Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-10-2009, 05:56 PM   #16
Seamus
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 12,278
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Put a gun to my head and I would have Pernell in the top 25, Fitz in the top 20. I still don't think a comparison such as this is apt. It's almost like judging footballer against a rugby player.
Seamus is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 12-10-2009, 08:32 PM   #17
essexboy
The Cat
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,035
vCash: 418
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Obviously in terms of ability Sweet Pea is a mile ahead but Fitzsimmons cant be blamed for being born in the wrong century, you can only rank him in accordance to how he performed in his own time. Personally I thought Whitaker beat Chavez easily, I think I gave Chavez two or three rounds, I had Whitaker-De la Hoya a draw which past prime was an amazing performance from Sweet Pea. Fitz was something else though, a phenomenon, he is one of the greatest middleweights ever and beat a great middleweight to get the title in Dempsey. To step up and take the lineal heavyweight title like he did is unlikely to ever be repeated. Possessed ridiculous punching power. I have Fitz around #11 ATG and Whitaker around #18. In dont rate fighters head to head or anything like that, thats an impossible exercise. Its more record and performance at numeous weights.
essexboy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 08:35 PM   #18
cotto20
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,918
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by es***boy View Post
Obviously in terms of ability Sweet Pea is a mile ahead but Fitzsimmons cant be blamed for being born in the wrong century, you can only rank him in accordance to how he performed in his own time. Personally I thought Whitaker beat Chavez easily, I think I gave Chavez two or three rounds, I had Whitaker-De la Hoya a draw which past prime was an amazing performance from Sweet Pea. Fitz was something else though, a phenomenon, he is one of the greatest middleweights ever and beat a great middleweight to get the title in Dempsey. To step up and take the lineal heavyweight title like he did is unlikely to ever be repeated. Possessed ridiculous punching power. I have Fitz around #11 ATG and Whitaker around #18. In dont rate fighters head to head or anything like that, thats an impossible exercise. Its more record and performance at numeous weights.
Yep. Peoples rating or critera shound't be based on how Fitzsimmons would fair in other era's or how he stacks up in fantasy fights.

He should be judged on what he accomplished and achieved in his own era of fighting. End of.......
cotto20 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 08:42 PM   #19
Seamus
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 12,278
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by es***boy View Post
Obviously in terms of ability Sweet Pea is a mile ahead ...
I guess I don't understand your definition of ability. I would think it took quite some ability for a spindly middleweight to win three divisions up to heavyweight and give a monster like Jeffries such fits. As far as pure power punching ability, Fitzsimmons has few peers. I would say it is even more impressive than Whitaker's defensive acumen.
Seamus is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 08:45 PM   #20
essexboy
The Cat
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,035
vCash: 418
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
I guess I don't understand your definition of ability. I would think it took quite some ability for a spindly middleweight to win three divisions up to heavyweight and give a monster like Jeffries such fits. As far as pure power punching ability, Fitzsimmons has few peers. I would say it is even more impressive than Whitaker's defensive acumen.
Im talking about how boxing has changed in the last hundred years. Obviously in his time he was extremely talented. I was sorta replying to PowerPuncher's post in an off-hand way.
essexboy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 09:58 PM   #21
sweet_scientist
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,870
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

I give Fitzsimmons the edge in terms of longevity (even though Whitaker boxed more rounds) and character, but Whitaker has the edge in terms of resume and dominance, which are more important categories for me, and hence why I have Whitaker higher.
sweet_scientist is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 10:12 PM   #22
cotto20
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,918
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweet_scientist View Post
I give Fitzsimmons the edge in terms of longevity (even though Whitaker boxed more rounds) and character, but Whitaker has the edge in terms of resume and dominance, which are more important categories for me, and hence why I have Whitaker higher.
Interesting, how many places apart do you have them?
cotto20 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 10:25 PM   #23
sweet_scientist
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,870
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by iran barkley View Post
Interesting, how many places apart do you have them?
About 10.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]


[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]


[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
sweet_scientist is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 12:17 AM   #24
Boilermaker
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,974
vCash: 685
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweet_scientist View Post
About 10.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]


[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]


[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
That is an excellent list, and you have obviously put a lot of work into it. But,I have to ask the question, how do you justify Bob Fitzsimmons rankings?

You have listed his longevity as a 7. Fitzsimmons won the middleweight in 1891, and was the best middleweight in the world until the day he lost the world title in 1895. From this day forth he was the best light heavyweight and Heavyweight in the world. By 1903, he was still considered the second best heavyweight in the world (at the time of his loss to Jeffries) and later that year he was considered the best light heavyweight in the world. This puts him at the very top of the tree 12 years after becoming the best middleweight in the world. it wasnt until 2 years later when he lost the light heavy champ to another Jack o brien that he was dethroned as the no 1 light heavyweight. That makes him the no 1 pound for pound guys (or thereabouts) for nearly 15 years. And about 5 or so years later he was still giving the World Heavyweight title contender Bill Lang a decent fight. All this is not allowing for the years before he won the world middleweight title, where he beat everyone going around.

