Why didn't Whitaker fight Camacho or Rosario at 135lb in late 80s?

Your observations would be correct i reckon. Probably the best he ever looked was vs Greg "The Candyman" Coverson. He manhandled and stopped a guy the rising Camacho went the distance with just prior.

Davis - Rosario was a very very close fight. It pissed me, my two fave lightweights of the time vs each other. I'd always hoped Davis would fight Mancini.

 

Who did you have winning Rosario-Davis? Rosario seemed quite cautious there during some of the middle rounds. When he did open up, I felt he was getting the best of it.

 

I thought Rosario pipped it. The kd's were the difference for me.

 

No one would take fight with Hector in his heyday when Hagler and Camacho ruled boxing. If they did, they'd get the same treatment Coverson & Davis got. ANYONE would take a fight with him in the 90's, even Chavez.

I can testify that Howard did indeed beat Rosario. Edwin hadn't done very well and of course being held in Puerto Rico, that means if he got a lucky shot in the last round he would automatically get the decision. But yes, Davis won the fight.

Regarding the Taylor fight, people try to play that down but the truth of the matter is he wasn't expected to do as well as he had. But it shows the skills were still there. Meldrick hadn't too much experience but still world class. Duva usually puts his fighters into tough fights early and comes out on top ie; Holyfield-Qawi and what this fight shows is that Howard was still able to compete with the youth of the sport which is the all important test for me.

In fact, Howard did much better than Eusebio Pedroza had in his 15 round draw with Bernard Taylor, a man with 14 professional fights in just his first title fight or Sugar Ray Leonard in his fight with young upstart Terry Norris. :smoke

But he was miles behind Hector Camacho and that means Hector was head and shoulders above the competition. Pernell, Chavez, would have been insane to take a fight with him. With Roger it wouldn't have been so bad since his career had already hit bottom so many times.

If you get the chance you must see for yourself the king of the crappy chins named Roger Mayweather. This was a true kill or be killed type of fighter. He called himself the black mamba. In his first big test against Lou Duva's Rocky Lockridge, he took one short righ hand chop inside and that was it. Lockridge KO 1 Mayweather and goodbye title.

It was no surprise he was coming in to lose to the latest matinee idol (I can spot them a mile away) and he did not dissapoint-Chavez KO 2 Mayweather.

The first tomato can I saw level the overrated Mayweather was Freddie Pendleton in a 1986 classic. Roger was moving and jabbing when Freddie plastered him with a counter, sending Roger back into the ropes. Roger got tangled on the rops and Freddie went ape**** on his ass-fight over!

Roger being favored to beat Hector by 1990 is just a flat out lie.

 

Ducked no one? Then why didn't a Prime Camacho give Rosario an immed. rematch? Rosario wanted one.

 

Yeah it is worse than losing to haugen you moron, its not always based on whos the better p4p fighter you nimrod. Greg Haugen would have tko'd fenech at 135. Why would it be delusional to suggest Camacho would have handed azumah his ass at 135, there was already a thread about it, most favoured Hector over your beloved Nelson. Yeah Nelson would do so well at 135, why cuz he looked great in being made as an amatuer by Whitaker?

The Meldrick Taylor and Camacho fights easily form a massive part of his legacy. Nobody is going to rank him top 25 by beating 6 or 7 decent fighters and a bunch of taxi drivers. There is a reason Greg Haugen, Lou Duva and the entire media always knocked on him for his competition, maybe because he really was feasting on mediocrities for a whole decade.

 

Camacho didn't give him a rematch because he didn't want to. He was BADLY hurt in the fifth round, worse than ever before. He barely escaped with that decision.

It was a great fight, but Camacho was smart both in and outside of the ring... ahh, the eighties. :yep

 

There's just so much stupidity coming from every word that you that say I really question why I even bother to reply to you. I think I'll quit after this one last schooling that I dispense.

Firstly, the Nelson who faced Whitaker was not the same as the Nelson who faced Fenech. Whilst I don't give too much credence to the malaria claim, what I do beleive is my own two eyes, and anyone that isn't braindead could see that Nelson lost a step between the Whitaker fight and the fight with Fenech.

Secondly, the Fenech-Nelson fight was fought at 130, not 135. So what relevance does it have what Haugen would do to Fenech at 135? The Fenech that showed up that night at 130 hit a level Haugen never knew.

Thirdly, the Nelson that fought Whitaker at 135 did a better job than Haugen did against Whitaker. At least Nelson won a couple of rounds and pushed Whitaker hard. Haugen was embarassingly outclassed and lost every 15 second interval of that fight, let alone every round.

If you really want to get to the point, start a thread pitching 1990 Nelson vs. 1990 Camacho and let's see if the majority here think the Macho man comes out on top.

Mind you, Camacho was losing to Haugen at 140, but if he dropped down to 135, I see no reason why he beats the Nelson in 1990.

Mario Martinez, Rocky Lockridge, Jaun Laporte, Roger Mayweather (x2), Jose Luis Ramirez, Ruben Castillo, Greg Haugen, Edwin Rosario, Lonnie Smith, Sammy Fuentes, Terrence Ali, Hector Camacho and Meldrick Taylor (x2).

Chavez fought and beat a lot of decent fighters. No one win makes him who he is. The Taylor win of course is the biggest and the Camacho win one of his most impressive performances, but it was his remarkable high level of consistency more than anything else which gets him a high ranking.

