BoxRec

Jaywheel wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:59 Trivia question:

If Duran-Hearns is fought in a forrest with nobody around, does Duran crashing face first on the canvas make any noise?

Tommy told Duran he was going down in 2 at the weigh in.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:43

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:16

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 14:01 Once again Peter Jackson sticks out like a sore thumb. He might not be top 500.

That is in your view. Other boxing exoerts speak highly of him

You're not an expert. Far too biased.

I have never said that I am an expert. Go to other boxing websites that got historians. Probably you will learn more of Peter Jackson. A great fighter in his own right in my view.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:20

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:43

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:16

That is in your view. Other boxing exoerts speak highly of him

You're not an expert. Far too biased.

I have never said that I am an expert. Go to other boxing websites that got historians. Probably you will learn more of Peter Jackson. A great fighter in his own right in my view.

I know plenty about him. His resume is shallow. Saying it's better than someone like Mike gibbons is asinine.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:59 Trivia question:

If Duran-Hearns is fought in a forrest with nobody around, does Duran crashing face first on the canvas make any noise?

And what Duran vs Hearns got to do with the conversation?

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:23

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:20

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:43

You're not an expert. Far too biased.

I have never said that I am an expert. Go to other boxing websites that got historians. Probably you will learn more of Peter Jackson. A great fighter in his own right in my view.

I know plenty about him. His resume is shallow. Saying it's better than someone like Mike gibbons is asinine.

I think it is not. I think that Jackson was a fantastic fighter. The second best of the 1880s decade behind the great Bob Fitzsimmons

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:24

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:23

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:20

I have never said that I am an expert. Go to other boxing websites that got historians. Probably you will learn more of Peter Jackson. A great fighter in his own right in my view.

I know plenty about him. His resume is shallow. Saying it's better than someone like Mike gibbons is asinine.

I think it is not. I think that Jackson was a fantastic fighter. The second best of the 1880s decade behind the great Bob Fitzsimmons

I know, that's why I laugh at you. You're a clown for my amusement.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:26

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:24

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 17:23

I know plenty about him. His resume is shallow. Saying it's better than someone like Mike gibbons is asinine.

I think it is not. I think that Jackson was a fantastic fighter. The second best of the 1880s decade behind the great Bob Fitzsimmons

I know, that's why I laugh at you. You're a clown for my amusement.

And you are an ass hole.

#79. Luis Manuel Rodriguez

Record: 107-13, (1NC) with 49KOs
KO pct is 46%
Career: 1956-72
World Titles Held: World Welterweight Champion (1963)

Highlights:World Welterweight Champion (1963). Undefeated in first 36 bouts. (Record: 35-0, (1NC), with 10KOs. From September 1961 to March 1966 lost only twice in 34 fights. The ONLY MAN to beat him in that stretch was the great rival Emile Griffith from the US Virgin Islands. His record in that time frame was 32-2, with 17KOs. Won 15 fights in a row from November 1964 to March 1966. Lost ONCE in 25 fights from September 1966 to September 1969. Won 15 more fights in a row from September 1966 to May 1968. (Record was 15-0, with 6KOs). Stopped 3 times in 120 professional bouts. Beat 5 out of 7 world champions (Record: 7-7, with 1KO). Beat 2 out of 3 hall of famers he faced. (Record vs HOFs is 2-6, 0KOs). For 13 years (1959-63) was in the top rankings at welterweight and middleweight.

Historical Impact: A slick and smooth boxer with a fast left jab, was also a voluminous puncher with a great chin. Was one of the best welterweight boxers of the 1960s decade. He is considered one of the greatest 147 and 154-pounders of all-time. Was mostly known for his 4-fight rivalry with the great Emile Griffith. Some observers believe that he beat Griffith at least twice. Others believe that he won the rivalry.

Defining Fight:W15 Emile Griffith (II)....March 21, 1963..."Reached finally the pinnacle by defeating most notorious rival"
Other Defining Fights: W10 Benny "Kid" Paret, WTKO9 Denny Moyer, W10 Curtis Cokes (II)L15 Emile Griffith (III), W10 Bennie Briscoe and LTKO11 Nino Benvenutti


What are Your thoughts on this great champion?

Other top guys El Feo beat in the 1960s decade:
W10 Virgil Aikens (twice)
WTKO5 Joe Miceli
W10 Isaac Logart
W10 Chico Vejar
W10 Luis Federico Thompson
W10 Joey Giambra
W10 Holly Mims
WKO2 LC Morgan
WTKO9 George Benton
W10 Juan Carlos Rivero
WKO1 Tony Mundine
W10 Tom Bethea

Uuufff!!! He beat up a lot of good quality of opposition!

