Chavez or Hearns? Who would be the mainevent in the 2011 IBHOF Induction

:nono

common comment by people who know nothing about boxing

do your homework man ...

 

Julio Ceasar Chavez!!!

 

I saw Chavez fight his whole career from 130 and up. He did well with Duplesis and Rosario and Fuentes and Haugen ,but when he had a guy quick who could equal how much he was punching, he was not as effective. Taylor made him very ordinary, but the problem with Taylor was that he had no good defense. Meekins and McGirt both busted up Taylor, and Taylor dominated the fights. Speed was a problem for Julio. I am saying he is great, but when he reached that top level he struggled much more than Pacman does with top guys.

 

I watched over 10 years of Chavez fighting. Telling me to do my homework on this subject is ridiculous. I do not have to do homework or see another Chavez fight since I have them all in my head by memory. I saw numerous fights where yeah he looked good and he seemed unbeatable because he was swarming and relentless, but the opposition was always below his level. I was at bars watching him fight the likes of Sammy Fuentes or Lonnie Smith in those years. Greg Haugen. Guys he was better than in everything. They were decent fighters, but not exceptional. He looked great with them. But then he stepped up with Taylor and Whitaker and Delahoya. The fact that Randall beat him was not because Chavez was slipping much in 1994, it was because Randall threw the straight right hand with speed right down the pike and he capitalized on Chavez not moving to the side more. Chavez also put his feet together too much, and that is why that right hand knocked him down. Chavez was great, but there is a level of top fighter which started with Taylor which neutralized Chavez and his offense. Speed was Julio's weakness. Other greats seemed to thrive when given a great challenge, Chavez started to struggle. Never did I say he was not great. And by the way. One fight of Chavez which I thought he carried a fighter was Jose Luis Ramirez. They were from the same town I seem to recall on HBO and Kevin Rooney was doing the commentary because Mike Tyson might have been promoting this fight in 1989. Chavez was not his usual self in this fight. I think he actually didn't want to embarass Ramirez so he took it easy on him knowing he would win the fight, which he won by stoppage because of a cut on Ramirez scalp. Then Rooney is saying he would want to watch a rematch with these guys. This is all from memory, but you know I should still do my homework on Chavez shouldn't I?

 

you want me to go through all this? Rosario was having weight problems and was trying to replenish his fluids right after the weigh in- but a good win, Camacho did not have the firepower to hurt Chavez when they fought and you need that to beat Chavez and a good straight right and at that weight Camacho never was that good. Haugen? Come on. Look what Pernell did to him when Greg was prime, and then right after Chavez, Tony Lopez dismantled Haugen. Taylor was the one who actually showed what speed could do to Chavez. And Lopez? at 140? What got Lopez the fight was beating Haugen. And the Lopez fight were after the Randall debacle. And you mention Ramirez, like I said in the previous post Chavez carried Ramirez. I will never forget that.

 

There`s no wrong answer here but mines is Chavez - I rank him a bit ahead (not much tho) of Hearns as an ATG... He was greater in his time than Tommy was in his IMO so Chavez is my answer.

 

Although this is not something I agree with I don't think it's a completely erroneous opinion. At the time JCC was fighting I think we would all have commented that he would struggle with slicksters, and could at times of been a little one-dimensional. It seems that years down the line it becomes criminal to have a negative opinion about the man.

I agree that this is a view that a lot of moronic posters would make, but this guy clearly isn't one and just has a different point of view. Again I don't agree with it but I don't think it's ridiculous.

 

I lean slightly towards Hearns but I agree there's no wrong answer!!!

 

Disagree Pimp,
Ive been browsing here since 02/03 & compared to other boxing sites, Chavez gets a real harsh deal.

A lot of guys on ESB dont even have him in their top 30. Terrible really when you think how dominant he was on his way to 87-0.

 

Taylor was a great fighter who fought the fight of his life bar none & still got ruined - literally - by Chavez.... that was prime Chavez.

Whitaker was closer to his prime than Chavez & was himself 1 of the greatest & most awkward boxers in the entire history of the sport.... Chavez wasnt far past his prime here but clearly not AT his prime.

DLH faced a way past prime & then a shot Chavez, DLH was younger, bigger, fresher, faster, stronger..... prime for prime would be a different story even with all the physical disadvantages going against JCC as he was a far greater fighter than hoya.

Glad to help :thumbsup

 

I am not sure it is ESB. I think what happens is time goes by and we have a better idea how good a fighter someone was with time and the whole career becomes more clear. You can sort of say Chavez built up that record with some insignificant guys like Rudolpho Aquilar or Kenny Vice. I remember the Vice fight because I think it was the same day that Norris fought Jackson, and they showed it on TV because of the fast knockout of Norris and they had time to do it. Chavez had a great career. No doubt. Great fighter. My point was you can see what level he was as a fighter. He dominated most fighters in a division, but with cream of the crop he was just a pinch below guys like Whitaker. That is not bad, but Whitaker proved a little more. I remember they talked about Chavez fighting Norris. I am not sure anyone else remembers this. It would have been exciting. I think Chavez is a guy who we can rate pretty effectively and Hearns also. They both fought on longer than they had to, so we know their level. I thought Hearns at his best could beat the top guys better than Julio. But they were comparable. Pretty close in ranking.

 

Look who's winning the poll. I rest my case.:good Hearns IMO was the better fighter and faced better comp but they are both close true ATGs no doubt.

 

This is a terrible post, there is so much wrong Im not even gonna go into the ****.

Have a good day :good

 

I disagree. I think you can put the Chavez who fought Taylor in the ring with Oscar when Oscar was a little more experienced and Oscar's speed wins the fight. Oscar's speed and counterpunching would have been trouble for Chavez always. Look what trouble Taylor gave Chavez and was only a few seconds away from winning. Oscar was better than Taylor, had a better jab and was a better counterpuncher. Not saying he was faster than Taylor, but he counterpunched better with power than Taylor ever could, and Chavez would have had a hard time getting close.

 

Look we all have heros. I understand . I am not trying to degrade anyone's hero but we are on a boxing board. I stand by what I said, which I am saying objectively. Chavez was great, but he was not near the level of a Whitaker or a Delahoya in my mind. Nowadays people rate Oscar lower because of how he declined recently and the mistake Oscar made as moving too high in weight and that took away his power. But Oscar in his prime near 140 pounds was a great fighter. Someday Oscar will go back up in rating. If you really look at opposition fairly. Oscar fought much better guys than Chavez did. In my mind it is very clear. Look at these guys Oscar fought as well as fighting Whitaker like Chavez did- Quartey, Ruelas,Hernandez, Whitaker, Trinidad,Mosley,Hopkins,Pacman,Mayweather. Look at the list here and compare that to the Chavez record.