Fighters of the Century per Futch/Dundee/Clancy/Duva/Chargin - The Welterweights.

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by JohnThomas1, Jun 26, 2021.



  1. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    48,174
    34,902
    Apr 27, 2005
    Espada had only lost to one man, Cuevas, in half a decade. He'd only ever been stopped by one man. He was coming off a world title fight loss to Cuevas. Admittedly his competition hadn't exactly been stellar but he hadn't lost to anyone either excepting the malevolent Mexican.
     
  2. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,763
    21,434
    Nov 24, 2005
    That hardly makes him a convincing contender.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  3. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    108,237
    38,769
    Mar 21, 2007
    I think, if i had to summarise my position, (without getting drawn into a discussion that has already lasted pages!) I would say that rather than saying just "resume" I try to get an indication of where a fighter's career indicates they lie in terms of what they are.

    As stated, if you're comparing lists of wins there is little argument that Basilio did the better work. But Basilio has a number of indicative losses as well, and they are losses that it is almost impossible to imagine Hearns suffering. I don't go into these in real detail above, but I won't bother to cover them off again here. Meanwhile Hearns cantered - cantered - to wins over a larger number of ranked fighters (less dangerous than the ones Basilio beat).

    My basic position would be to accept there is an argument for ranking Basilio higher and Hearns lower, but to absolutely reject the position that it's impossible to rank Hearns higher without leaning heavily on head-to-head.

    Nevertheless, my appraisal of Hearns as absolutely elite among the welters - ranked only a line below Robinson and Leonard (he might actually beat Kid Gavilan, for example) - does enhance his ranking for me.
     
    JohnThomas1 likes this.
  4. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    48,174
    34,902
    Apr 27, 2005
    True but there's nothing making him a really weak one either. There's no bad losses in years. Hearns treated him like a 5th rater.
     
  5. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,763
    21,434
    Nov 24, 2005
    Well, I largely agree.
    I've never been one to make a firm delineation between "accomplishments" and "head to head", and the two concepts overlap heavily for me anyway.
     
    McGrain likes this.
  6. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,763
    21,434
    Nov 24, 2005
    I'd expect Hearns to beat the best version of Espada quite easily too.
    Not sure that does a huge amount for his resume though.
     
  7. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    48,174
    34,902
    Apr 27, 2005
    I'd expect him to beat around half the top 10 in history. The welterweights were insanely stacked during his time. Hearns, Cuevas, SRL, Duran, Benitez, Palomino and a few decent contenders. It was a WOW time in boxing.
     
  8. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,763
    21,434
    Nov 24, 2005
    Yes. It was a great era. (as was Ross and McLarnin's)

    Hearns fought two of those you mention, at welterweight.
    Going 1-1.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  9. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    48,174
    34,902
    Apr 27, 2005
    I don't rate the Ross/McLarnin era near as good at it's best point. Not even close. Not many in history would make a very big impact. The H2H strength is frightening.
     
  10. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,763
    21,434
    Nov 24, 2005
    You do seem to favour the late-70s-early-mid-1980s quite often.
     
  11. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    48,174
    34,902
    Apr 27, 2005
    Well it was my era but i certainly stand by my comment and don't believe it biased.

    There isn't much between Ross's rating at 135 and 147 and he's a bit undersized IMO when thrown in with fully fledged welterweights of quality like Hearns, SRL and co. Undergunned for mine. Sure Duran had a short stint of greatness there but there's only one Duran. Ross would be one heckuva junior welter. For his three fights against McLarnin the highest he scaled was 141 and the lowest 137 1/2. McLarnin is similar for me.
     
  12. Jason Thomas

    Jason Thomas Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,120
    3,578
    Feb 18, 2019
    These ratings are not bad, but I would rate Leonard over Armstrong, and switch Gavilan and Basilio.

    The biggest omission is Jimmy McLarnin. I would put him in and drop Walker, who I believe did better work at higher weights.
     
  13. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,297
    9,960
    Jan 4, 2008
    That Cuevas wasn't top 3 is probably a better proof of how insanely strong the division was at the time, than an indictment of Cuevas' quality.
     
  14. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,102
    41,928
    Mar 3, 2019
    Yes, the era was incredibly strong but I find it hard to crown a win as 'one of the best in welterweight history', when the fighter who the win is over wasn't even the third best man in the world at the time. Leonard himself has three that are better. Duran arguably has two.
     
  15. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,297
    9,960
    Jan 4, 2008
    One of the best performances rather than best wins.
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2021
    George Crowcroft likes this.