They were the top contenders of the 1960s decade.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 19:29 Other top guys El Feo beat in the 1960s decade:
W10 Virgil Aikens (twice)
WTKO5 Joe Miceli
W10 Isaac Logart
W10 Chico Vejar
W10 Luis Federico Thompson
W10 Joey Giambra
W10 Holly Mims
WKO2 LC Morgan
WTKO9 George Benton
W10 Juan Carlos Rivero
WKO1 Tony Mundine
W10 Tom Bethea

Uuufff!!! He beat up a lot of good quality of opposition!

They were the top contenders of the 1960s decade.

Peter Jackson didn't beat any. I'd have Rodriguez higher.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 19:32

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 19:29 Other top guys El Feo beat in the 1960s decade:
W10 Virgil Aikens (twice)
WTKO5 Joe Miceli
W10 Isaac Logart
W10 Chico Vejar
W10 Luis Federico Thompson
W10 Joey Giambra
W10 Holly Mims
WKO2 LC Morgan
WTKO9 George Benton
W10 Juan Carlos Rivero
WKO1 Tony Mundine
W10 Tom Bethea

Uuufff!!! He beat up a lot of good quality of opposition!

They were the top contenders of the 1960s decade.

Peter Jackson didn't beat any. I'd have Rodriguez higher.

I got Rodriguez higher than Jackson. Jackson beat a good amount of good fighters, too. We are talking about the 1880s decade.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:15

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 13:36

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 01:57

The win against Julio Cesar Chavez was not for all the marbles. It did not mean nothing. Chavez was used up like a dirty rag to clean dirty ovens.

Oscar really did not an over the hill Pernell Whitaker. He never beat him in Pernell's prime. By that time, Pernell was cooked up in drugs.

Hector "Macho" Camacho was not the same fighter after Edwin "Chapo" Rosario exposed him in 1986. By the 90s decade, Camacho was through.

Those ain't great wins. Not for all the marbles. The fights for all the marbles, Oscar lost big time. I mean, BIG TIME!

This just in. De la hoya was not at this best when he fought Mayweather, Hopkins, and Pac. Being as fair as you are to a guy you don't like, i'm sure that you will now say that they should not be counted against him.

He was still in his prime for the Hopkins fight.

He was bigger than Floyd at 154lbs. He was at that weight for years. Already accustomed to it. But, of course, he is not exceptional and could not beat a guy smaller than he. That would not happened with the greats Tommy Hearns or Mike McCallum. They would have obliterated Pretty Boy Floyd in 6 rounds.

So wouldn't DLH be smaller than Hopkins?

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 20:17

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:15

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 13:36

This just in. De la hoya was not at this best when he fought Mayweather, Hopkins, and Pac. Being as fair as you are to a guy you don't like, i'm sure that you will now say that they should not be counted against him.

He was still in his prime for the Hopkins fight.

He was bigger than Floyd at 154lbs. He was at that weight for years. Already accustomed to it. But, of course, he is not exceptional and could not beat a guy smaller than he. That would not happened with the greats Tommy Hearns or Mike McCallum. They would have obliterated Pretty Boy Floyd in 6 rounds.

So wouldn't DLH be smaller than Hopkins?

Yeah. But with Floyd and Manny, he lost. They were smaller than Oscar

Luis Manuel Rodriguez went 36 bouts straight from the beginning of his career undefeated.

But, on Saturday, December 17, 1960 at the famous Madison Square Garden, El Feo suffers his first defeat. The opponent? The great Emile Griffith. Together, they would pair in a 4-fight rivalry.

About the fight, it was truly very hard to score when it comes this two great welterweights. Everybody knew at the time by 1960 that both of these cats would become world champions. It was just a matter of time.

There was too many clinching, clutching and grabbing. It was a wrestling match. The punches were not that effective from both sides. It is because Griffith's swarming style does not give you punching room. I scored the fight 3-2-5 in favor of Griffith. It was that close and very hard to score. Two judges gave Griffith the fight 5-4 and 6-4. The other gave it to Rodriguez 5-4.

What a way to lose your undefeated record. At least El Feo lost it to a future hall of famer.

Rodriguez drops 35-1 (1NC), with 11KOs.
Griffith improves with a record of 22-2, with 7KOs.

Luis Manuel's next fight on film available on YouTube is his second fight with high ranked middleweight contender Yama Bahama. Rodriguez already beat him in 1959.

