If Tito hadn't ran into 2 defensive masters, could he have been a great middleweight?

Agreed.

Also keeping in mind that in addition to failing against defensive masters at that weight, we also never saw how he would handle a big middleweight puncher, like an Abraham or an Echols. The only solid punching middleweight he fought was Hopkins. Joppy and Cherifi were no punchers.

 

We agree, just the matter of degrees. I just think the chance of Tito getting to Tommy is a one in twenty shot at best, while you may have it one fifteen. Is that a fair assessment TS, we both agree that Tito is a bad match agaisnt TH, and has lets say not a good chance.

And BTW for the Tito fans, I'm one also, just think a bad matchup for Tito v Hearns.

All good gents

 

No, he was too small and didnt have the attributes to move up easily.

 

i think part of the reason he crumbled during the Hopkins fight was because he had some time to kool down after those explosive press conferences...

insult PR and tito will go off on your face...

but because of 9/11, no flights were allowed in or out of New York..and that prolonged the fight and ruined his motivation...

B-Hop also exposed that whole hand-wrapping thing and ever since then he sucked and lost a significant amount of power that he once had...

 

Well no, I don't.

If you are a "great" fighter - You adapt and beat all styles, not just dominate guys in William Joppy like fashion.

 

He can still fight Pavlik.

 

Agreed.

 

To the OP;
Every defeat of a champion is against a bad stylistic matchup, don't you think?

If it were good stylistic matchups they would call that cheerypicking. Don't worry, Trinidad is a god. We all know that. Every great fighter looses.

 

I agree with Cherifi, but not Mayorga. Tito used Mayorga's head as target practice for 8 rounds, before finally dropping him to the body.

Hopkins did comment that his ribs were sore from some of Tito's body shots, and that Tito landed a good left to the jaw in round 10 that left a bruise there.

I think Tito was still a pretty big puncher at 160. Maybe not quite the same as in the lower divisions, but still packed a good punch.

 

True, but if it was tito the 'event' would never have happened. This is medium-sized businessman (former boxer) vs. good small current boxer.

 

At WW Tito was truly an all time great. It took bigger guys with mad skills to defeat Tito. Anyone his size he beat. He would beat all the average middles. Hopkins is tough. Wright, Tito just looked awful! I think Taylor at his best would give Tito trouble, but Tito at his best would KO Taylor late.

 

I'm not saying that tito would beat hagler, i'm saying that it would have been a good fight and the last thing it would have been is a joke. Hagler was such a good fighter that he believed that he could beat any fighter any way, thats why he fough leonard the way he did, he thought he could beat leonard fighting leonards type of fight, and i believe hagler won the fight. With this point in mind, if hagler fought a 40-0 prime felix trinidad, then he would want to beat trinidad in trinidads style of fighting, it would be an all out war, and if that fight happened then i believe it would be close.

Again if tito fought Hearns then i believe this fight would also be a war, hearns could out box most fighters, if he fought hagler that way then he may of been big enough to take the win. if hearns fought tito then i belive that he would fight toe-toe, and then it depends on who could take the punch. you make a very good point that tito might not be able to deal with the hearns straight right because of tito's lack of defence, but tito could hurt hearns just as hard with a left hook.

 

Thanks for that great analysis as always :nut

 

I am beginning to think he hates Puerto Rican boxers for some reason. First Cotto now Tito. :think