BoxRec

Thought this may be fun. Here are 3 different cases of what would have happened if two fighter's careers would have occurred at the time of the other guy's.

1. Roy Jones and Eddie Mustapha Muhammad. How would Jones have fared in the light heavyweight division during the late 1970 and early 1980s? How would Mustapha Muhammad have fared vs the lightheavyweights of the 1990s? Who does Jones lose to that fought Mustapha Muhammad? Who does Mustapha Muhammad lose to that fought Jones?

2. Bernard Hopkins and Rodrigo Valdez. How does Hopkins do in the 1970s and Valdez in the late 1990s/early 2000s.
Who does Hopkins lose to that fought Valdez? Who does Valdez lose to that fought Hopkins?

3. Carlos Palomino and Marlon Starling. How well does Palomino do in the 1980s and Starling in the mid-late 1970s?
Who does Palomino lose to that fought Starling? Who does Starling lose to that fought Palomino?

Mustafa beats RJJ's opponents.
RJJ loses to Spinks.

Hopkins loses (very close) to Monzon.
Valdez loses to RJJ.

Starling loses to Duran and Benitez.
Palomino loses to Curry and Brown.

Rover wrote:Mustafa beats RJJ's opponents.
RJJ loses to Spinks.

Mustafa was one of the more inconsistent fighters I've ever seen. No way he beats all of them.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Rover wrote:Mustafa beats RJJ's opponents.
RJJ loses to Spinks.

Mustafa was one of the more inconsistent fighters I've ever seen. No way he beats all of them.

I assumed it was best v. best here.
Which LH RJJ opponent do you give the best chance of beating Mustafa?
Tarver?

Early on Jones could have been KO'd by Hart or Briscoe. Later on he loses to Spinks and probably Snipes.

EMM would eventually lose to himself. Though he has the potential to win them all.

Ezzard wrote:Early on Jones could have been KO'd by Hart or Briscoe. Later on he loses to Spinks and probably Snipes.

EMM would eventually lose to himself. Though he has the potential to win them all.

I'd assumed the post was referring to light heavyweight.

Probably right. But they both started out as middles so it seemed interesting...

Ezzard wrote:Probably right. But they both started out as middles so it seemed interesting...

I think B-Hop would beat Mustafa at middle.

I think if Mustapha was in Jones era, he would have had avery long title reign. He would have beat Griffin and would have been the champ at leat until he fought Tarver. At least 6 years.

It would have been interesting to see how Jones would have fared in Mustaph'as era. He would have had some interesting fights if somehow he would have gotton in the ring against Spinks, Galindez, Scott, Marvin Johnson, Saad Muhammad, and Jerry Martin. He would have lsot to Spinks but the other fights would have been very interesting.

How Valdez would have had a long title reign but how long? At least 5 years. Doubtful that he would have stayed on top in his late 30s like Hopkins did.
Hopkins would not have beaten Monzon. Would have been interesting to see how he would have done against Briscoe. He would have beat Hugo Corro.

Starling is a tough call. There is little doubt that he was better than Stracey and all of the opponents that Palomino beat in successful title defenses. Probably would have lost to Benitez.

So you would think he would have had a decent title reign like Palomino did. However, somehow, someway Starling did not win some fights that he should have or at least could have. The first decision loss to Curry could have gone his way. The draw in the 2nd Breland fight should have gone his way. The loss to Blocker was very close.He also had technical draw against Bumphus and the no-contest against Molinares.

Perhaps he somehow would have lost or had a draw vs someone that Palomino beat.
Palomino almost certainly would not have had that lenghty of a title reign in the 1980s. He would have lost to Curry twice. Perhaps would have lost to Aquino or Honeyghan, though he should had enough to win. Would pick him to beat Bumphus,Molinares, Breland,and Blocker. Out of all of those guys the chances are that he loses somewhere a long the line. He would have lost to Curry twice.
Each lost key fights before winning titles. Starling lost to Pedro Villea and Palomino lost to Andy Price.

The bottom line is that had they fought in different eras, Jones, Hopkins, and Palomino would be seen as less dominant.
Mustapha Muhammad, Vladez, and perhaps Starling would have had long title reigns and would get much more attention than they do now.

Ambling Alp wrote:I think if Mustapha was in Jones era, he would have had avery long title reign. He would have beat Griffin and would have been the champ at leat until he fought Tarver. At least 6 years.

It would have been interesting to see how Jones would have fared in Mustaph'as era. He would have had some interesting fights if somehow he would have gotton in the ring against Spinks, Galindez, Scott, Marvin Johnson, Saad Muhammad, and Jerry Martin. He would have lsot to Spinks but the other fights would have been very interesting.

How Valdez would have had a long title reign but how long? At least 5 years. Doubtful that he would have stayed on top in his late 30s like Hopkins did.
Hopkins would not have beaten Monzon. Would have been interesting to see how he would have done against Briscoe. He would have beat Hugo Corro.

Starling is a tough call. There is little doubt that he was better than Stracey and all of the opponents that Palomino beat in successful title defenses. Probably would have lost to Benitez.

So you would think he would have had a decent title reign like Palomino did. However, somehow, someway Starling did not win some fights that he should have or at least could have. The first decision loss to Curry could have gone his way. The draw in the 2nd Breland fight should have gone his way. The loss to Blocker was very close.He also had technical draw against Bumphus and the no-contest against Molinares.

Perhaps he somehow would have lost or had a draw vs someone that Palomino beat.
Palomino almost certainly would not have had that lenghty of a title reign in the 1980s. He would have lost to Curry twice. Perhaps would have lost to Aquino or Honeyghan, though he should had enough to win. Would pick him to beat Bumphus,Molinares, Breland,and Blocker. Out of all of those guys the chances are that he loses somewhere a long the line. He would have lost to Curry twice.
Each lost key fights before winning titles. Starling lost to Pedro Villea and Palomino lost to Andy Price.

The bottom line is that had they fought in different eras, Jones, Hopkins, and Palomino would be seen as less dominant.
Mustapha Muhammad, Vladez, and perhaps Starling would have had long title reigns and would get much more attention than they do now.

Starling had a tech decision loss to Bumphus.

Good catch.

That was the best case against open scoring. Bumphus had a nick, found out he was ahead and called it a day to get a win in a fight he surely would have lost.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Good catch.

Original screen name.:)

Wonder if we could craft a thread titled, "Coming to America" or "The Distinguished Gentleman" or "The Golden Child" or "The Nutty Professor"?
:)
Actually, Daniel Jacobs's nickname is "The Golden Child."

Rover wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:Good catch.

Original screen name.:)

Had to change. It no longer takes my password that I have been using for the last 7 years. Won't take my email address so I can get a new one. This was the only way that I could get back on.

Ambling Alp II wrote:

Rover wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:Good catch.

Original screen name.:)

Had to change. It no longer takes my password that I have been using for the last 7 years. Won't take my email address so I can get a new one. This was the only way that I could get back on.

Ah, sorry about the wisecrack then.