with less than vigilant study on the subject. OH and two remarkable performances, well recorded and distributed for all to see.

Well, I guess I'm sort of in between some people who have an extremely high regard for Pryor and yourself, who has a somewhat lower regard for Pryor.
For example, I think he was better than Cervantes, and you don't.
That's not to say that Cervantes wasn't good and that he was a little underrated by some people.
I do agree that often people see a guy look great on TV once or twice and come away with an inflated opinion of him.
Pryor didn't always fight as well as he did against Arguello. People who only saw those fights may rate Pryor a little too high.
Still, with one exception he always managed to win. As I mentioned before, he didn't beat other top guys of era, (Namely Costello and Haley).
Nevertheless, all things considered, I believe he has to be on the short list of who should be considered the best Jr Welterweight ever.

Ambling Alp wrote:
Pryor didn't always fight as well as he did against Arguello. .

I agree, in fact those were by far his best performances.