Your Hottest Takes:

I just researched it on a site called boxrec.com. It turns out that Whitaker only managed a draw against Chavez, not a win. So, he struggled with a past it, over-his-best-weight Chavez. That actually is a feather in Whitaker's cap, to do that well against an ATG, even one who was past his pull date.

 

Tyson Fury had the potential to be the best ever heavyweight

 

Nah just because an old timer said it doesn't make it true

 

I thought Hughie Fury would be among the best heavyweights in world and would be heavyweight champion someday back around the 2016-2017 times but that went south big time.

 

I think a surprising # of fighters have better pure resumes than Chavez - for example, Fritzie Zivic has wins over Burley, Armstrong x2, & LaMotta. Chavez has a lot of wins over very good-to-near great fighters, but is lacking wins over true greats IMO.

H2h, I wouldn't rule out that Hearns beats any ww not named Sugar Ray. Unfortunately for him, he shared a division w/ 1 of those Rays, but still succeeded in outfighting him most of the way before being stopped late.

While I agree that Hearns' actual achievements @ww may leave something to be desired compared to other ATGs, a blowout of long-reigning titlist/hofer Cuevas + other wins over ex-titlist Espada & perennial contenders like Shields, Gray, & Weston are collectively nothing to sneeze @ either. Even just judging pure achievements, I don't think he falls short of fighters like Curry or Spence.

 

Marciano's skillset gets underrated a little bit I think. I think most people rank him in the top 10 heavyweights and many have him in the top 5 or even top 3 but it's just with the opinion many feel he would be too small for later era's despite his achievements.

 

Sal Sanchez wasn't overrated. He always found a way to win, which is heavily overlooked.

 

Hardly. Counting rounds it was something like 7-5. Whitaker won his rounds more emphatically but not 10-8 emphatically.

Moreso, in the bigger picture, this fight was 9 years almost to the day after Julio won his first title, at a weight limit that was his best, a full 17 pounds lighter. And no matter what one says, 87 fights is 87 fights and takes a toll.

Sweat Pea was a nice little fighter, a bit gimmicky, but probably good enough for the HOF.

 

some of my hot takes:

-RJ would've always had problems w/ a Cuellar trained Glen Johnson. From the outside, Johnson had a longer reach & made better use of his jab, & he was a better infighter @ close quarters. Cuellar mapped out a great gameplan for Johnson that never got the credit it deserved IMO.

-Lomachenko is a great fighter, but he rates on the lower tier of the greatness scale.

-Benitez was @ his peak @ 154. Even though he may have lost a step in speed, he was getting better placement & power on his punches than ever before & had become an adept bodypuncher. (In retrospect, this should make sense given that he was now a mature adult & no longer a teenager as he was down @140).

-Dwight Qawi on the night of the Saad rematch would've been no less than 50-50 vs. any LHW in history not ranked among the all-time upper echelon.

-Cuevas would've been no less than 50-50 vs. any ww not rated among the all-time 20-25.

 

Supposedly from what I've been able to find records about it are spotty at best and he was never the best fighter is his era so idk

 

Debatable Whitaker has better wins Chavez had a better reign so depends on what you value I can see it either way

 

I agree wholeheartedly with the idea that Bob Foster and his legacy as a great LHW is overplayed. "Oh, but the POWER!" Yeah, whatever. Defending against the likes of most of his LHW opposition will put many good fighters in a position to enhance their stature. Good? Certainly. Powerful? You bet. Just not as great a fighter as is made out. Not enough good competition to elevate him to the point many seem to.

If a person gushes over heavyweights and has little to say about better fighters in lower weights (and most of them are, by definition) and spends all their time talking about heavyweight this and heavyweight that, I think less of them. That probably says more about me than boxing honestly, but who cares. I own that, and that's what I think.

The 80's were the last great era in boxing. It's gone wayward since. Not sure how controversial that is.

Arturo Gatti was not a bad fighter. Technically, I mean. Nor was Ray Mancini. "Technique" means more than being a stylish, elusive boxer. Some good technical fighters get hit, because their style demands it. Don't confuse style with technique. They're different things.

Whitaker decisions Duran at 135.

 

I agree but I'd reckon boxing loses more great fighters to rugby on average. Rugby is both a more physical and more international sport, I think there's probably more rugby players inclined towards violence than there are basketball players inclined towards violence. And rugby players nowadays are all massive and plenty would fit in nicely at HW.