BoxRec

Who was the best fighter of the last decade?

Has to be Roy Jones

where's LENNOX LEWIS?

and Oscar De La Hoya and Bernard Hopkins are missing from the list

Trinidad, but no De La Hoya? Right...

Anyway, Jones Jr for mine.

Bleh @ Roy Jones, Jr.

As for the HW's it's quite the toss up between Holyfield and Lewis, but I'd lean towards Holyfield, being as Lewis never got to face Tyson or Bowe in the 1990's, though you can make the case that he could have beaten either man.

The best fighter (at any weight) of the 1990's? I'm going for 'Sweet Pea' Pernell Whitaker....or....Julio Cesar Chavez. I can make the case for either man, Chavez was a legend and Whitaker was all but untouchable in his prime.

I think Chavez' best work was done prior to the 1990's. Whitaker is a fair choice though.

Whitaker was better than Jones. Whitaker defended his Lightweight title 6 times in the 90's, beating Azumah Nelson and becoming undisputed champion by KOing Nazario in 1 round (the guy who beat Rosario, who is one of Chavez's more prominent opponents.) He won a paper belt against Pineda (this is the guy who many thought Judah should have lost to a few years ago, before the Spinks rematch). Then he beat McGirt, who was a decent fighter, to become Welterweight champion. He defended his title 9 times. He got robbed blind against Chavez, who he beat very convincingly, even if the judges had it a draw. Chavez is another big candidate for best fighter of the 90's, and Whitaker took him to school... Whitaker won the fight. Whitaker moved up to Jr. Middleweight for one fight and beat Vasquez who had 10 successful defenses as Jr. Middleweight champion, and who had beaten a young Castillejo and a young Winky Wright. Whitaker beat him by decision to capture a belt in a fourth weight class. Then Whitaker, who was being ducked by Tito, got to fight Oscar... a majority of people who I've asked thought Whitaker beat Oscar, and I also thought Whitaker beat Oscar... another very big 90's fighter who could arguably be on this poll.

I like Jones I guess, but he was not better than Whitaker, his opponent selection wasn't anywhere near as good as Whitaker's. And even beating Toney, Jones' best win, is not more impressive than beating Chavez. Whitaker had more belts in the 90's than Jones did, which is usually the thing Jones and his fans always talk about.. the number of belts he won. And Whitaker defended his titles more than Jones did. The only thing Jones has is he was younger, so Pea declined at the end of the 90's while Jones wouldn't decline until this decade. But I'm not sure that's a good enough reason to put him over Whitaker.

I remember during Mayweather-Corrales, Lampley said that Mayweather's supporters compare him to Jones and his detractors compare him to Whitaker. First of all, if the worst your detractors can do is compare you to Whitaker then you must be damned good. More importantly, I think these "detractors"... whoever they were... need to remember that not only was Whitaker very physically talented, like Jones, but he was also more skilled, and he fought and beat the best time and again... Jones beat a couple of great fighters... but he didn't push the envelope like Whitaker did.

Once again the great Finito is underrated. Although I do believe that all fighters except Trinidad deserve to be on the list, I still think Finito is being underrated. I would rank them like this, Finito first, Whitaker closely following, followed by Jones Jr. (if he had beat DM I might have considered him the best), Chavez, Holyfield, and finally Trinidad. Out of all the fighters there, the two who remained undefeated throughout the 90's are Finito and Jones. Although Whitaker had questionable losses, and an unfair draw against Chavez, the fact remains the Lopez and Jones did not lose (excluding the DQ). Jones though, didn't exactly fight the best, even though he would often make respectable contenders look amateurish. On the other hand, an aging Finito had a close encounter against a young up and coming Rosendo Alvarez. Like a true champ, Finito gave him a rematch to show he was the better of the two. I know having an undefeated record doesn't mean much if you're not fighting the best, but Finito did fight the best. The sad fact is that most people don't follow lower weightclasses enough to realize that. Another thing that makes a fighter great in my opinion is the willingness to take risks, instead of playing it safe outboxing his opponents, he would set out to prove he was the better fighter by forcing exchanges and getting the best of his opponents. Finito was one of those fighters that comes once every 10 or so years. The complete package, he could brawl, box, counterpunch, dodge, slip, had beautiful footwork. I've always compared him to a smaller version of Salvador Sanchez or Sugar Ray Robinson. He just seemed to be able to do it all. So in my opinion the greatest fighter of the 90's is also one of the most underrated fighters of all time. Not underrated by those who know him, but simply underrated because many never got the chance to see him. Not to take anything away from Jones Jr. but I feel that all around the greatest fighters from the 90's were Lopez and Whitaker, because both fought the best, except that one of the two didn't lose. (Granted Whitaker's losses are controversial and he was passed his best years, but then so was Finito.)

dr_devious wrote:and Oscar De La Hoya and Bernard Hopkins are missing from the list

Very true, although Hopkins really shined for the early part of this decade.

1. Pernell Whitaker
2. Roy Jones, Jr
3. Evander Holyfield
4. Ricardo Lopez
5. Julio Cesar Chavez
6. Felix Trinidad

Jones was virtually untouchable in the 90s. He beat Hopkins and Toney and won titles in 3 weight divisions. He was also unbeaten through the decade.

dr_devious wrote:Jones was virtually untouchable in the 90s. He beat Hopkins and Toney and won titles in 3 weight divisions. He was also unbeaten through the decade.