I dont see how anyone can have better longevity than this, surely he rates a 9 or better!

Also, on level of competition, his victory over corbett (as a middleweight) is the biggest pound for pound competition anyone has ever achieved. His victory over the numerous no 1 or 2 heavyweight contenders (as a middleweight or at worst light heavyweight) are enormous pound for pound competition. His only defeats (other than the likely dive) were to two heavyweight top 10 or so contenders (either of which would be a huge scalp if he was successful) and to top 10 all time great heavyweights and arguably a top 10-30 all time great light heavyweight. I dont see how he could have taken on any better competition, yet you have given him just 43.5 for resume. The same as Hagler and MOnzon, two good fighters but both of whom never ventured above the middleweight limit! Even an ATG like Harry Greb, does not have the same victories against ATG heavyweights that Fitz has and he was defeated closer to his prime and against lesser fighters than Fitz ever was.

Dominance also is another debatable question. Fitz was a World Heavyweight champion as a middleweight. What other middleweight, in his time or after was even a leading contender? A few light heavys have done what fitz did, but never a middleweight, and even as a heavyweight. Until being upset by Jeffries, Fitz' KO ratio even against leading heavyweight contenders was simply astonishing. I dont see what else he could have done to be any more dominant. in fact, he was so dominant that he never even bothered fighting in his natural weight class, because there was no one considered good enough to meet him. Very few, probably only henry armstrong could come close in this regard.

I think that you could easily raise Fitz 2.5 in relation to longevity, 10 for competition (for his time he pretty much fought and beat every light heavy and heavy contender, just like langford did) and 5 for dominance (like Robinson and the other greats, there quite simply was not a middleweight or light heavyweight of his time that anyone considers was better than Bob Fitzsimmons - either then or now. That is as dominant as it gets). That leaves 17.5 extra points to add to Fitz total (imo). This takes him to 98.5 which i think is a fair indication of his greatness based on your scale.
Boilermaker is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 01:06 AM   #25
sweet_scientist
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,870
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boilermaker View Post
That is an excellent list, and you have obviously put a lot of work into it. But,I have to ask the question, how do you justify Bob Fitzsimmons rankings?

You have listed his longevity as a 7. Fitzsimmons won the middleweight in 1891, and was the best middleweight in the world until the day he lost the world title in 1895. From this day forth he was the best light heavyweight and Heavyweight in the world. By 1903, he was still considered the second best heavyweight in the world (at the time of his loss to Jeffries) and later that year he was considered the best light heavyweight in the world. This puts him at the very top of the tree 12 years after becoming the best middleweight in the world. it wasnt until 2 years later when he lost the light heavy champ to another Jack o brien that he was dethroned as the no 1 light heavyweight. That makes him the no 1 pound for pound guys (or thereabouts) for nearly 15 years. And about 5 or so years later he was still giving the World Heavyweight title contender Bill Lang a decent fight. All this is not allowing for the years before he won the world middleweight title, where he beat everyone going around.

I dont see how anyone can have better longevity than this, surely he rates a 9 or better!

Also, on level of competition, his victory over corbett (as a middleweight) is the biggest pound for pound competition anyone has ever achieved. His victory over the numerous no 1 or 2 heavyweight contenders (as a middleweight or at worst light heavyweight) are enormous pound for pound competition. His only defeats (other than the likely dive) were to two heavyweight top 10 or so contenders (either of which would be a huge scalp if he was successful) and to top 10 all time great heavyweights and arguably a top 10-30 all time great light heavyweight. I dont see how he could have taken on any better competition, yet you have given him just 43.5 for resume. The same as Hagler and MOnzon, two good fighters but both of whom never ventured above the middleweight limit! Even an ATG like Harry Greb, does not have the same victories against ATG heavyweights that Fitz has and he was defeated closer to his prime and against lesser fighters than Fitz ever was.

Dominance also is another debatable question. Fitz was a World Heavyweight champion as a middleweight. What other middleweight, in his time or after was even a leading contender? A few light heavys have done what fitz did, but never a middleweight, and even as a heavyweight. Until being upset by Jeffries, Fitz' KO ratio even against leading heavyweight contenders was simply astonishing. I dont see what else he could have done to be any more dominant. in fact, he was so dominant that he never even bothered fighting in his natural weight class, because there was no one considered good enough to meet him. Very few, probably only henry armstrong could come close in this regard.

I think that you could easily raise Fitz 2.5 in relation to longevity, 10 for competition (for his time he pretty much fought and beat every light heavy and heavy contender, just like langford did) and 5 for dominance (like Robinson and the other greats, there quite simply was not a middleweight or light heavyweight of his time that anyone considers was better than Bob Fitzsimmons - either then or now. That is as dominant as it gets). That leaves 17.5 extra points to add to Fitz total (imo). This takes him to 98.5 which i think is a fair indication of his greatness based on your scale.