Bahama at one time beat the great Kid Gavilan in 1958. It was Gavilan's last fight.

In this second fight, Rodriguez weighed in 151 lbs, meanwhile Bahama was 157lbs. Rodriguez showed his higher class from the get go. Going on and out like a fast cat and scoring with fast jabs and right crosses. And before clinches, Rodriguez was pouring some fast combinations to Bahama's body. The fight was halted in the 3rd round. Bahama was cut in his left eyelid.

Rodriguez wins by a third round technical knockout in one of his best performances of his career. He was on fire. It would take his nemesis Emile Griffith to beat him again in 1963 title rematch.

On Saturday, January 27, 1962, Luis Federico Thompson, a tough long-time contender from Buenos Aires, Argentina came to MSG in New York to test his skills against Cuban Luis Manuel Rodriguez.

Thompson, a black Panamanian born fighter out of the city of Colon, made his residence in Argentina in 1952. By the time he faced Rodriguez, El Negro was a ring veteran of 151 bouts!

And Rodriguez seems that he really trained hard for this fight. He threw so many punches that HBO Compubox would have loved his puching output. He was very aggressive against the Argentinian.

I really don't know why Thompson did not match El Feo's punching output. When he counterpunched Rodriguez and be as busy as he, he was getting the better part because most of Rodriguez' punches were blocked by El Negro's arms. He hit Rodriguez with vicious uppercuts. But Rodriguez legs and chin were in tip top shape.

But, Rodriguez was a punching machine. A non-stop whirlwind. He deserved to be the clear winner. No knockdowns in the fight. Just two technical cutsies showing their excellent skills.

Rodriguez won the fight in my view 7 rounds to 3. Two judges in the fight scored it outrageously 9-1? That was not good. I think Thompson did better than that. The only ERROR on his behalf was not throwing much as he should.

Rodriguez is in line for a title shot. Meanwhile his nemesis Emile Griffith and Benny "Kid" Paret are exchanging the crown back and forth in less than a year.

Rodriguez improves to 43-2 (1NC) with 16KOs.
Thompson drops to 130-12-10 with 69KOs.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑04 Apr 2021, 20:14

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 20:17

elmersalsa wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:15

He was still in his prime for the Hopkins fight.

He was bigger than Floyd at 154lbs. He was at that weight for years. Already accustomed to it. But, of course, he is not exceptional and could not beat a guy smaller than he. That would not happened with the greats Tommy Hearns or Mike McCallum. They would have obliterated Pretty Boy Floyd in 6 rounds.

So wouldn't DLH be smaller than Hopkins?

Yeah. But with Floyd and Manny, he lost. They were smaller than Oscar

So since he was smaller than Hopkins, it should not count right? Hopkins was supposed to beat him, right?

Also against Pacquiao, De La hoya was 35 and had not fought at that weight in 7 years.
Are you seriously claiming that he was in his prime for that fight?

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 10:59

elmersalsa wrote: ↑04 Apr 2021, 20:14

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 20:17

So wouldn't DLH be smaller than Hopkins?

Yeah. But with Floyd and Manny, he lost. They were smaller than Oscar

So since he was smaller than Hopkins, it should not count right? Hopkins was supposed to beat him, right?

Also against Pacquiao, De La hoya was 35 and had not fought at that weight in 7 years.
Are you seriously claiming that he was in his prime for that fight?

He was stronger and bigger than Floyd and Manny. He was at a weight class that Manny nor Floyd were accustomed to. And both of them beat Oscar easily. That comes to show that not even when he got advantages in his favor, he can't beat Manny nor Floyd. Guys that were coming up from the flyweights for crying out loud. Oscar is a joke. To put him in the top 100 is a TRAVESTY

A renowned boxing writer, TheIrishZombiee from reddit, sums it well about Oscarito:

One thing you gotta give Oscar credit for is his desire to be the best. You can't accuse him of ducking anyone. No one likes Oscar the promoter but Oscar the fighter was a phenom in his prime. He had his limitations- under-utilized right hand, a bit stiff, questionable stamina, and he didn't have the highest ring IQ. The last one is blown out of proportion though. Oscar was a very intelligent fighter but there were certain tactical errors that make people question his IQ. Like the last 3 rounds against Trinidad, slugging with Mosley in the first fight, abandoning his jab against Floyd etc. What he did have was an all-time great jab, one of the best left hooks I've ever seen, Mexican chin and heart, excellent fundamentals, blinding speed in his prime, great at feinting, and ability to box and slug. All in all, Oscar has both the resume and the skillset to be considered an all-time great. Hard to debate otherwise.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 14:17 A renowned boxing writer, TheIrishZombiee from reddit, sums it well about Oscarito:

