BoxRec

i was looking at pernell whitaker's record and i'd forgot that he never beat a top tier fighter at their weight , azumah nelson was the best name but he was fighting out of his weight class . so what other great fighters are a bit thin on wins over other great fighters .

Ricardo Lopez. Tyson. Holmes. Marciano

BarryWashington wrote:How was Whitaker beating Chavez or De La Hoya not great wins?

because he didn't :)

Sure he did.

Palomino & Cuevas are two guys, though calling them great could be a stretch.

stevedoc wrote:i was looking at pernell whitaker's record and i'd forgot that he never beat a top tier fighter at their weight , azumah nelson was the best name but he was fighting out of his weight class . so what other great fighters are a bit thin on wins over other great fighters .

Nelson and Chavez clearly make the grade.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sure he did.

i think pernell gets to much credit for the "draw" chavez was beaten two fights later by the great frankie randell.
as for the oscar fight i see it on a 20" tv with 40 others in a village in indonesia ,i thought it looked like pernell was making oscar miss a lot but i couldn't really score it ,so no real comment from me on that fight .

Controversial wrote:Ricardo Lopez. Tyson. Holmes. Marciano

Because Ezzard Charles, Jersey Joe Walcott and Archie Moore wern't great fighters?

I'd rank Norton as a great fighter for Holmes.

I'd concur with Lopez and Tyson, if you're not counting the past-it Holmes.

Jack Dempsey.

He beat a great light heavyweight in Gibbons but no great heavyweights.

stevedoc wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sure he did.

i think pernell gets to much credit for the "draw" chavez was beaten two fights later by the great frankie randell.
as for the oscar fight i see it on a 20" tv with 40 others in a village in indonesia ,i thought it looked like pernell was making oscar miss a lot but i couldn't really score it ,so no real comment from me on that fight .

Chavez was considered the best fighter in the world, Whitaker clowned him. I wouldn't call either of them prime. You're entitled to your opinion but that is a difficult fight to remove credit from.

Now Chavez is a guy that fits this thread better than Whitaker. Randall was an excellent fighter that nobody wanted to fight. He'd have been hell for Julio at any point in his career.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

stevedoc wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sure he did.

i think pernell gets to much credit for the "draw" chavez was beaten two fights later by the great frankie randell.
as for the oscar fight i see it on a 20" tv with 40 others in a village in indonesia ,i thought it looked like pernell was making oscar miss a lot but i couldn't really score it ,so no real comment from me on that fight .

Chavez was considered the best fighter in the world, Whitaker clowned him. You're entitled to your opinion but that is a difficult fight to remove credit from.

Now Chavez is a guy that fits this thread better than Whitaker. Randall was an excellent fighter that nobody wanted to fight. He'd have been hell for Julio at any point in his career.

i'm not saying whitaker didn't win just that i think chavez was on the slide ,plus whitaker would of always been a hard fight for JCC
as for chavez i'd say meldrick taylor ,rosario ,camacho were all very good fighters better than anyone whitaker beat.

stevedoc wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

stevedoc wrote:
i think pernell gets to much credit for the "draw" chavez was beaten two fights later by the great frankie randell.
as for the oscar fight i see it on a 20" tv with 40 others in a village in indonesia ,i thought it looked like pernell was making oscar miss a lot but i couldn't really score it ,so no real comment from me on that fight .

Chavez was considered the best fighter in the world, Whitaker clowned him. You're entitled to your opinion but that is a difficult fight to remove credit from.

Now Chavez is a guy that fits this thread better than Whitaker. Randall was an excellent fighter that nobody wanted to fight. He'd have been hell for Julio at any point in his career.

i'm not saying whitaker didn't win just that i think chavez was on the slide ,plus whitaker would of always been a hard fight for JCC
as for chavez i'd say meldrick taylor ,rosario ,camacho were all very good fighters better than anyone whitaker beat.

