BoxRec

In 'boxers of the past' forum someone has listed all the hall of fame boxers using the rating system A,B,C,D and E as such. I know this reply should be attached to that thread however I don't wanna get into name calling there. And anyway I wan't to raise a different issue (Oh! they rated Jeff in with the 'D' group by the way)
The issue i want to raise is that even when Jeff was on top he never consolodated a position or dominated a division like I think he could have. My impression was that he could have been featherweight champion for as long as he wanted. I considered it bad for his legacy even back then to go chasing titles.3,4 or even 5 titles means nothing to us who follow the sport. However he could have unified the featherweight title and been mentioned in the same breath as Monzon or Zarate if he had of stayed at featherweight. What do others think?
"Level D- Borderline whether they should be in the Hall of Fame. You could make a strong case either way. These are very good fighters who certainly aren't the worst fighters in the Hall of fame."

I think he is a bit higher than a D level HOFer for starters...

But to answer you question I think a lot can be said for sticking to one division and dominating it, a la Bernard Hopkins, but I think even more can be said for winning big fights / Titles in multiple divisions, a la Roy Jones Jr. It all depends on the situation I guess, in days gone by when there were only 8 divisions boxers could sit in one division and it meant more as there were more top fighters in that division. These days the talent is spread out over more divisions so there are fewer 'top class' fighters in any one division. This means the 'real champions' have to move around (up) divisions to look for the next challenge and I think that is the best thing to do...

I have commented a couple of times that there are really still just a few dominant fighters, if you combine Roy Jones Jr, Floyd Mayweather Jr and Pac man they have won titles in all but three weight divisions (14) around the same era...

What would have been the point of amalgamating titles? With all the political bullshit that goes on in boxing now, if he had won a WBA title the WBC would have declared his WBC title vacant.

Jeff was a champion in three weight divisions and unlucky not to have won in four. I do not know who this clown who rated him as a "D" grader was, but his only contact with boxing would have been in his dreams.

I would have preferred to be speaking about Fenech today in terms of having dominated and unified a division rather than having won 1/3 of 3 different titles. Unified titleholders to me are usually champions and the 'champion' tag carries a lot more weight than 'titlist'. There should always be a major distinction between the two

Fenech won his first title in his 7th fight and his third by around his 20th? He rode the then wave of fighters going for several titles at different weights and whilst it looked great on paper, you need to put it into a bit of perspective...........

Satoshi Shingaki (IBF bantam titlist) had not much as a fighter. It was smart of Fenech's management to go for this guy's title due to his inexperience

Samart Payakaroon (WBC super feather titlist) was quite a good fighter but had lived the playboy lifestyle before fighting Jeff. This win was a good one, though. Fenech's first knockdown although it was more an off balance touchdown rather than a legit knockdown

Victor Callejas for the WBC feather title worried me a bit. I'd read where Callejas had virtually lifted Loris Stecca off the canvas with one left hook and Fenech being the macho type fighter was always going to try and match his power. Fenech outfought and outboxed the guy in a brilliant display. He also suffered (yet again) a broken hand in the very early rounds

I know there was talk of setting up a unification fight at featherweight with Antonio Esparragosa. This guy was pretty good but IMO Fenech would have beaten him. Too relentless, too tough. I think around this time the IBF feather titlist was Jorge Paez and both Fenech and Esparragosa would have beaten him easily

Overall I'd like to think Fenech would be rated somewhere in the top 10 fighters of the period 1987 - 1991. At one point he was rated #3 fighter P4P in the world alongside Tyson and Chavez by several different boxing magazines. He was still relatively unknown in the US and the rating was through the fact that the scribes were forced into taking notice of the guy through the sheer weight that his wins carried

During what turned out to be a fairly short prime he dominated virtually everyone he fought and there were fighters that were simply scared to fight him. Not too many fighters have this kind of auru about them (Calvin Grove for example, was offered a Fenech fight a few years before they did fight, and answered "are you crazy, do you want to get me killed?"

Overall, not bad for a guy that turned pro at flyweight, had chronic hand problems, and fought the best fighters of his day at several weights

Not many men beat both Carlos Zarata and Daniel Zaragoza (famous for their "battle of the Z men" fights). Jeff did.

I watched the Zaragoza fight and was amazed a 10 fighter fighter could so easily beat someone like him. Years later Zaragoza when asked if there were any fights he'd like to have a go at again, mentioned Fenech. haha no chance Daniel, he would have beaten you much more easily second time around

The Zarate fight showed a side of Fenech I didn't particularly like. When they stopped the fight he at first thought the decision was a TKO against him due to it being stopped because of the cut. Zarate also thought this was the outcome and raised his arms in victory. Fenech walked over to him and was about to get stuck into him again and Zarate covered up

Nobody ever accused Fenech of being a UN Ambassador. I speak only about his boxing ability and his massive fighting heart.

Brute wrote:Nobody ever accused Fenech of being a UN Ambassador. I speak only about his boxing ability and his massive fighting heart.

I think if you're going to be objective about Jeff Fenech's career then you also have to look at his shortcomings. I didn't like what I saw at the end of the Zarate fight as it maybe showed Jeff had a problem when things weren't going his way

The same can be said about the second Nelson fight.......he tried to knee Azumah in the nuts near the end of one of the rounds

OK, he hated to lose. I did not say I would ever write him a character reference, but Jesus he could fight!

Brute wrote:OK, he hated to lose. I did not say I would ever write him a character reference, but Jesus he could fight!

Yeah, great fighter, shit trainer and hopeless shop lifter.

