BoxRec

Leonard certainly hasn't done anything in the last 20 years. During his time, Hearns was more exciting just to name one.

Last 20 years I would probably say Morales or Holyfield.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Leonard certainly hasn't done anything in the last 20 years. During his time, Hearns was more exciting just to name one.

Last 20 years I would probably say Morales or Holyfield.

Gatti?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Leonard certainly hasn't done anything in the last 20 years. During his time, Hearns was more exciting just to name one.

Last 20 years I would probably say Morales or Holyfield.

Gatti?

Gatti is definitely in the top few, he had everything, explosive highlight reel knockouts, early blowouts of pretenders, getting demolished by his elite competition, thrilling comeback victories, boxing matches-turned-brawls etc. Pretty much every type of fight that exists is in his record somewhere more than once.

I'd also throw in Chavez, Carbajal, Barrera, Pacquiao, Morales, Holyfield, Israel Vazquez, Riddick Bowe, Lamon Brewster (probably the most fun to watch HW of the 2000's), Felix Trinidad, Jorge Arce...

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Leonard certainly hasn't done anything in the last 20 years. During his time, Hearns was more exciting just to name one.

Last 20 years I would probably say Morales or Holyfield.

Gatti?

Gatti certainly fits the bill. Just for my personal preference the fact that gatti couldn't compete with the elite fighters kept me from naming him first. I'm not a Boxing snob or anything, I attend small cards and I love any kind of war. But when the stakes are higher, I just get more excited.

Corrales, Rafa & tito I would add to Diamond's list.

Make it 40 years and my boy getting off the deck is the man.

Can boxrec not block IP's. This guy keeps popping up with these silly adverts.

It depends. I think Tyson got a lot of people into boxing.

Maromero Paez and Macho Camacho were always fun to watch.

For the Mexicans and Chicanos, like myself, I would say JC and Oscar DLH.

Pound for pound, fight for fight, I have to believe it is tough to beat Gatti. It is tough to find a fighter with as high of a % of exciting fights as him.

Honorable mentions:

Holyfield, Bowe, Barrera, Morales, Tyson, Hamed, and Foreman.

I am taking the entire event into consideration, not just the fight. It didn't matter how horrible a Tyson fight was, it was an exciting event and something you were waiting to see all day with anticipation. Same with Hamed and Foreman.

NAZ was always entertaining

as was tyson even in his last fight before the fight i found myself sitting on the end of the seat wondering what was going to happen

p4p1 wrote:NAZ was always entertaining

This is the most entertaining thing I've ever see him do....fuss over his bad haircut like a woman

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClZkyV-boQM

tzyuforever wrote:

p4p1 wrote:NAZ was always entertaining

This is the most entertaining thing I've ever see him do....fuss over his bad haircut like a woman

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClZkyV-boQM

Aesthetically, that's the least of his troubles

Depends what entertains you, I suppose. I preferred watching Pernell Whitaker (for the first half of the decade, anyway) to Arturo Gatti any day, personally. I get little joy out of watching B-listers, regardless of how the masses view their fights. A guy like Mickey Ward did nothing for me, for example. An incredibly limited fighter who possessed little outside of a strong left hook to the body. I thought he lost the first fight to Gatti, personally (I also happen to think it's a rather overrated fight along with the series in general, taking a back seat to Gatti's wars with Ivan Robinson). Outside of the knockdown he did little outside of getting his ears boxed off the majority of the way, and this by a basic technician in his own right. These guys provided the slug-fests, but not the skill-set I prefer to watch.

I don't understand the fascination with a lot of slugfests either. Of course, some are really skilled, but primitive brawling isn't as fun to watch for me. I like watching current boxers like Guillermo Rigondeaux, who take apart their opponents like they are dismantling a car engine.

cosimo wrote:I don't understand the fascination with a lot of slugfests either. Of course, some are really skilled, but primitive brawling isn't as fun to watch for me. I like watching current boxers like Guillermo Rigondeaux, who take apart their opponents like they are dismantling a car engine.

It's not simply about brawling, it's more about two-sidedness. The Vazquez-Marquez rivalry is an excellent example of two guys using plenty of skill in the midst of their firefight.

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

cosimo wrote:I don't understand the fascination with a lot of slugfests either. Of course, some are really skilled, but primitive brawling isn't as fun to watch for me. I like watching current boxers like Guillermo Rigondeaux, who take apart their opponents like they are dismantling a car engine.

It's not simply about brawling, it's more about two-sidedness. The Vazquez-Marquez rivalry is an excellent example of two guys using plenty of skill in the midst of their firefight.

Yeah totally. I like all-out attack, but just not at the expense of skill.

King Carlos wrote:Depends what entertains you, I suppose. I preferred watching Pernell Whitaker (for the first half of the decade, anyway) to Arturo Gatti any day, personally. I get little joy out of watching B-listers, regardless of how the masses view their fights. A guy like Mickey Ward did nothing for me, for example. An incredibly limited fighter who possessed little outside of a strong left hook to the body. I thought he lost the first fight to Gatti, personally (I also happen to think it's a rather overrated fight along with the series in general, taking a back seat to Gatti's wars with Ivan Robinson). Outside of the knockdown he did little outside of getting his ears boxed off the majority of the way, and this by a basic technician in his own right. These guys provided the slug-fests, but not the skill-set I prefer to watch.

What's your take on the oft-celebrated Foreman-Lyle war?

Good question, I think it's glorious. So is Moorer/Cooper. Funny that I ended up watching Lee/Locicero today after saying that I preferred skill to brawling. Great fights are great fights and I love them all.

...i said gatti on the other thread with the name and since that was just a minute ago i hven't changed my mind...

I think it has to be Hamed. But Gatti is a close second.

We are fans of the sport here. Purists I know. We hate to see anyone mock our favorite sport in any way.....

But damn,Emanuel Augustus did entertain I gotta admit.

I absolutely agree!

I first thought of Marco Antonio Barrera, but then thought of Pacquaio and Ricky Hatton.

I guess it just depends on what boxers you like...

Katsidis is always great towatch.
Pacman, Gatti, MAB or Morales though

Naz Hamed

Surprisingly this wasn't a hard pick for me.

Erik Morales, without a doubt.

jaclem2 wrote:...i said gatti on the other thread with the name and since that was just a minute ago i hven't changed my mind...