As I added, I wouldn't have called either prime. I don't think Chavez beat Meldrick, but he was great at the time. Rosario and Camacho were solid wins(he has a slew of them) but if you're removing Azumah from pea's ledger than Hector doesn't mean much at 140.

Larry Holmes beat "The Greatest". 'Course it wasn't when The Greatest was anywhere near great.

dempseyfire wrote:

Controversial wrote:Ricardo Lopez. Tyson. Holmes. Marciano

Because Ezzard Charles, Jersey Joe Walcott and Archie Moore wern't great fighters?

I'd rank Norton as a great fighter for Holmes.

I'd concur with Lopez and Tyson, if you're not counting the past-it Holmes.

Great fighters yes but were they still at their peaks? Not a controversial train of thought, often a criticism aimed at Marciano. As for Norton I'm not sure he would be classed as a "great" fighter, good yes but not great. Depends on your definition of great I guess, I tend to think of an prime ATG.

I think Tyson can have Spinks as a great fighter. While he was past his best and had banged up knees, he was still the undefeated Heavyweight champion of the world.

Julio Cesar Chavez

Tyson? Holmes? Marciano?

Big names... My first thought was Golota, lol

You could argue Mike McCallum either way.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You could argue Mike McCallum either way.

I thought mcCallum deserved at least one of the decisions against James Toney and for what it's worth ( probably not much ) he did beat curry.

stevedoc wrote:i was looking at pernell whitaker's record and i'd forgot that he never beat a top tier fighter at their weight , azumah nelson was the best name but he was fighting out of his weight class . so what other great fighters are a bit thin on wins over other great fighters .

If you're going to limit the criteria to great fighters who never beat great fighters who: 1. Were prime and 2. Fighting In their natural best weight class. Then that basically accounts for most of them. There are few greats ( comparatively speaking ) who defeated another great who's formidabilities matched their own. Leonard beating hearns and Frazier beating Ali are two rare examples.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You could argue Mike McCallum either way.

I thought mcCallum deserved at least one of the decisions against James Toney and for what it's worth ( probably not much ) he did beat curry.

That, and Kalambay, would be the point of the argument.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

stevedoc wrote:i was looking at pernell whitaker's record and i'd forgot that he never beat a top tier fighter at their weight , azumah nelson was the best name but he was fighting out of his weight class . so what other great fighters are a bit thin on wins over other great fighters .

If you're going to limit the criteria to great fighters who never beat great fighters who: 1. Were prime and 2. Fighting In their natural best weight class. Then that basically accounts for most of them. There are few greats ( comparatively speaking ) who defeated another great who's formidabilities matched their own. Leonard beating hearns and Frazier beating Ali are two rare examples.

Foreman beating Frazier is another example.

Giancarlo wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

stevedoc wrote:i was looking at pernell whitaker's record and i'd forgot that he never beat a top tier fighter at their weight , azumah nelson was the best name but he was fighting out of his weight class . so what other great fighters are a bit thin on wins over other great fighters .

If you're going to limit the criteria to great fighters who never beat great fighters who: 1. Were prime and 2. Fighting In their natural best weight class. Then that basically accounts for most of them. There are few greats ( comparatively speaking ) who defeated another great who's formidabilities matched their own. Leonard beating hearns and Frazier beating Ali are two rare examples.

Foreman beating Frazier is another example.

It's the opinion of most people that Frazier was slipping by the time of the foreman fight and one that I happen to agree with. But nevertheless I think we agree that the list of such examples is slim

It really isn't, especially if you go back to earlier era's. While there might not be a million even money fights with two prime guys, there is certainly tens of thousands. Even in more modern era's you can spit them out rapidly off of the top of your head. Floyd/Chico, Floyd/Castillo, DLH/Mosley, DLH/Tito, Hopkins/Tito, etc..

drunkenpiper36 wrote:It's the opinion of most people that Frazier was slipping by the time of the foreman fight and one that I happen to agree with.

Most people?

So, it wasn't much of a shock at the time?