Greater fighter: Shane Mosley or Wilfredo Gomez ??

You can argue the greatness aspect of it for Mosley if you like, but in terms of who is better I don't think it's ever going to be a contest in a million years, definitely Gomez in that sense.

 

There's a fair bit of truth to that. I'd also say that Gomez was simply the more adaptable fighter. He was concussed to all **** against Sanchez, but still found a way to get back into the fight by changing his game up. I don't think I ever saw Shane change up his style in a fight like that. He had one strategy and if that failed it was over.

Of course, Gomez was just a plain out better fighter at their peaks, even though Shane hung around longer through his dedication to the sport.

 

It's neck and neck, but Gomez may just edge this on the fact he was more dominant at his natural weight.But, in Shane's favor, he did better against better competition when he moved up.Really close call.

 

It is close I agree, but I also agree that Gomez clearly being the better operator would lift him to that next tier of apparent 'greatness'.

I really do not rate Shane at lightweight like others do. He simply would not have made weight in Gomez's day, whereas if he had an extra day to weigh in he could've shaved off some extra lbs with no worries and smash everyone up there as well.

Mosley was at his very best at welter IMO. And he's patchy there. But an athletically gifted puncher who had a reliable chin nearly all of the time. I do agree the few years after Forrest he looked a shadow of himself, but his win over Margarito was emphatic when he was well past his best.

Was Toni' an absolute corpse at the weight and mentally all over the place? Yes. That lessens the win. But most thought Shane would be outworked that night by a man with the reputation of a monster and he slaughtered him. After that, shocking. It rounds off his story I guess.

Gomez 100% lost to Lockridge IMO, but what the **** as he up there for anyway?! And Lockridge was class, so no bother in the grand scheme of things.

Gomez did beat some very good operators at 122 though. And looked incredible against most of them. And post-Sanchez he showed he was able to just gunsling and pick up a quality win over Pintor.

Both had their ups and downs. But again, Gomez was one of the best operators I've ever seen. De La Hoya I is arguably a better win than Zarate. But Bazooka put on the better performance.

 

Two of my favorites, accomplishments wise its close but i would probably give the edge to Gomez due to his dominance at 122 and him being considered by most the best of all time at that weight, skills wise and who's the better overall fighter its Wilfredo Gomez quite clearly.

 

Great post Flea :good

 

Thanks as always it's rambling and cluttered but I'm mashed so forgive me

 

I wouldn't call it very close.....Mosley is much higher on my list of favorites, but Gomez is greater by a comfortable margin IMHO!

 

An arguable statement.

 

:think Interesting to think how much film does to ones legacy. I do agree(as I did in May '11) that Gomez looks far better at his best weight than Shane though Shane moved up better though both inconsistent in doing so. I guess both can be considered close but I see Gomez as much better. Not much greater and not "miles better) either.

Back to the film. Curious to see how an old time fighter would be viewed if historically they're at least top 5 at their best weight but move up a weight or two a few fights removed from prime and get flattened. Of course he'd have more than enough top wins in his prime to be seen as a legend but the problem is the only film available is when they're a top contender at best but despite having decent rds against top fighters bigger than him he gets destroyed eventually. Interesting stuff though very off topic to a degree.

 

There probably are fighters where the footage from them is from that period of their career. Too stoned to think of any examples at the mo', sorry.

 

Oh, yeah no doubt I'd like to say it's a phase :rasta