BoxRec

Great fighter, but def. in the all-time PFP rankings is not in the league of your Armstrongs, Grebs, Walkers, Robinsons etc. Was over-rated right after he retired but oddly you don't hear about him much anymore . . .

you make a great argument, well researched and good points but,
you can not compare him to boxers of old...
its like the mayweather -vs- ray robinson post,
boxers of old fought more, for less, and were far more mentally tuff...
records of fighters today isnt one fourth as numberious as the days of old,
those guys fought alot today fighter fight what...4 times a year if were lucky look at the consistency in fights of the old boxers you compared chavez too...
and your point about pernell....its a strong point but, styles make fights,
pernell was a defensive freak and one of the most underated fighters of all time, my opinion, pernell beat oscar in oscars prime, and oscar wanted nothing to do with a rematch....but as for chavez, yes, i would certainly put him in p4p with the best of all time, where?? its hard to say,
i can only compare him to who he fought,
as for your research....instead of his record on boxrec
go back and watch his fights, i think you might have a possable change of mind....

its not really fair to compare him to those mentioned,but to compare him to other great welterweights hes definitely top 10

Chavez was a super featherweight, lightweight and light-welterweight. He never held a title at welterweight.

I would put him a half-step below the all-time greats. He may have been the best p4p boxer in the world for a few years, but he never really had a career-defining fight. His most memorable fight was one he didn't really win--the first fight with Meldrick Taylor.

I don't see that the Whitaker fight should count against him. He lost it, but he was chasing a title three weight classes up from where he won his first. He started his career as a super flyweight and was fighting that day for the world welterweight title. Looking back on it today, Chavez had everything to gain and nothing to lose in a historical sense. He's just another star fighter who went one weight class too far.

He's overqualified for the Hall of Fame, but he doesn't quite rank with guys like Robinson, Armstrong, Duran, Greb, etc. IMO.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Great fighter, but def. in the all-time PFP rankings is not in the league of your Armstrongs, Grebs, Walkers, Robinsons etc. Was over-rated right after he retired but oddly you don't hear about him much anymore . . .

hmmmm, i'll have to think about that one.

Can anyone please tell me how JCC fought and if he was exciting and so on..? Please!

To be fair to Chavez I think he was never quite the same after the first Taylor fight. I don't think he was at quite at his sharpest when he faced Whittikar.

I thought that Julio Cesar Chavez was overrated. Yes, he was a smart fighter who knew how to cut off the ring in addition to being durable and a good bodypuncher. But I thought that he was too easy to hit. As result, I thought that someone like Roberto Duran would beat him easily.

- Chuck Johnston

{amateur} wrote:Can anyone please tell me how JCC fought and if he was exciting and so on..? Please!

Chavez was usually good value for money, typical aggresive Mexican fighter with a killer left hook to the body. It's worth checking out his Super-feather and Lightweight fights.

In his prime he would clinicaly dismantle and grindown his opponents.

Mike Tyson on what he thought of Chavez after Chavez had stopped Tysons stablemate Edwin Rosario in 11 rounds on 21/11/87.

"All those other Lightweights should retire, Chavez is too dangerous to fight"

Thanx for the info guys!

elmersalsa wrote:

I USED TO THINK THAT HE WAS EXTREMELY GREAT. BUT I compared his record and accomplishments with greats like Jack Dempsey

Yeah, a guy who was knocked out cold in 10 seconds by a club fighter. And is more suspicious than Panama Red.

Tantum wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

I USED TO THINK THAT HE WAS EXTREMELY GREAT. BUT I compared his record and accomplishments with greats like Jack Dempsey

Yeah, a guy who was knocked out cold in 10 seconds by a club fighter. And is more suspicious than Panama Red.

So you are implying that Jack Dempsey was a fraud then,right?.And the Flynn fight is well known to have been a dive on Dempsey's part for 500$,anyone who honestly thinks that the feather fisted Flynn stopped Jack cold in less then a minute is very naive.

He is Overrated!

Most guys aren't underrated or overrated. Chavez was a great fighter and most people know that.

I think those that think he overrated are only thinking of his fights with Whitaker and Taylor.
Was he the best of all time? No. However, he had way too many wins over quality opponents to ignore. Camacho, Mayweather (2x), Ramirez, Haugen, Rosario, La Porte, Lockridge etc.
Lockridge gave him all that he could handle but most of the time he won in dominating fashion.

He was an effin great fighter.

As controversial as it was, the way Chavez showed the huevos to hang in there, never give up and stop Taylor, demonstrated just how gritty he was.

He's overwhelmingly considered the greatest of all Mexican fighters. And Mexico has had more than a few legendary boxers.

The Whitaker fight probably occurred at the point where Chavez was just beginning to slip. A few months later came his first official defeat to Randall.

But Whitaker was outstanding and had a style that would baffle many P4P greats.

Chavez was hardly underrated. Even if you only consider him a top 25 fighter all times, that's a pretty damn good ranking to boast.

I got him ranked at #25 all time pound per pound. Julio Cesar Chavez was a beast, especially in the 1984-90 era, where he was at his absolute best. I ranked him also as the third best fighter of the 1980s behind Sugar Ray Leonard and Mike Tyson. He can really punish you in the body with those terrific left hooks. He could break you down as the fight goes on. He was like a motor. He started slow, but as the motor keeps warming up as the rounds go by, he heated up and after that, he was hard to slow down. The longer the fight, the better. A great fighter by no means. After the Meldrick Taylor fight, he wasn't the same boxer.

He is a one of all time greats for sure, but he had also been promoted to build up a record.

Well sure some of his fans have gone overboard. But you could say that with just about any great fighter. As senor pipino says, he is top 25 of all time. There should be no question that he was a great fighter.

It's idiotic to demean Chavez and attempt to diminish his legacy.

Except for the Taylor fight, he really didn't cone close to losing until the Whitaker bout.

That was his 88th bout. He didn't lose from 1980 until 1994, spanning 90 fights.

One of the greatest streaks in boxing history.

Sure, as Haugen pointed out, there were a bunch of Tijuana taxi drivers included in that remarkable unbeaten skein, but Chavez also vanquished one contender after another from featherweight to super lightweight.

He would have given Duran quite a battle at 135. Duran was a bit quicker, better defensively and adapted to different styles more readily than Chavez.

Both had amazing chins and hurt you whenever they hit you.

Duran probably beats Chavez at 135, but he'd know that he had been in quite a battle.

Chavez was an ATG that stayed around too long. He was methodical; powerful; granite chinned; savvy; and highly skilled. One of the greatest body punchers I've ever seen. Watch several of his fights and see the greatness of El César del Boxeo!!

Slightly overrated, but still a truly great fighter, and one that will be revered for a long time to come.