 

Camacho's record is mediocre comparative to Chavez'. Chavez beatdown a guy that near chased (prime) Camacho out of the ring and changed him to a safety first fighter. Camacho's best win is who, Ramirez? Also beaten by Chavez. Then we have Haugen

Chavez has by far the better win of the two (Taylor is better than anyone Camacho beat for starters) and kills him for consistency and longevity. No Camacho fan should be making fun of Chavez' record.

 

First of all, let's not kid ourselves that Chavez beat Taylor. Just put an * next to it in the record book. We all know Steele stole it from Taylor and handed it to Chavez, a prime example of what's wrong with boxing.

This is why I had been very suspicious of Julio going into the Whitaker fight. I could see his management had been skillfully steering his career so it was no surprise to see him flounder in embarrassing fashion in the Whitaker fight.

Sweet Pea even won the battle of the low blows.

We hadn't actually seen him beat a marquee fighter that didn't have a spotty record. Those types of fighters don't count and never will. :yep

For the record, every fighter faced by Chavez had long since past their best and hence.. the spotty records. See for yourself; Maywather already ko'd in one. Why anyone would pay to see it again is beyond me. Ramirez was trounced in losses to Mancini and Camacho. Laporte had lost to around 20 other people. Haugen whipped by Pazienza and Pernell. Rosario beaten by Ramirez and Camacho. Camacho already beaten by Haugen which makes a Chavez-Camacho match laughable if you know anything about boxing.

The list goes on and on. Not to mention the 75 Tijuana taxi drivers that built up his legendary record. It's no coincidence that the losses piled up on his record are the only fighters whose prime he faced.

 

What is this great chavez's record against official p4p competition, seriously he is th emost overrated atg ever.

 

You've got more excuses than Cheney has crooked teeth when it suits. Hearns was weight drained, Hagler was 206yo and SRL was training secretly on the love boat, Heccy's speed was gone at 28 etc etc. The plain fact of the matter is that by the rules Chavez did indeed win. Taylor had his chance, indeed two of them and those are the cold hard facts.

Yeah, you've always seem to have these incredible but private insights going into matches where your hated one won, or loved one lost. Chavez was miles bast his greatest vs Whitaker, both time wise and weight wise. Granted Whitaker wasn't either but Chavez was the worse off. Lets get totally real however, Whitaker is one of the greatest P4P fighters ever along with Chavez and it's sure no shame getting outboxed by him. A match between these at their peak and 135 would be a fascinating affair. A favour Whitaker, but Chavez would be a live one.

Keeping a close eye down there, were we? :blood

Tell me again who your beloved Camacho beat?

Mayweather was just 22 when ko'ed by Lockridge, and the Rock was a BIG step up in class despite Roger having the title. Also, Mayweather's one achilles heel was his chin, it was never the greatest but his sum of parts around it made him a fine fine fighter. Roger came back to be a force in boxing for many many years and was likely a better fighter later anyway.

Just because a fighter gets stopped early career doesn't mean he has no credibility for the rest of his life, for goodness sakes. Or shall we talk about Terry Norris, utterly poleaxed by Jackson early career. Or Dempsey? Pedroza? Or 100 others.

Well actually, the second contest was far better and quite an exciting fight. You should try to watch it one day. Roger had successfully defended his 140 title 4 times and was on a decent run. You probably don't know about Mayweather, and Mexicans either :yep

Ramirez was on a good run, and had the highway robbery over Whitaker. He was a great barometer was Ramirez. Unlike Camacho Chavez beat him head on.

Haugen had also beaten Camacho baby :good

Rosario punched Heccy's heart clean out of the ring, was 1-1 with Ramirez and was coming off (year prior) the greatest 135 stoppage in years. Hector refused to fight him "ever again". Chavez stepped up to the plate however. No dog in Julio.

Let me tell you something. Haugen was very likely the second most dangerous opponent Camacho had faced up to this point. The first he took a controversial split over after looking terrified at various points of the fight. Camacho had been feasting on very ordinary oppostion for over two years, funny how he was beaten as soon as he stepped up a few levels with Haugen :yep

As does your bull****.

Taylor was peak. Rosario near his best. Mayweather too. Don't even begin to tell me he didn't beat a superb version of Lockridge.

Sorry to bring you back to reality, had a bit of spare time :good

 

He beat him better than anyone, Delahoya did also did but he did not put him down and No one ever stopped him, he was hurt vs Rosario and I think dropped. How do I know, I never liked him and was waiting for him to catch a beating but he never took a beating left boxing with a 78-5-2 Record...Impressive

 

DLH did put him down i reckon.

 

After Camacho lost to Haugen, I wouldn't be surprised if Mayweather would have been favoured to beat Camacho. I don't know if he would have been, having lost to Chavez himself in 1989, but the thought doesn't strike me as insane.

Mayweather had a crappy chin, but otherwise he had decent boxing skills, and there'd be no guarantee that Camacho knocks him out.

Mayweather performed better against Whitaker and Chavez (in the second fight) than Haugen or Camacho did, that's for sure.

And one last point, I wouldn't exactly call someone that beats the likes of Mayweather, Bramble, Paez, Lopez and holds Frankie Randall to a disputed draw a 'tomato can'.

Freddie is another fighter that performed better against Pernell than Greg Haugen did, the man of course, who beat Camacho around the same time Pernell fought Freddie.