BoxRec

1. Chavez Taylor(fight 1) rd 12
2. Castillo-Corrales(fight 1) rd 10
3. Gattil-Ward(fight 1) rd 9
4. Holyfield-Bowe(fight 1) rd 10
5. MAB-Morales(Fight 1) rd 5

Hows my list? any good? These are the fights ive seen im only 21, so although i know about boxing quite a bit I havent seen many great fights from the 80's and 70's and most of you probably have. so what are some of ur favorites?

Good list, Hagler -Hearns rnd 1 also. Zale - Graziano,any round in the first two fights.

Hagler Hearns had a round in there somewhere.

well can you guys give me ur lists of your top five rounds

Gatti -Ward rnd9, Hagler - Hearns rnd1, Holmes -Norton 15, Dempsey-Firpo 1,Depaula-Foster 1. No particular order and that last one was wild but maybe not one of the greatest actually.

Hagler-Mugabi round six.

Muhammed-Lopez Rd 8 (I think it was rd 8 )

Coetzee vs Weaver Rd 8
Coetzee vs Page R7
Holy vs Dokes Rd 9
Holy vs Bowe Rd 10
Foreman vs Lyle round 4
Holmes vs Witherspoon Rd 9
Hagler vs Hearns Rd 1
Ali vs Foster round 6
Holy vs Qawi round 13
Fletcher vs James Green round 3
Ruddock vs Dokes round 4

Holmes-Norton 15

My three are Hagler-Mugabi rd 6
Hagler-Hearns rd 1
Chavez-Taylo rd12

I nearly forgit the best Heavyweight rd ever, I think it was rd 5 of Ali V Foreman........

Nobody going to mention Dempsey-Firpo?

Ya I got it up there Ez.

expug wrote:Ya I got it up there Ez.

Just seen it. It's a legendary fight that captured the imagination of sports fans and non-sports fans. Wouldn't it be great if boxing could somehow get abck to its former glory.

Ezzard wrote:

expug wrote:Ya I got it up there Ez.

Just seen it. It's a legendary fight that captured the imagination of sports fans and non-sports fans. Wouldn't it be great if boxing could somehow get abck to its former glory.

Absolutely, the sport was huge back then. THat whole era is fascinating really.

..louis/schmeling....2nd fight. no additional comment necessary.

Maybe not one of the absolute best, but the fifteenth round of Hagler-Antuofermo was pretty exciting. That was an entertaining fight all round, infact.

Decagon wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

expug wrote:Ya I got it up there Ez.

Just seen it. It's a legendary fight that captured the imagination of sports fans and non-sports fans. Wouldn't it be great if boxing could somehow get abck to its former glory.

Who cares about boxing's former glory? This is the best era of boxing that the sport has ever seen. We have access to more fights and more materials than any generation before us. Guys sitting in the barbershop in the 1960s could argue over Marciano or Louis. We can compare film footage of Jim Corbett and Muhammad Ali simply by downloading it.

The best era of boxing? Yes, there is more access to information so if your only interest in the sport is reading what's on the internet and watching old fight clips for free, then you may have a point. But if you are a fan of the sport, then you know that the sport is nearly dead in the US where there are hardly anymore gyms and live fights in most cities. Boxing is now a minor sport in the US, and a mere shadow of what it once was.

Have you EVER attended a live fight card? Are you even a fan, or just someone who needs to feel important by making contentious statements?

[quote="Decagon"][quote="Ezzard"][quote="expug"]Ya I got it up there Ez.[/quote]

Just seen it. It's a legendary fight that captured the imagination of sports fans and non-sports fans. Wouldn't it be great if boxing could somehow get abck to its former glory.[/quote]Who cares about boxing's former glory? This is the best era of boxing that the sport has ever seen. We have access to more fights and more materials than any generation before us. Guys sitting in the barbershop in the 1960s could argue over Marciano or Louis. We can compare film footage of Jim Corbett and Muhammad Ali simply by downloading it.[/quote]

but the boxers aint as good. the grass roots doesnt throw up as many genius's as in the 40's and 50's. debate.

DoubleM wrote:Hagler-Mugabi round six.

Good call

Or Chacon - Boza Edwards II round 1

..john l. your response was good and i agree with much of it...right up to the last mini-paragraph. why do the ad hominem bit that mars so many discussions here and turns them into personal arguments and get off the subject. (no question mark....strictly rhetorical)

Jaclem---As you know, I very much respect your opinion, but have ever read some of the nonsense that Decagon tries to spout about fighters of old? It's obvious that much of it is based on nothing more than assumption, or maybe three, or four minutes of one clip of one fight that a fighter had, which usually is not the fighter at his best, not to mention that the film is of the absolute worst quality imaginable. I know arguments are very un-productive, but so is making up versions of what you assume to be true and for every good, solid comment that Decagon makes, he makes two, or three ridiculous claims. And like I have always said, I have no problem if that is someone's opinion, but he tries to pass it off as fact, which has been shown time and again, yet he continues to make the same comments over and over, even after someone has given him proof otherwise...now that would seem to me to be someone who is not at all interested in a productive debate!

Jaclem wrote:..john l. your response was good and i agree with much of it...right up to the last mini-paragraph. why do the ad hominem bit that mars so many discussions here and turns them into personal arguments and get off the subject. (no question mark....strictly rhetorical)

Of course, in retrospect I agree with what you are saying. Unfortunately, I think past Decagon posts have often times pushed me beyond civility. In many threads he has been not only rude, but has resulted to nothing but vulgar hostility to avoid answering simple questions that he has raised with his own posts.

That having been said, I do agree with your comment and will attempt to tone down my responses in the future.

barry and johnl...thanks....but...i have no problem with getting into a verbal pier sixer with anyone...as those who have been on this forum for some time surely know. my point was just on that one particular post. by adding the personal put down...deserved or not...this is....well..the usual cliche is don't play in the other guy's ballpark...but here it would be don't fight in the other guy's home town, especially if the other guy and the referee have a strong family resemblance. if you...well, o.k....if WE...keep our opinions and arguments on the subject the guy who jumps in and turns his response into name-calling or insulting the intelligence of the other...he is the one making the fool of himself. by adding a gratuitist slam at the end of a sensible comment you..we...are opening the door for a personal argument right back at us....and the discussion gets lost.

i've been guilty of this myself many times..hey it's fun....but it also virtually asks for the same kind of response....and then becomes just a dogfight between two guys and has little interest to the rest of the forum members.

..of course, if some idiot would come on and say ezzard charles was a mediocre fighter i'd jump all over the horse's ass and ask if his mother had any children with i.q's in double digits....and...oh dear...see what i mean?

hey..i don't want to get rid of the battles here....i want to be part of many of them....just as long as they stay on the subject.

>>>if some idiot would come on and say ezzard charles was a mediocre fighter<<<

I would just about bet money that Decagon has stated that very thing at some point in the past couple of months!