Ranking the most skilled Mexican fighters

Napoles was a Mexican citizen. Thus a Mexican fighter. There are many ethnicities in Mexico.

Mexican-American fighters are generally US citizens. Thus US fighters.

 

Just curious but using this logic, do you consider Artur Beterbiev a Canadian then because of his citizenship? Is Roy Jones Russian? Is Bob Fitzsimmons a Kiwi?

 

I believe that Beterbiev has dual citizenship. Roy became a Ruskie well after he was a relevant fighter. He was 46 or so years old. I believe also that Fitz was an American by the time he won the heavyweight crown. Not sure if there was a dual status.

Napoles was not a dual citizen. He was a Mexican citizen before he was ever champ.

 

i don't give a **** about ethnic nationalism, but this is just getting pedantic when it's obvious the thread is about fighters that were born and grew up in the country of Mexico, who will almost all be from long established ethnicities therein. Just an easy way to localise discussion to a certain boxing tradition. Napoles was a Cuban that grew up and learned to fight there, only leaving when he was already a grown man because of the ban on pro-boxing. He has as much to do with mexican heritage as Fidel Castro, or Jose Legra has with Spanish, or Luis Rodriguez is a yank.

mexican/irish/scottish american is a different thing if we're talking second-gen immigrant as they're born and bred in the states and citizens from birth. Napoles is in the same boat as Arbachakov in Japan,Tszyu in Australia, Dick Tiger and Hogan Bassey in the UK/States, etc...

 

I don't really see how winning titles changes ethnicity quite honestly. Fitz was born in Cornwall and raised in New Zealand. He started his career in NZ and Oz. He was born and raised on another side of the planet to the US, I don't understand the argument for him being American. Napoles only went to Mexico because boxing was banned in his native Cuba, where he began his pro career and presumably would have continued fighting in had it not been banned. Legally, Napoles was Mexican from the age of 22 onwards, but ethnically, he is Cuban.

 

If one wanted to be a pain in the ass, they could point out that Mexico has really generous birthright citizenship. Bring proof you have a parent or grandparent who was a Mexican citizen, and you can claim Mexican citizenship. So, technically, most Mexican-Americans would be dual citizens if they'd do the equivalent of some DMV homework. So, sorta, maybe they can count for both US and Mexico?

 

Fitz is a weird case from a century ago which doesn't really concern me here.

Ethnically, Napoles was Afro-Caribbean, the same as a lot of people in Veracruz and Oaxaca. In Mexico.

 

More specifically, Afro-Cuban , no need for as wide a designation as caribbean...

He's a cuban fighter. well done for pedantically derailing things.

 

Did he ever have a Mexican trainer? I don’t believe so, to my best knowledge he trained himself by sparring etc with his Cuban foundation.

 

He had some trainers in LA, I believe. Outside of that it was just Conde so far as I know.

But I don't care if his trainer was a Martian because Napoles was a Mexican.

 

Last I checked Napoles was born in Cuba, raised in Cuba learnt to fight in Cuba, is Cuban and defected to Mexico after 20 something pro fights IN CUBA lol how is he Mexican?

 

I agree with he rest of the discussion.
Mexican boxers here are those who were born,raised and trained till they get successful in Mexico, Nàpoles only came after the ban,and got his title.

 

Solid picks. Canto is the easy choice there, as he's great in those departments. Roman...great multi-directional movement and fine defence, though he didn't have the same great reflexive elusiveness and I think his jab was sometimes a bit too easy to counter/punch with, but he's also a strong choice to be up there, especially considering he didn't have as much power as a lot of the others with which to gain respect.

Lopez main drawback is his quality of opposition is the worst. I don't think he ever looked like he had great defensive reflexes, but they were pretty good and he displayed better feet and integration of defence/offence against sub world class opposition than the other '90s/21st century Mexicans did, but how much of that would have fragmented if he was regularly fighting better challengers?

Sanchez is an odd one. I think he had better multi-directional movement, and at least an equal amount of reflexes and defensive moves in his arsenal "on paper" than guys like Saldivar, Castillo, Chavez (pre '90s slowing down) or Olivares, so he suits being made to look better by a skilled highlight creator...but did he actually get hit less than those guys? I think there's a good case to be made that he got hit flush more often overall in most of his fights. Part of it was probably that he had so much faith in his great chin and counterpunching, post-Little Red, but whatever the case, I don't think he was that strong at being consistent with the more minimalist sense of distance side of things, especially against good jabbers and straight punchers. Even against wilder more aggressive fighter like the technically raw Azumah Nelson, who was winging lots of well-timed but telegraphed wide hooks and looping right-hands, he was getting lit up often. Compare that fight to something like Saldivar vs Sugar Ramos or Chavez vs Rosario.

I don't think he's a bad choice though. Just not sure he really seperated from fighters he seemed to show the potential to at times.