He lost a DQ to Griffin, as decagon is alluding to, though he of course won the rematch. Either way, a win over Chavez is more impressive than a win over Toney. A win over a young Hopkins is not more impressive than wins over Nelson or Vasquez. Whitaker held titles in four weight classes in the 90's. For most of the decade, Whitaker was also untouchable.

I Feel Fine wrote:

dr_devious wrote:Jones was virtually untouchable in the 90s. He beat Hopkins and Toney and won titles in 3 weight divisions. He was also unbeaten through the decade.

He lost a DQ to Griffin, as decagon is alluding to, though he of course won the rematch. Either way, a win over Chavez is more impressive than a win over Toney. A win over a young Hopkins is not more impressive than wins over Nelson or Vasquez. Whitaker held titles in four weight classes in the 90's. For most of the decade, Whitaker was also untouchable.

Right on

How can Jones be better than Whitaker when Whitaker BY FAR BEAT SUPERIOR OPPOSITION: Azumah Nelson, Jorge Paez, Julio Cesar Chavez, Rafael Pineda, Buddy McGirt, Julio Cesar Vazquez, and had fights with DeLahoya and Trinidad way past his prime? He defiantely dominated his opposition which was the best. Jones NEVER FOUGHT THAT TYPE OF OPPOSITION and did not wanted to.

Whitaker was strictly world class

I don't think it matters with Chavez. They were both ex-Lightweights, they both won belts at 140, and I don't think the result would have been any different if Whitaker had just fought him there. And Chavez, as I said earlier, is a big candidate himself for this title of best in the 90's, the fact that Whitaker beat him should be a big edge for him here. To me thats better than beating Toney, who apparently had real weight issues when he fought Jones. Nelson probably was a bit out sized, but he was a 130 lbs champion so its not like fighting at Lightweight was a huge leap, plus he made some rounds competitive.. though Whitaker won clearly. Hopkins wasn't what he would be in later years when Jones beat him, IMO. Hopkins would get better and more versatile with age. Not a bad win, but I don't know that its better than beating Nelson. Beating Vasquez has to count as much as beating Hill, two guys in a higher weight class with 10 defenses of their respective titles. And Hill was coming off his loss to DM. And I think in terms of general opposition Whitaker fought better fighters, and there were no guys around who he should of fought that he didn't. Jones didn't fight a few people... some of it might not have been his fault, but the fact remains.

Well I mean Chavez didn't spend his best years there but I don't know that Chavez wasn't comfortable at 147. He did better against Oscar in the second fight at 147 than he did in the first fight at 140. I'm not saying Chavez was better at 147, but I do think it helps that he was fighting a fellow ex-Lightweight, and I don't think he looked particularly bad in the fight... he just was up against the wrong style. I don't know what he does different at 140 if Whitaker had fought him there. Are you saying Chavez wins if the fight is at 135-140?

Decagon wrote:I personally don't think Whitaker's competition during the 1990s is any better than Roy Jones's. Nelson and Chavez were the best fighters he fought, but they were both fighting above their normal weight. Roy Jones did beat Bernard Hopkins, James Toney, Reggie Johnson and Virgil Hill.

Nelson and Chavez were also ageing by the time Whittaker fought them - he didnt beat the peak Nelson or Chavez

Decagon wrote:

dr_devious wrote:Jones was virtually untouchable in the 90s. He beat Hopkins and Toney and won titles in 3 weight divisions. He was also unbeaten through the decade.

Nope.

Fantastic counter-argument, that, Decagon. Perhaps you would be a better candidate to replace Larry Merchant than Max Kellerman.

Decagon wrote:I personally don't think Whitaker's competition during the 1990s is any better than Roy Jones's. Nelson and Chavez were the best fighters he fought, but they were both fighting above their normal weight. Roy Jones did beat Bernard Hopkins, James Toney, Reggie Johnson and Virgil Hill.

Well, Virgil Hill was washed up when Jones fought him. Dariuz Michaelweski gave him a beating of his life in Germany before Jones did.
Reggie Johnson was not a great fighter. Hey, he was not even a natural lightheavyweight nor a top 50 lightheavyweight of all time.

The ONLY 2 great wins of Jones career were with Toney and Hopkins and that is not ENOUGH. Hey, Dec, Holyfield had more monumental wins than Jones.

Azumah Nelson went up in class to fight Whitaker and got outclassed. It was the first time that Azumah lose a fight in 8 years since the Salvador Sanchez war. Chavez was considered as the best figher pound per pound at the time and Whitaker schooled him, even though the fight was at 147. Whitaker was not a natural welterweight eithter.

Plus Whitaker beat Vasquez, beat Paez, Pineda, and other good challengers of the time.

Whitaker gotta be the best of the 90s. Bar none.

Decagon wrote:Chavez was nothing at 147; this is silly.

You're not seriously questioning Whitaker-Chavez on the basis of weight while building up Jones-Toney, are you? Toney was weight drained for the fight. This is well known. People knew it going into the fight. Yet gaining two pounds to fight Whitaker is going to kill Chavez? I'm not saying Whitaker didn't have an advantage, and looking back at their weights he out weighed Chavez by three pounds, but you're not going to tell me that Chavez beats Whitaker at 135-140 based on anything in that fight.

Toney even lost his next fight after Jones to Griffin.

Dr... Nelson was old? He still had some good years left. Chavez was getting there, but he was coming off the Haugen win which was one of his great performances. I could say similar things about Hopkins, he wasn't at his peak yet.

Whilst I do believe that Chavez and Nelson were compromised by weight and wear-n-tear I still have to go with Whittaker as the bets of the decade.

It is an artificial boundary though as Chavez is penalised for most of his best work happening in the 80s.