One thing you gotta give Oscar credit for is his desire to be the best. You can't accuse him of ducking anyone. No one likes Oscar the promoter but Oscar the fighter was a phenom in his prime. He had his limitations- under-utilized right hand, a bit stiff, questionable stamina, and he didn't have the highest ring IQ. The last one is blown out of proportion though. Oscar was a very intelligent fighter but there were certain tactical errors that make people question his IQ. Like the last 3 rounds against Trinidad, slugging with Mosley in the first fight, abandoning his jab against Floyd etc. What he did have was an all-time great jab, one of the best left hooks I've ever seen, Mexican chin and heart, excellent fundamentals, blinding speed in his prime, great at feinting, and ability to box and slug. All in all, Oscar has both the resume and the skillset to be considered an all-time great. Hard to debate otherwise.

Bollocks!

elmersalsa wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 12:44

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 10:59

elmersalsa wrote: ↑04 Apr 2021, 20:14

Yeah. But with Floyd and Manny, he lost. They were smaller than Oscar

So since he was smaller than Hopkins, it should not count right? Hopkins was supposed to beat him, right?

Also against Pacquiao, De La hoya was 35 and had not fought at that weight in 7 years.
Are you seriously claiming that he was in his prime for that fight?

He was stronger and bigger than Floyd and Manny. He was at a weight class that Manny nor Floyd were accustomed to. And both of them beat Oscar easily. That comes to show that not even when he got advantages in his favor, he can't beat Manny nor Floyd. Guys that were coming up from the flyweights for crying out loud. Oscar is a joke. To put him in the top 100 is a TRAVESTY

Does the fact that he was 34 when he fought Mayweather and 35 when he fought Pacquiao mean anything at all to you?
Does going down in weight mean anything to you?

elmersalsa wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 14:33

Jaywheel wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 14:17 A renowned boxing writer, TheIrishZombiee from reddit, sums it well about Oscarito:

One thing you gotta give Oscar credit for is his desire to be the best. You can't accuse him of ducking anyone. No one likes Oscar the promoter but Oscar the fighter was a phenom in his prime. He had his limitations- under-utilized right hand, a bit stiff, questionable stamina, and he didn't have the highest ring IQ. The last one is blown out of proportion though. Oscar was a very intelligent fighter but there were certain tactical errors that make people question his IQ. Like the last 3 rounds against Trinidad, slugging with Mosley in the first fight, abandoning his jab against Floyd etc. What he did have was an all-time great jab, one of the best left hooks I've ever seen, Mexican chin and heart, excellent fundamentals, blinding speed in his prime, great at feinting, and ability to box and slug. All in all, Oscar has both the resume and the skillset to be considered an all-time great. Hard to debate otherwise.

Bollocks!

Nevermind the Bollocks, here's The Golden Boy!!!!

God save the dragqueen
The salsa regime
They made you a moron
A potential H bomb

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 15:07

elmersalsa wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 12:44

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑05 Apr 2021, 10:59
So since he was smaller than Hopkins, it should not count right? Hopkins was supposed to beat him, right?

Also against Pacquiao, De La hoya was 35 and had not fought at that weight in 7 years.
Are you seriously claiming that he was in his prime for that fight?

He was stronger and bigger than Floyd and Manny. He was at a weight class that Manny nor Floyd were accustomed to. And both of them beat Oscar easily. That comes to show that not even when he got advantages in his favor, he can't beat Manny nor Floyd. Guys that were coming up from the flyweights for crying out loud. Oscar is a joke. To put him in the top 100 is a TRAVESTY

Does the fact that he was 34 when he fought Mayweather and 35 when he fought Pacquiao mean anything at all to you?
Does going down in weight mean anything to you?

He was the bigger and stronger fighter. Was still capable at 34 to beat Floyd. No excuses there. He got whupped.

Really? So age doesn't matter? I'm sure that you will always be consistent with that.

And the Hopkins loss? Wasn't Hopkins bigger and stronger? Surely you can't count that against DLH since Hopkins had the advantages.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑06 Apr 2021, 13:44 Really? So age doesn't matter? I'm sure that you will always be consistent with that.

And the Hopkins loss? Wasn't Hopkins bigger and stronger? Surely you can't count that against DLH since Hopkins had the advantages.

Save your breath. He will never see his own hypocrisy