What current fighters will you of had to of been there to fully appreciate? Fighters who record skimming over just won't do.
Oh, good question. Possibly Juan Manuel Marquez. His best wins are over old guys, and whenever he's stepped right up in class (Pac twice, John) the record books will say he lost. We know that the truth may have been otherwise and we know that in Barrera and Casamayor he beat two good old timers, but that record books won't say that. Still. It's not over yet.
Yes, when Marquez himself was old. It can't be held against him. If he was 24-25 and fighting Barrera and Casamayor I could see your pointing for mentioning it.
I'm not casting doubt upon the quality of the wins, i'm trying to predict how it may be seen in 20 years.
Plus hes meant to be stepping in with Hatton in 2009, if he wins, its a legendary 1, but I think we'll see him being timber in that 1
Pretty much everything in time but: Mayweather - no ones going to care in 20years about Williams/Margarito/Cotto not being on his record, just like they don't care about McCallum, J Jackson, Benn, Toney, Nunn being on the fab 5s records. Mayweather will looks better if and when Corrales/Castillo/Hatton/Hernandez/Delahoya get inducted into the HOF Lennox - beat everyone he faced, maybe some will rank him no1 HW of all time, no **** Calazage - will possibly retire undefeated, people will forget Hopkins/Jones were near shot to bits Pacquaio - already a legend, got Morales and Barrera at the right times pretty much, great wins but they flatter him, could well go down as a bigger legend if he pulls off a Delahoya and/or Hatton win, which I wouldn't discount completely Fighters who may become underrated Roy Jones - already underrated and his skill level may become forgot in time and some may focus on the end of his career to say 'look he was never that good' Marquez - Losses to John/Pac and he'll probably be accused of ducking Hamed and Morales and going after shot Barrera and Cassa Barrera - it maybe easy to look at his record in the future and not appeciate how good he was from 1999-2002, plus the robbery he lost against Morales (2000)
Doesn't matter if it's now or 20 years time. Marquez beat Barrera and Casamayor above his best weight and he was 34-35 years old himself at the time of those fights. When someone looks back in 20 years time they must take into consideration that Marquez himself never exactly had youth on his side at the time of those fights. In 20 years time Marquez's age wouldn't change when looking back. "His best wins are over old guys" That type of statement would be used only if we are talking about a younger fighter with a considerable youthful advantage ovet the opponents he beat.
Marquez has put together some excellent wins but: Marquez hadnt been in many wars pre-Barrera and the Barrera fight was razor thin and could have gone either way. Marquez was naturally bigger than Barrera who only went to 126 to fight Hamed. Barrera's prime was around 2000, by 2007 all he did was keep the guard up and throw the jab and move, Winky wright style because he was too small at 130, a far cry from the relentless Julio Cesar Chavez type fighter at 122 And Casamayor was 37 and looked way past prime when he beat Corrales 2 years ago. Then was innactive for a year and had 2 poor performances in the last year.
Marquez himself was past his prime. Watch the Medina fight, Pacquiao I, Polo, etc. Quicker reflexes, mobile on his feet, and generally better all round. He's been slowing down over the last couple of years. I couldn't care if he hadn't been in many wars, he had moved up twice past his prime weight and was slowing down. No question about it.
Yes, I'm not disputing that his best wins are over old guys. But it's not a statement I would use for a fighter who's skills are eroding and coming into his mid-30's himself.
People will most likely forget that Marquez was closer to his prime than what Barrera was because they will simply look at their ages and see that they are comparable. If I'm around though, I'll bear witness to the opinion that Barrera was further from his prime than what Marquez was, and that if Barrera faced Marquez in his prime I'd have taken Barrera. Marquez will get underrated a little though because he lost both Pac fights (I thought he did lose the first fight, but he could definitely make a case in the second fight, even though I had it a draw) and of course he was robbed by John and the Norwood fight could have gon either way. Now, who I think will be underappreciated in 20 years time is Winky Wright. His record will show losses to Simon, Vargas and Hopkins, but really, he only really 'lost' 1 fight in his career imo, to Vasquez when he was rather green. Had him beating Taylor, Simon and had his fights with Vargas and Hopkins as draws.
Maybe Vitali Klitschko. One defence against an average opponent, no great wins on his resume, people may forget what a very good fighter he was. Plenty riding on this Peter fight for Vitali, actually.