Ruben Olivares v Jose Luis Ramirez Armando Muniz v Pete Ranzany Rodolfo Martinez v Mike Ayala Bennie Briscoe v Tony Chiaverini Joey Giambra v Florentino Fernandez
It's about wear and tear, quality of competition, long layoffs, drugs, and etc. This is all well known by "boxing fans".
And he had less wear and tear than Hearns , Hagler , and duran .. I see you missed that with the Hearns comparison .. You see . when you use your popularity to go in and out of retirement to cherry pick fights, if you are going to count the wins , you need to count the losses ... sometimes it worked for him, Hagler and LaLonde, and sometimes it didnt .. Hearns 2 and Norris .. So unless you followed his career , I dont expect the " casual fan" to pick up on it
When I mean young fighter I don’t mean already a contender for a belt. Mean still growing. Some damn good examples so far and ones not sure I’d count. But main idea is do you still consider that a good win for either side? It has to be imo. Might not be the best win but it still counts for something . The idea that these wins must be thrown out is ridiculous. Obviously wouldn’t count any of these as their best wins but they mean something
Billy Petrolle was lauded as the "old man" who beat all the young bucks when he kayoed Justo Suarez, King Tut, Billy Townsend, Eddie Ran, and Battling Battalino at Madison Square Garden in 1931 and 1932. He was not yet 30, but his manager Jack Hurley did a great job of setting the narrative following Petrolle's "comeback" in January 1930 after taking four and a half months off at the end of 1929.
Bob Fitzsimmons was known as the Grand Old Man of the Ring for beating Starkey and Ruhlin, both with very big size advantages. He beat George Gardner when he was seriously far from his best at 40.
Holmes vs Mercer is always my go to example for this scenario. And yes, I give massive credit to Holmes as he took Mercer to school in an entertaining fight.