Antonio Cervantes - An ATG?

I'll have to look for the issue (mine's also in storage) but I remember they had Canto in the lower part of the top 10

 

If it was Farhood, rooster would've accepted it as gospel. :nono

 

Duodenum, the KO magazine has them listed as

1. Monzon
2. Ali
3. Duran
4. Napoles
5. Canto
6. Zarate
7. Foster
8. Arguello
9. Cervantes
10. Galindez

 

Just so you know, Cervantes made 10 successful defenses of his 140 title before losing it to ATG Benitez. He regained the title at age 32 odd) when Benitez left and made another 5 successful defenses before losing to young ATG Pryor.

That's 15 defenses. Between them Nunn, Curry and McGirt had 15 defenses total in their primary divisions.

Woeful post.

 

Um, yeh

 

I don´t think Aaron Pryor is an ATG, JohnThomas1.

 

I'm a detractor too, but i think he sneaks in. Sure not going to argue tho :yep

 

And your problem with this is?

Cervantes had range and heavy hands (thus a puncher's chance), but Napoles could also punch and had overall better skills. I envision Napoles systematically dissecting him if his thin skin isn't cut too badly.

 

So Cervantes wasn't very good defensively then?

 

Thanks much, Red!:good

 

Even if they were both over the hill, the fact remains that he defeated both Cervantes and Arguello by clean knockout. Could a non ATG have done this?

There was controversy in Miami, thanks to Panama Lewis, and excuses by Alexis, claiming that Futch had over trained him. Pryor-Arguello II was pretty definitive though. Alexis had good wins in the interim with the Fernandez rematch and over Claude Noel, and he trained intelligently with a focus on redemption. That Pryor dropped him thrice is impressive. Costello could punch, and he was later able to hit Arguello, but never floor him. I understand the detractors, but going 3-0 with three knockouts against Pambele and El Flaco Explosivo is a pithy accomplishment.

 

Do you really think that´s enough to call a fighter an atg? Personally, I don´t. This would lead to an inflation of atgs and devalue the term IMO.

 

As avoided as he was, he did whatever there was available for him to achieve as impressively as he could. He decisively knocked out the very best he could have taken on at his weight. If opportunities to take on SRL, Hearns and Duran (particularly SRL) at WW were presented to him, he would have accepted those challenges.

Because he does indeed lack some depth of resume, we have to ask if he was good enough and consistent enough to match up well with history's other greats at 140, when at his best. For five years, he was the champion of the division, never beaten at the weight. He successfully defended ten times. Pambele fell in 1980, Arguello for the second time in 1983. It's not as if everything came together perfectly for him once, as it did for Douglas against Tyson. He suffered from a lack of suitable available challenges after Arguello. Not his fault.

 

Pryor had some help in beating arguello, which was illegal stimulant of some kind. No way would he have been able to take those punches without being on something. Panama Lewis, especially after seeing arguello flatten kevin rooney, new this and put something into pryors system that would enable him to take those punches.

Also consider the fact that pryors career was shortened due to drug use. There was also an article in sports illustrated about pryor being addicted to drugs. Apparently "hawk time" had turned int "coke time". T