I think p4p Aaron Pryor was the better fighter. But Basilio was a full fledged welterweight. I think much would depend on Pryor’s ability to effectively adapt to that division. He was basically a junior welter his whole career and the best men he defeated were guys who moved up from lower classes. Carmine was tough too. He was only stopped twice in over 70 pro fights and that came at the end of his career against Gene Fulmer for the middleweight title. I don’t see Pryor scoring a knockout.
Look at what the Carmine did to the past his prime Carmine Basilio did to the past his prime Sugar Ray Robinson on Sept 23 1957, the onion farmer winning a split decision in 15 rounds. But on March 25 1958, Robinson regained the title back, clearly outpointing Basilio, using speed and counterpunching. Aaron Pryor, a proven commodity at 140 lbs, Pryor would use lateral movement angles and speed to do the same to the rugged durable Basilio as Ray did in the rematch, good matchup, Aaron by unanimous decision.
great question. SRR vs. Basilio is a classic. CB vs. Pryor? i am trying to calculate how many punches would be thrown. Basilio by slight edge. Only because of natural weight. What a matchup . Both would never be the same ...
In a perfect world Pryor would've been given a shot at the lightweight championship. His height and frame / build suggest that weight would've been a more natural weight for him. Other than Duran or Chavez, I haven't seen any lightweight I would feel comfortable picking against him at light/jr.welt. Basilio was about the same height as Pryor, but he was much more thickly built , carrying the weight of welter and middle very well. Both were action fighters, but Pryor had the overall better ability. Does that better ability make Pryor the favorite against Basilio? No it doesn't . This fight is a war of attrition , a long drawn out dog fight. Unlike the poster that believes Basilio ko's Pryor in 4 rds, (Total nonsense, Basilio didn't have the firepower of Hearns with his height and reach advantages. A total disrespect of Pryor's ability and overrating Basilio) This fight would start out with the quicker Pryor probably leading after the 1st 5rds. But like the tide Basilio's better physical strength would began to push Pryor back into the ropes, where he does his best work. Baslio wouldn't stop Pryor, but in a 15rd fight at WELTER or above Baslio's ability to absorb Pryor' firepower and eventually walk through it would be the difference. Pryor would fight bravely but he'd loose. Baslio is the natural bigger man,his physical strength, his activity, and dogged determination would be the the key to a 15rd win over Pryor. Pryor wouldn't do well against the better natural welterweights and above in history.
Excellent analysis but I respectfully disagree. Too me, the biggest and most telling thing about this match-up is Pryor's speed. A lot of folks are pointing to the more natural size of Basilio which is a valid advantage but too me, it's the hand and foot speed of Pryor that is the key difference. Basilio was not a huge puncher but more of a guy that won through pressure and attrition. I don't see either man winning by KO which means if this is going to the cards I'm picking the man most likely to win a decision. I just don't see Basilio winning the majority of the exchanges against Pryor and I don't see Pryor wearing down. All due respect to the great Carmen Basilio but I like AP.
Nice points Steak8---- but i think CB could match him ......not early -but in the last 5 rounds. Did Pryor ever fight 15 with the intensity he showed with Arguello? If he brought that "A" game I could see your outcome
