You may be interested in this video - This content is protected The voting took place in Rummy's decades sticky thread. For what it's worth, based solely in fights contested in the 50's, I had Moore at #1 too, followed by Marciano and then Perez.
I think I would have Moore no 1 as well. Looking at Loi’s record in the 60s, and him doing very well afterwards against Perkins and Ortiz while being over the hill, he has to be a dark horse. Surprised he doesn’t get talked about more.
I had Loi #14 in the 50's. Tremendous consistency and paper record, but he does not have the quality in win resume of those I rank ahead of him. Loi didn't make my 25 in the 60's. Going 1-1-1 with Perkins and 2-1 with Ortiz hint at an excellent fighter, but a 16-2-1 record without any outstanding wins outside of those three, isn't as good as my top 25, imo.
A victim of threads like this maybe ? Seems to have been an excellent and underrated boxer overall though ?
There's a lot of really weird wins in there too. I don't remember the details coz they're hard to find but from what I remember, he probably went 0-3 against Ortiz.
Loi was tremendously consistent and dominant over non elite opposition and right at the end of his career split series with elite boxers in Ortiz and Perkins. Ortiz and Perkins aside, he lacks quality wins in comparison to most ATGs. He may well have been as good as fighters who should rank higher based on quality of opposition beaten.
I’ve read that he did win at least one of those, on an old thread here from someone who saw the fight, I think, but I’m not sure. Still, after 100 fights being competitive with those two does point to someone pretty good
Really? I'm under the impression opinion was split as to the winner in their first two contests, whilst the consensus was Loi clearly won their third.
