im on the fence with these fighters, i think they all could be called great with respect to the word, but there also may be a argument that they where just under the mark. johnny tapia marvin johnson bobby chacon michael carbajal rosendo alverez
These are 5 fighters it actually pains me a little not to call great but I do my best not the chuck that word around lightly. Chacon and Tapia aren't far off. Carbajal is top 10 for his weight and usually that's enough for me but alas light-fly just doesn't have the history or depth. Man I loved Marv and the service he gave to the sport but he falls pretty far short. Alvarez was a fine fighter, capable of a lot more if the opportunites were there at the lower weights but for me he is the furthest from great.
I consider Johnny Tapia a great fighter, or very close to it. For me he deserves parity with bigger name fighters from the same era such as Calzaghe and Tszyu.
I'd love to label Chacon & Tapia in particular as greats, but for me they all border on it and sit in the very category instead.
I consider Tapia more than just a borderline great. I think he's very underrated. Carbajal was a great fighter, imo, and interestingly, I never even thought to wonder if he was or wasn't. It was not a question to me.
Tapia and Carbajal were closest to being great. Let's be discrete in doling out this term "great"..none of them were great, but like I said, Tapia and Carbajal came closest.
Sometimes I get the feeling that someone deliberately says "great" instead of "all-time great" and they get answers based off of personal "all-time great" criteria, if that makes any sense.
I assumed he was talking in all-time terms. The likes of Chacon, Tapia and Carbajal were great for their own era, but in all-time terms? No, not for me.