Need Aaron Pryor Info

Arguello wasn't bigger. He was old and a bit creaky by 1982, and the only other standout on his ledger was 40 years old when he beat him. There's just not enough to go on with Pryor to go too crazy about him.

 

A longer reach and being taller doesn't make him bigger. Pryor was the bigger, stronger guy in there.

 

He probably does not rate highly for a number of reasons. Although at 140 some may call him the best of that ******* division. I think at 140 he is likely #1.

2 resume outside of Cervantes and Arguello and many feel both were past prime and Arguello fighting above his prime weight factor in. A shame he could not land another big fight or 2....he perused SRL but it never transpired. There were talks of he and Mancini but that never happened.

So although he is a great LWW, his peak was short, his best wins were against 2 past prime greats (not diminishing Pryor as I love his style and think he is great...although probably not top 100 ATG), not enough quality opponent wins, and stuck in the 140 division without moving up and testing himself in another division.

To me he is as dominant as Gomez at SBW and maybe Jackson at SWW, but nothing outside of that division hampers his case.

 

Arguello was the 126lb champion then moved up to 130 and 135, @140 he was older, tired and had put on weight to win at the time an unprecedented 4th weight division title.....that is why they selected Pryor for the effort IMO that though they had the fight in the bag..... Pryors sloppy chin in the air hands down and questionable chin little did they know Pryor would use PED's to get the edge over the smaller older man.....he was the naturally smaller man y build...height and weight do not matter Hearns was not bigger than Hagler though he was taller and had longer arms

 

Yes, I distinctly remember a decrepit Arguello, entering the ring with a walking stick in his hand. He was so old, so tired...

Seriously, talk about the black bottle all you want but let's not diminish the quality of Pryor's victory based on the idea that Arguello was completely past it.

 

I am one who considers Pryor quite overrated but...........they selected Pryor because he was far and away considered the top man at 140 and Arguello wanted his achievement to be considered legit. Beating the paper champ wasn't for Arguello he wanted to beat the best. These are the facts.

 

I am glad you see him as overrated especially given his resume but I disagree he fought Pryor for the same reason he fought Mancini....money and popularity of the opponent

Pryor was the only recognizable name at 140 a true no name.division....at the time Pryor was hyping himself non stop and was the only decent money fight at 140 with a title on the line

 

He was old for a fighter it's the mileage at world class level not the age and at the very end of his title ambitions....Pryor had the cheat to beat the naturally smaller man

 

He fought Pryor because he was considered the top dog at 140 by a long shot.
He was worth decent money in no small part to the fact he was the top dog. As said Alexis being Alexis wanted to beat the best.

Sorry rich but this is indisputable.

 

He knew he couldn't beat Mamby as well.

 

The same guy that got beat by Leroy Haley a few months prior to Pryor - Arguello then beaten by him again not long later? Mamby lost 3 of his next 4 fights around the time he could have fought Arguello. He was half a decade older than Alexis. Sure at his best he may have been stylistically awkward but there's not a snowballs chance in hell Arguello didn't think he could beat Mamby.

 

Once more Rich is all lies about PRYOR. I will bring back the IS PRYOR GREAT thread yet again for you to see Richs agenda and pure lies