Philip Holiday, the former world lightweight champ, says Jeff Fenech would have been too busy and too strong for Johnny Famechon. Just read it on
. Apparently wheetleys magazine has got expert opinions from heaps of fighters for a dream fight

I think Johnny's skills are rather underrated. Jeff would have had a hard job landing. Who wins is a toss up

I was lucky enough to see Johnny Famechon beat Bobby Valdez at the old Sydney Stadium in 1968. When Valdez thought he had Johnny cornered, Johnny just rolled under his punches and wound up back in centre ring with Valdez staring at an empty corner. Even for a featherweight he was incredibly fast. Valdez finished up getting disqualified in the thirteenth round for clinching with Famechon in the corner out of sheer frustration and refusing to release him. Johnny made him look silly, and Valdez was rated in the top five featherweights in the world.

Johnny Famechon could also hit hard. I watched him on TV long ago, knock the Japanese: Fighting Harada through the ropes to retain his title, with Harada being unable to continue.

Matching Fammo versus the Marrickville Mauler at their peaks would make a dream fight, but let us remember them at their best - they were both terrific fighters.

I remember Johnny's last fight, when he lost a dubious decision in Rome to Vicente Saldivar. Harry Gibbs was referee and sole judge. At the end of the fight he looked confused as he put his hand on Saldivar's head to indicate the winner. The Italian crowd booed mightily. Considering that Johnny was born in France and the French and Italians have hated each other since Julius Caesar invaded Gaul, that says a lot.

Since that I have read Bob Mee and other clowns write that Saldivar won a "unanimous decision." Nice to know that Harry Gibb agreed with himself.

D at best is where I would rate Fenech. At the time he won the IBF title it wasn't much better then some of these abc titles floating around now. (Brute you must agree). He beat some great fighters but I don't believe that he fought them at there prime.
Famo wins on my card.

ABC wrote:D at best is where I would rate Fenech. At the time he won the IBF title it wasn't much better then some of these abc titles floating around now. (Brute you must agree). He beat some great fighters but I don't believe that he fought them at there prime.
Famo wins on my card.

I would rate him a B level, If he stayed retired after his hand problem we would be talking about him as an all time great. Zarata Zaragoza and Callejas were some tough guys who would give nightmares to anyone from any era and Fenech beat them all.
Along with his robberie draw with Azuhma Nelson when he was way above his natural weight class.

Fenech beat some really good fighters. Zaragosa won the WBC Super Bantam title some time after Fenech moved to featherweight and held it on and off until he was in his forties, and he was much more experienced than Fenech when Fenech beat him in a non-title fight, with only one judge giving Daniel a round. I have always taken Payakaroon's story about his playing up before he fought Fenech, considering he was lighter for the Fenech fight than when he won the title and only lost a featherweight challenge after that in his last fight. I think he made the story up to explain how he got KOed. Callejas and Villasana were also good fights and McCrory was an Olympic Gold medallist. He may not have beaten Famechon if they had met at their peaks, but Jeff was no slouch as a fighter.

ABC wrote:D at best is where I would rate Fenech. At the time he won the IBF title it wasn't much better then some of these abc titles floating around now. (Brute you must agree). He beat some great fighters but I don't believe that he fought them at there prime.
Famo wins on my card.

I gather that if Jeff had of got the decision he deserved against Nelson we wouldn't be having this discussion.
If Jeff had have been american maybe he would have had more respect. anyway at Featherweight I think he was untouchable.
Dream fight
Prime Fenech Vs Prime Olivares at featherweight. Be early!

I,d give Jeff a A, Hes fight with Nelson showed it (1st one). Also i watched his fights when i was a kid on free to air TV and couldnt rate him anyless.

I remember watching many of his fights when I was a kid during the 80s. He out of all the Aussie exports back then was the one that meant to most it seemed. There was nothing he could not do. Then years later, after he retired, thats when I learnt what kind of man he is.

I met Jeff once at a fight show, he was surronded by leaches that really damaged his greatness.

Great fighter though. I think he is a HOF for his ring showings.

Kym

This doesn't really answer your question, but as a Yank, I was immensely impressed from witnessing his first match against Azumah Nelson on the Tyson/Ruddock undercard, back in 1991. It was one of the worst miscarriages of justice I've ever seen. He WON that fight, I don't care what anyone else says--and even though he got stopped in the rematch, I can't help but think that things would have been different had he not been robbed the first time. He's 1-1 against the great Azumah Nelson, of that I have no doubt.

Another interesting little tidbit about Fenech. I recall reading somewhere that, back in the 80's after one of his fights, he knocked out a security guard in a Las Vegas casino. I don't quiet remember exactly, but some big muscular dude was messing with him, and he flat out nailed him right in the middle of the face and put him down. Any details would be appreciated.

I read about that incident and he was found to be cleared of any charges.

Shoplifting gold watches in Sydney however is another story

The huge bouncer being flattened by Fenech story, made headlines although I can't remember any other details. There was also another story of a fellow punter in one of the US casinos getting into some sort of verbal altercation with Jeff and the guy ended up slapping him across the face. Errrrr wrong move fella, another KO win for Fenech

EriqS wrote:This doesn't really answer your question, but as a Yank, I was immensely impressed from witnessing his first match against Azumah Nelson on the Tyson/Ruddock undercard, back in 1991. It was one of the worst miscarriages of justice I've ever seen. He WON that fight, I don't care what anyone else says--and even though he got stopped in the rematch, I can't help but think that things would have been different had he not been robbed the first time. He's 1-1 against the great Azumah Nelson, of that I have no doubt.

i think jeff won that fight 117-111, the worst part is, i love watching that fight, it is, i belive jeffs second best ring performance(the first being his knockout of Callejas, were he fought the majority of the fight with one hand) but the bogus decision ruins the veiwing experience