Fighters with few pro fights but top amateur pedigree vs the opposite?

You have the guys like Leonard and McCallum who looked like experienced veterans already after 20 or so pro fights, but with many amateur fights on a high level behind them. And then you have the other type: guys like Duran, Arguello, Benitez, Sanchez, JCC etc who started out as pros as soon as they'd learned to walk more or less and who rose to masterhood that way.

SRL vs Benitez and Duran, as well as Pryor vs Arguello are examples of the two types of fighters clashing.

Is any of the two ways better than the other, you'd say?

 

With the exception.of Duran, most of the guys who 'learn on the job' tend to burn out quicker. Benitez is the prime example, Chavez had started to slip by the time he reached 30, ditto Arguello. I don't necessarily think one is better than the other; a long amateur career its simply more conducive to a long career, as you can better yourself without having to take as much of a beating as you would in the pros. In a way, boxing age (number of fights and years fought) is far more important than actual age.

As for some fights: Davey Moore vs Roberto Duran, Evander Holyfield vs Dwight Muhammad Qawi (kinda). Was Nino LaRocca an amateur for long? If not him vs Curry. I'm sure there are plenty.

 

I know what you're saying but i Think it can work both ways. Sometimes a long amateur career from an early age can be less conducive for a long pro career. Probably not so much now as the amateurs are protected a lot more but definitely back in the past.

 

Gerry Cooney was 55-3 as an amateur, while Larry Holmes was 19-3.

And then there was Duane Bobick's stellar amateur career...

 

Anyone remember this lad, Shawn O'Sullivan and this fight?
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz4AHrttlx8[/ame]

 

Oh yeah. Some of the Cubans and eastern Europeans were burnt out by the time they got to the show. And back in the day amateur boxing was essentially what college football is to pro football (American); an unpaid internship.

 

Amateur boxing is far more entertaining without helmets.

 

What a fight. Nice one, AlFrancis.

 

Thai Olympian Payao Poontarat took on the far more experienced pros Guty Espadas and Rafael Orono. Unlike most Thai's he was not a Nak Muay, just an amateur boxer.

 

Nah, that was a fighter with great amateur pedigree and not that many pro fights (30+) against a fighter with great amateur pedigree and no pro fights at all.

Patterson vs Moore fits the bill much better.

 

It is isn't it! :good

 

Most stelar am to never feature on an olympic team , michael bentt, did his am experience help him vs morrison?

Long term ams can be bad and good, long term am good - lewis, bad - tyrell biggs

 

Feels like most Olympic medalists that went pro were quite succesful at it. But if you're not serious enough with training and life style habits as a pro, of course your amateur experience won't do much good. But it sure as hell ain't gonna hurt.

 

With Pro rules I would've given to the Cuban, I believe the Canadian won.

 

Yes, very close. I think if I was the Cuban I'd of felt hard done by. Great comeback though by O'Sullivan, I think it was the last 30 seconds that swung it for him.
Anyway the point of the post apart from seeing that great fight again was to show a top amateur who didn't quite make it as a pro. He must of been involved in some wars as an am, then there is all that hard sparring on top of it.
Sadly O'Sullivan at 50 is now suffering from pugilistic dementia.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8VNC383QzI[/ame]