P4P: Make a list purely on ability

This is an intresting thread,but i dont want to miss anyone so i will wait until later to give a better list. The obvious Robinson,Young Ali, Duran,Leonard will be on the list,but also some other guys you might not expect like a Holyfield at Cruiser,Finito Lopez,Sanchez,maybe a prime Donald Curry, Burley,Maybe Fenech at JF. Ill probably list like 30 guys since there are so many.
There seemed to be More greats based just on ability,than great fighters over the long haul. Thats why these kind of list are easy to leave somewhat out. Im not the biggest Jones fan but based on ability this guy has got to be top 5.

 

This may need to be hashed out further. For example, Greb, Pep, Giardello and Conn reportedly were capable of punching much harder than their knockout percentages suggest. Do we factor in things like resistance to cuts?

In Locche-Fuji, Pastrano-Downes, Conn-Pastor, and Canto-Takada, the stereotypically featherfisted winner atypically produced a stoppage of a championship caliber opponent. Against Fuji, Locche hardly resembles Maxie Rosenbloom, repeatedly whacking hooks to the body and sending the head skyward with uppercuts. Canto beat the crap out of Takada.

Do we consider Mustafa Muhammad's aggressive and highly motivated blasting of Lotte Mwale largely to the exclusion of his usually more reactive performances?

Hilmer Kenty was an aggressive stalker throughout his championship run, but that wasn't his natural style. He only reverted to type after losing his title, when he sped circles around John Montes.

Are we to consider Buster Douglas exclusively on the basis of his performance against Tyson?

 

I wouldnt go as far as to put Locche in my top ten here personally. I rate him high head to head but if you see my post on page 1 i really look into guys who can control the pace due to their technical skills and ability to school opponents. Locche could shut guys out so i might come across hypocritical, but in my perception he wasn't really one who liked to control the tempo of fights as a strategy. He'd rather let a guy attempt what he wants and frustrate them regardless. Not what i would describe as a master ring general by definition, rather a defensive wizard of the highest order, something you have to see to believe in that regard. In my opinion he is number one for defense, but it's tight at the top of that one.

 

I can think of a few names who would fare better on such a list than on most.

Packey McFarland

Jem Driscoll

Les Darcey

Dave Holly

 

It's just an impression, but I've always felt that Locche could have easily controlled a fight strategically and taken the initiative if he wanted to, but simply couldn't be arsed to do it. I think he got more joy out of embarrassing opponents for the laugh of it in front of thousands of his countrymen. His footwork is the thing that usually gets criticized, but he seemed to have good footwork when he could actually be bothered to use it fully. Does the available footage even show him at his best? He looked quite mobile and less bulky against Ortiz in 66, prior to winning the title.

 

Antonio Gomez woud prevail over morales/mab/marquez.Let's not even bring up Marcel.:good

 

If I retract my original statement concerning 'ability', then Napoles fits the bill. And maybe Joey Archer.

And we might be looking at Walter McGowan a bit differently these days if he hadn't been so prone to cuts.

 

1. Jones Jr
2. Robinson
3. Whitaker
4. Duran
5. Leonard
6. Ali
7. Tyson
8. Charles
9. Mayweather
10. Holyfield

 

Yeah he was certainly a guy that liked to make the crowd laugh, you can see it in the footage. I've seen some of the Ortiz one and yeah you're right. I do think it all amounts to speculation on the evidence but good observation by you mate.

 

I am curious about this one. I guess it depends on how you define ability. But however you define it, I would think that a welterweight of high ability would be able to handle a lightweight of high ability. Judging from the ass whipping Leonard got from Duran, it doesn't seem Leonard qualifies. You did put Duran over Leonard. That is as it should be (he's way above Leonard). But Leonard was a welterweight. A great bigger man should beat a great smaller man. Also, Hearns had Leonard very puzzled over 12 rounds of their first fight and outboxed Leonard in their rematch. Hearns proved he had more ability, didn't he? I think so. He was the better boxer in both fights. So why isn't Hearns on the list? Leonard didn't look very good against Norris, either. I believe that a fighter of ability worthy of being ranked so high should consistently display great ability especially in the weight classes in which he won championships. Leonard didn't. Leonard was a excellent boxer in terms of ability. No question about it. Very technically proficient. But I don't think he was any more so than, say, Camacho. Leonard didn't have the ability of Pep (who should be higher), Jones, or Whitaker (I am glad to see you rank Whitaker so highly).

 

I only mention Locche as an example of somebody whose abilities may have surpassed what he typically displayed. Is usual strategy to be considered within the context of this thread, or are we only dealing with utmost potential?

All of the names in my previous post were intended as examples of potential, not necessarily as candidates for the proposed list. Having mentioned that, I find it really interesting that Locche was singled out for further discussion. (Among the names I happened to introduce, I thought Conn's might be the one to be highlighted first. Louis famously said, "Billy Conn had it all.")

 

I think we have seen the best of Locche defensivly on film in the Fuki and 2nd Cervantez figth. But with the Highligthsand i have a fiar few highligths he looks alot mobiler(if thats a word) and more springy. I uploaded th Ortiz fight to Youtube and added some comments about it

 

I'm speculating, like you say, but I'm unashamedly biased as anything towards Locche .

I liked your call on Gushiken aswell. I've been watching him lately and he was a wonderful ring general, sort of what Mijares should have been like if things didn't go arsehole upwards for him.

 

Off the top of my head
1. Benny Leonard
2. Roy Jones Jr
3. Ray Robinson
4. Pernell Whitaker
5. Ray Leonard
6. Floyd Mayweather Jr.
7. Henery Armstrong
8. Muhammad Ali
9. Joe Louis
10. Willie Pep

 

Well i regard him as a much better fighter than Camacho to be honest. Camach is one who some might label more flash than substance and i wouldn't argue too much. To be honest i can't really take the bringing up of the Norris fight too seriously. And he flat out won the fight against Hearns the first time, ability was shown on his behalf at the highest level in my book. People talk like Hearns was showing some display of wizardry till he got caught that night. It's madness, he was boxing in an offensive manner, and using his jab very well. Leonard hurt him and then applied pressure consistently and showed great finsishing skills, not neglecting the body either. In their rematch, i had that a draw, and Leonard was much sharper with the hooks etc he threw than was Hearns with his shots, that much is clear in my memory bank. Hearns got two knockdowns and i still had it even personally. Roberto Duran was maybe the bestlightweight ever, but this seems to lead people to believe he had no right to do well at 147. Look at the man's record in hindsight at 147. He was more than proven there, a win over him (and only one occurred) at that weight is a great one in terms of ability. I'm clearly a Duran fan and i hardly like Ray Leonard, but i rate both men's wins over each other there.