Who's the better welter?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by redrooster, Sep 25, 2009.


Page 2 of 8
  1. MrMarvel

    MrMarvel Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,792
    15
    Jan 29, 2009
    Neither Cuevas nor Hearns were ever world champions, so why are you talking about defenses? Tommy didn't have a reign. The WBC title was linear in this situation. Tommy was the number one contender. And he got there in part by completely destroying Cuevas.

    I agree with others, Cuevas at number four is ridiculously high.

    To answer the question, Hearns was without question the better welterweight.
     
    MrMarvel, Sep 25, 2009
    MrMarvel, Sep 25, 2009
    #16
  2. natonic

    natonic Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,581
    83
    Jul 9, 2008
    natonic, Sep 25, 2009
    natonic, Sep 25, 2009
    #17
  3. redrooster

    redrooster Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,635
    332
    Jan 29, 2005
    I look at the man best qualified to be champion at the time and the best man at the time was Cuevas. Palomino was more his sidekick.

    I like the rest of the experts considered Leonard as champion because Hearns wasn't the well known commodity leonard was. Yes he was destroying everybody but who was everybody? When this question is asked people suddenly hush up as if to say "who IS everybody?"

    So in my mind, beating Hearns is not the great surprise everyone makes it out to be because he was already second best in my book. It was more of a sensationalism the media is generally known for. Tommy was not quite as seasoned or well trained as Leonard and probably a inferior athletically.

    Of course, we found out his weaknesses ; suspect stamina, holds his chin up high, can't roll with punches, suseptible to counters, unable to clinch, etc. Leonard had a little more trouble reaching him that I thought he would but didnt catch shots clean the way Tommy would. more developed and sophisticated defense capabilites as well as his ability to duck and counter, served him well.

    Does this mean I would rank Leonard highly, even going so far as recognizing him number two?

    Of course not. Such a thing would reek of ignorance. I merely recognize him as the best of that particular time- a very small window of time in the annals of welterweight history.

    Big at the time but of no greater importance than any other time merely because of the media buildup
     
    redrooster, Sep 25, 2009
    redrooster, Sep 25, 2009
    #18
  4. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,807
    44,441
    Apr 27, 2005
    There's a fair bit of ownage going on here

    :lol:

    One could almost compare it to a potential peak matchup between Tyson and Lupe Pintor, excepting Pintor had credit and respect as a fighter

    :lol:
     
    JohnThomas1, Sep 25, 2009
    JohnThomas1, Sep 25, 2009
    #19
  5. My2Sense

    My2Sense Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,935
    92
    Aug 21, 2008
    He's 3-1 against Graham, with two wins coming in title defenses. Was every one of his wins a "gift"??

    You also didn't answer the question, or even begin to address it. You just tried to sidetrack it, as is typical of your responses.
     
    My2Sense, Sep 25, 2009
    My2Sense, Sep 25, 2009
    #20
  6. My2Sense

    My2Sense Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,935
    92
    Aug 21, 2008
    No, the best man was Palomino. He was the man who beat Stracey who beat Napoles.

    No, Cuevas was his sidekick, because Cuevas had won his "title" from Espada who was merely Napoles' sidekick.

    No, the "rest of the experts considered" Leonard the champion because he had the real championship, not a widely reviled paper title.
     
    My2Sense, Sep 25, 2009
    My2Sense, Sep 25, 2009
    #21
  7. My2Sense

    My2Sense Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,935
    92
    Aug 21, 2008
    Oh, and to answer the original question, HEARNS.
     
    My2Sense, Sep 25, 2009
    My2Sense, Sep 25, 2009
    #22
  8. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,807
    44,441
    Apr 27, 2005
    And here's some more ownage :lol:
     
    JohnThomas1, Sep 25, 2009
    JohnThomas1, Sep 25, 2009
    #23
  9. redrooster

    redrooster Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,635
    332
    Jan 29, 2005
    I said best qualified. The best qualified doesnt always inherit the linear title.

