Page 1 of 2
Greatest lightweight of all time
Posted: 11 Sep 2002, 22:05
by Robmeth
Roberto Duran, with all his vigor couldn't hold a candle to Hilmer Kinty. Hilmer was so great, while everyone had their eye on fellow kronk stable mate Thomas Hearns, Hilmer won the lightweight title and later unified the title with Jim Watt. Hilmer lost to Sean O' Grady but later reversed the decision with two wins and a draw against the irishmen. don't forget Hilmer was 3-0 against Duran including that 8th round K.O. and that was while Duran was still a good fighter. He was set back with a 11th round ko loss for the Jr. Welter championship by Costa Zoo, but that was in the twilight of his career and shouldn't be used as an arguement against his greatness.
Posted: 12 Sep 2002, 01:13
by Jaclem
I've give the edge to Jerry Strickland when he fought at that weight, just on the quality of the opposition.
Posted: 12 Feb 2006, 16:43
by Nile4000
Was Hilmer scared to fight Howard Davis jr. and Aaron Pryor?
Posted: 12 Feb 2006, 16:55
by everlast
pernell whitaker is the greatest lightweight head to head imo
Posted: 12 Feb 2006, 17:04
by matador
everlast wrote:pernell whitaker is the greatest lightweight head to head imo
I agree. His fights were so one-sided he'd make top-tier opposition look like sparring partners.
Posted: 12 Feb 2006, 17:09
by jamesmcdonnell
There'a good argument for either man being the greatest, however, Benny Leonard's record at lightweight is nothing short of incredible.
Henry Armstrong although he went on to win the Welter title, fought most of his career under the lightweight limit and thought he wasn't lightweight champ for long, was definetly great at the weight.
Posted: 12 Feb 2006, 17:10
by D. Shiznit
I would have to say Oscar De La Hoya.... the man was unbeatable at lightweight.
Posted: 12 Feb 2006, 20:06
by pringle
with a name like "hilmer" you'd have to be good fighter.
Posted: 12 Feb 2006, 22:21
by matador
D. Shiznit wrote:I would have to say Oscar De La Hoya.... the man was unbeatable at lightweight.
Yeah, by outmustling much smaller veterans moving up in weight who were washed up.
Whitaker gave Oscar hell when he was way past his prime at welterweight (which is closer to Oscar's natural weight and way above Sweat Pea.) Sweat Pea was much more elusive at lightweight and, in his prime, he would've pitched a shutout over Oscar.
Posted: 12 Feb 2006, 23:56
by MaxPow
It's hard to make a lightweight head-to-head discussion without mentioning Mayweather.
Re: Greatest lightweight of all time
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 00:22
by shoutout
Robmeth wrote:Roberto Duran, with all his vigor couldn't hold a candle to Hilmer Kinty. Hilmer was so great, while everyone had their eye on fellow kronk stable mate Thomas Hearns, Hilmer won the lightweight title and later unified the title with Jim Watt. Hilmer lost to Sean O' Grady but later reversed the decision with two wins and a draw against the irishmen. don't forget Hilmer was 3-0 against Duran including that 8th round K.O. and that was while Duran was still a good fighter. He was set back with a 11th round ko loss for the Jr. Welter championship by Costa Zoo, but that was in the twilight of his career and shouldn't be used as an arguement against his greatness.
based on the high number of total fabrications in your post, i'm assuming the last 4 letters of your name refer to crystal meth...i suggest you join the forum at druggedoutlosers.com!!
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 00:27
by shoutout
MaxPow wrote:It's hard to make a lightweight head-to-head discussion without mentioning Mayweather.
alot of folks here would scoff at that, but based on the fact that mayweather had a controversial win over the best LW champ in his first bout at 135 (castillo) & a clearcut win over castillo in his 2nd fight at 135, i think PBF clearly merits consideration for top 5 all-time lightweights...especially considering that PBF, castillo & probably chico corrales will end up in HOF!!!
