Did The Ring name the wrong Fighter of the Year in 2001?

I don't see how it's even relevant if a fighter is an underdog. A better win is a better win. Ward's win over Dawson is better than Bailey's win over Mike Jones.

 

why we gotta mention Bailey and Mike

 

lol. I didn't notice the avatar. Jones is good though. I hope he rebounds this year.

 

who?



















:yep

 

Good thread, but really can't compare Chico to Tito, who was more accomplished at that time and beaten undefeated killers like Vargas and Campas and of course, getting a controversial win over Oscar. Chico was a big win and considered by many still Floyd's best performance to date as he was the underdog too. Chicanito and J. Chavez very, very good wins. Similar like Broner beating Gamboa, Vasquez, and Salgado. Still, some hardcore fans like myself knew Hopkins size aside from his skills would be too much for Tito and thats why some won't give Hopkins full credit, because he was too big. But one must consider he was also 36, an age considered advanced in boxing, tho in Hopkins case was barely,getting started.

 

Floyd being FOTY in '01 would have been ok with me, even tho i do think Hops win over Tito was far greater than Floyds that year (or whole career at that). Floyd had more quality wins. Hops was just greater.

Kinda how this year is with JMM having the far greater win, while Nonito got the award with more quality wins.

 

In retrospect, there were actually four guys who had legit cases for being FOTY in 2001.

MAB beat Hamed and Sanchez in impressive fashion. KT unified at 140, and capped his run with a two round KO of a favored Judah. Floyd and Hopkins had terrific years, as well.

Really, any of those pick would have been acceptable.

 

Agreed. :thumbsup