    Is that why SI predicted a Leonard win or did it have more to do with his capabilities?
     
    redrooster, Sep 25, 2009
    redrooster, Sep 25, 2009
    #24
  10. My2Sense

    My2Sense Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,935
    92
    Aug 21, 2008
    Palomino didn't "inherit" the lineal title, he EARNED it by decisively whupping the division's top rated fighter in his own backyard.

    That's the single best "qualification" a fighter can have as champion.

    What does that have to do with anything?? What about all the people picking Hearns?

    There was tons of debate over who was going to win; there was NO debate over which one really was the champion coming in, which contradicts your notion that these two points are somehow one and the same.
     
    My2Sense, Sep 26, 2009
    My2Sense, Sep 26, 2009
    #25
  11. Shake

    Shake Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,633
    58
    May 4, 2007
    Come, Carlos. To the boxmobile.
     
    Shake, Sep 26, 2009
    Shake, Sep 26, 2009
    #26
  12. sweet_scientist

    sweet_scientist Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,744
    88
    Nov 8, 2004
    :yep


    And most guys on this forum that have seen the fight called a gift feel it should have gone Gavilan's way.

    Wins against the likes of Graham and Basilio are just fantastic wins, even if they are close and contested, and there's really no justification for Red to leave Kid Gavilan outside his top 10 whilst having Pipino Cuevas no. 4.
     
    sweet_scientist, Sep 26, 2009
    sweet_scientist, Sep 26, 2009
    #27
  13. TommyV

    TommyV Loyal Member banned

    32,127
    41
    Nov 2, 2007
    Typical. :lol:
     
    TommyV, Sep 26, 2009
    TommyV, Sep 26, 2009
    #28
  14. redrooster

    redrooster Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,635
    332
    Jan 29, 2005
    I just read Mr Bill's latest comment on the Kid. Is it really true about his low ko%? Because if it is, then my low ranking of Kid was correct. When Pipino hits you, you'll know you've been hit. It's no matter Kid's fights all went the distance and Pipino's ended early

    And regarding what you said about close decisions, I'm not down with that.

    What matter is how I see the fight going, not how the judges or others see it. WHich means, if I think a fighter lost then he lost as perception is reality, and he's not champion anymore.

    Look at Pedroza and Lockridge. Pedroza wasnt really champion after he lost that fight. And he lost again in his 14th defense with his "draw" against the speedier Taylor.

    Close isnt good enough

    And I dont have to tell you what I think of that business of lineal champions.

    My2sense, this is for you.

    All that talk of linear champions dont mean squat in a real fight. Ali was saying the same thing "I have the real belt that John L. Sullivan had, etc-on down the line"

    What did it matter after Joe had his hands raised

    So you see? I was right all along
     
    redrooster, Sep 26, 2009
    redrooster, Sep 26, 2009
    #29
  15. My2Sense

    My2Sense Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,935
    92
    Aug 21, 2008
    Shouldn't you know something like that before you judge him??

    No it wasn't, because your low rating was based on your claim "I don't count gift decisions", not anything to do with KO% (although you've yet to explain how all three of his wins over Graham were "gifts", as well as his wins over Bratton, Williams, Jack, Turner, Davey, etc.)

    Meaning what? Whoever hits harder is automatically better?


    So let's see your scorecard for his three wins over Graham then.

    Really? I don't recall anyone disputing he was the champion during the whole batch of title defenses he made after that, or that McGuigan had won the championship when he beat him.

    But Palomino and Cuevas never had a "real fight" (thanks to Cuevas turning it down) so what's your point?

    Last time I checked, it was Leonard-who-beat-Benitez-who-beat-Palomino-who-beat-Stracey-who-beat-Napoles who had his hand raised over Hearns-who-beat-Cuevas-who-beat-Espada-who-beat-Gray-who-had-already-lost-to-Napoles - so how exactly were you "right all along"?
     
    My2Sense, Sep 26, 2009
    My2Sense, Sep 26, 2009
    #30
Page 2 of 8