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 00:42
by ringsider
I think Robmeth, has been using meth, for a little too long.
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 00:49
by shoutout
ringsider wrote:I think Robmeth, has been using meth, for a little too long.
i agree, but that doesnt mean we can't salvage this topic by turning it into a serious discussion of the issue at hand (see above posts)...
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 01:57
by Jaclem
...i don't know that he was the greatest....i don't think any one fighter can be so positivley identified in this division which has produced to much tlaent for so many years...but my all-time favorite lightweight is ike williams...whom i think ..when at his best..would have to be considered among those at the top of the list.
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 02:30
by shoutout
Jaclem wrote:...i don't know that he was the greatest....i don't think any one fighter can be so positivley identified in this division which has produced to much tlaent for so many years...but my all-time favorite lightweight is ike williams...whom i think ..when at his best..would have to be considered among those at the top of the list.
i could see duran, whitaker, mayweather, williams & benny leonard as top 5...
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 08:12
by Robmeth
You all very stoopid! Leave me alone!
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 08:30
by Syntax Error
Pernell Whittaker for me.
Far too slick for anybody.
Duran would have done 10 no mas' fighting Whittaker!!!!!!!!
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 10:05
by jamesmcdonnell
Duran was fighting at Welterweight, and lest we forget, had ALREADY beaten Leonard in their first fight.
Leonard was a better all around fighter than Pernell also, he hit with more authority and fought in the pocket well.
Duran was also over 200 lbs in between the 1st and 2nd fights, and the reason he quit was he was on diuretics to lose weight and was completely fucked.
Whittaker would have had to have had the fight of his life to beat Duran, who was a real killer of men at lightweight, not sure who would have won, but would have been a close fight.
DLH, not even close.
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 10:06
by scottmallon
This is a list compiled by the members of the International Boxing Research Organization of which I am a member. I believe it is pretty accurate.
#1 Benny Leonard
#2 Roberto Duran
#3 Joe Gans
#4 Henry Armstrong
#5 Tony Canzoneri
#6 Ike Williams
#7 Pernell Whitaker
#8 Barney Ross
#9 Julio Cesar Chavez
#10 Lou Ambers
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 11:24
by BrocktonBlockbuster49
scottmallon wrote:This is a list compiled by the members of the International Boxing Research Organization of which I am a member. I believe it is pretty accurate.
#1 Benny Leonard
#2 Roberto Duran
#3 Joe Gans
#4 Henry Armstrong
#5 Tony Canzoneri
#6 Ike Williams
#7 Pernell Whitaker
#8 Barney Ross
#9 Julio Cesar Chavez
#10 Lou Ambers
i think jack blackburn should defintley be on the list
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 11:45
by jamesmcdonnell
scottmallon wrote:This is a list compiled by the members of the International Boxing Research Organization of which I am a member. I believe it is pretty accurate.
#1 Benny Leonard
#2 Roberto Duran
#3 Joe Gans
#4 Henry Armstrong
#5 Tony Canzoneri
#6 Ike Williams
#7 Pernell Whitaker
#8 Barney Ross
#9 Julio Cesar Chavez
#10 Lou Ambers
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 13:12
by mattyp151
I take Whitaker over Duran. He would fight a lot like Leonard/Duran II, granted not with as much pop, but would definitely frustrate Duran a bunch.
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 13:18
by jamesmcdonnell
As I said, what about the first fight? Duran came into that fight properly prepared and totally outpsyched leonard, it's funny how people often seem to overlook that fight and focus instead on the horribly out of condition version Leonard beat.
At lightweight at his best, nobody ever ran rings around Duran. It would have been an even fight, and a pick em.
Posted: 13 Feb 2006, 13:35
by Borinken25
my top 5:
1. Armstrong
2. Duran
3. Benny Leonard
4. Joe Gans
5. Whitaker
Duran and Armstrong in a head to head are the best.