Good post, and I'll get back to you tonight .
sweet_scientist is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 02:08 AM   #26
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Arguello too low
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 02:15 AM   #27
sweet_scientist
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,870
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaman View Post
Arguello too low
I agree he is. I'll have to make an adjustment.
sweet_scientist is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 02:18 AM   #28
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweet_scientist View Post
I agree he is. I'll have to make an adjustment.
Good way of doing it, and kudos for even thinking of 120+ fighters
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 03:31 AM   #29
dublynflya
I agree!!!
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: On the right side of Hadrian's Wall
Posts: 2,107
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by es***boy View Post
Obviously in terms of ability Sweet Pea is a mile ahead but Fitzsimmons cant be blamed for being born in the wrong century, you can only rank him in accordance to how he performed in his own time. Personally I thought Whitaker beat Chavez easily, I think I gave Chavez two or three rounds, I had Whitaker-De la Hoya a draw which past prime was an amazing performance from Sweet Pea. Fitz was something else though, a phenomenon, he is one of the greatest middleweights ever and beat a great middleweight to get the title in Dempsey. To step up and take the lineal heavyweight title like he did is unlikely to ever be repeated. Possessed ridiculous punching power. I have Fitz around #11 ATG and Whitaker around #18. In dont rate fighters head to head or anything like that, thats an impossible exercise. Its more record and performance at numeous weights.
That makes plenty of sense! good post!!
dublynflya is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 03:36 AM   #30
dublynflya
I agree!!!
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: On the right side of Hadrian's Wall
Posts: 2,107
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pernell Whitaker Or Bob Fitzsimmons Who Should Be Remembered As The Greater Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boilermaker View Post
That is an excellent list, and you have obviously put a lot of work into it. But,I have to ask the question, how do you justify Bob Fitzsimmons rankings?

You have listed his longevity as a 7. Fitzsimmons won the middleweight in 1891, and was the best middleweight in the world until the day he lost the world title in 1895. From this day forth he was the best light heavyweight and Heavyweight in the world. By 1903, he was still considered the second best heavyweight in the world (at the time of his loss to Jeffries) and later that year he was considered the best light heavyweight in the world. This puts him at the very top of the tree 12 years after becoming the best middleweight in the world. it wasnt until 2 years later when he lost the light heavy champ to another Jack o brien that he was dethroned as the no 1 light heavyweight. That makes him the no 1 pound for pound guys (or thereabouts) for nearly 15 years. And about 5 or so years later he was still giving the World Heavyweight title contender Bill Lang a decent fight. All this is not allowing for the years before he won the world middleweight title, where he beat everyone going around.

I dont see how anyone can have better longevity than this, surely he rates a 9 or better!

Also, on level of competition, his victory over corbett (as a middleweight) is the biggest pound for pound competition anyone has ever achieved. His victory over the numerous no 1 or 2 heavyweight contenders (as a middleweight or at worst light heavyweight) are enormous pound for pound competition. His only defeats (other than the likely dive) were to two heavyweight top 10 or so contenders (either of which would be a huge scalp if he was successful) and to top 10 all time great heavyweights and arguably a top 10-30 all time great light heavyweight. I dont see how he could have taken on any better competition, yet you have given him just 43.5 for resume. The same as Hagler and MOnzon, two good fighters but both of whom never ventured above the middleweight limit! Even an ATG like Harry Greb, does not have the same victories against ATG heavyweights that Fitz has and he was defeated closer to his prime and against lesser fighters than Fitz ever was.

Dominance also is another debatable question. Fitz was a World Heavyweight champion as a middleweight. What other middleweight, in his time or after was even a leading contender? A few light heavys have done what fitz did, but never a middleweight, and even as a heavyweight. Until being upset by Jeffries, Fitz' KO ratio even against leading heavyweight contenders was simply astonishing. I dont see what else he could have done to be any more dominant. in fact, he was so dominant that he never even bothered fighting in his natural weight class, because there was no one considered good enough to meet him. Very few, probably only henry armstrong could come close in this regard.

I think that you could easily raise Fitz 2.5 in relation to longevity, 10 for competition (for his time he pretty much fought and beat every light heavy and heavy contender, just like langford did) and 5 for dominance (like Robinson and the other greats, there quite simply was not a middleweight or light heavyweight of his time that anyone considers was better than Bob Fitzsimmons - either then or now. That is as dominant as it gets). That leaves 17.5 extra points to add to Fitz total (imo). This takes him to 98.5 which i think is a fair indication of his greatness based on your scale.
That was a great read and I for one cannot question your "Rating" of Ruby Robert (Who I consider a top 10 ATG) or your knowledge of the facts! Spot-on!!
dublynflya is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013