Alexis Arguello rated 8th best fighter in the last 50 years

They are damn close. Arguello was a better super featherweight, Chavez was probably a better lightweight (although neither stuck around long at 135). Opposition wise, Arguello met Marcel, beat world champions in Olivares, Escalera (x2), Chacon, Boza, Limon, Ramirez, Mancini and of course lost twice to Pryor. He also dropped a non-title decision to Vilomar Fernandez.

Chavez was probably more consistent but maybe took longer for people to recognize him as a truly great fighter. The win over Rosario was a turning point for him - from then on he was a p4p entrant and took over top spot in March 1990 and was the no. 1 fighter in the sport till October 1993. Arguello was never the p4p no. 1 but then that wasn't so much of a thing back then.

 

You miss the fight where an old and undersized Olivares is a mile ahead of Arguello before getting chin checked?

 

Well, Olivares was a greater fighter than Rosario and Taylor combined but probably past his best at the point that he fought Arguello.

 

He was that far ahead of a prime arguello?

 

Unfortunately, the fight doesn't exist on film, but have you read reports of how flawless, how lethal , and yes, how skilled Olivares was in dismantling and destroying a very quality opponent in Alan Rudkin? It was reported on by veteran Boxing Illustrated writer Lew Eskin, which I remember very well reading. It's like the performance of Jerry Quarry vs Buster Mathis....also reported on by Eskin...both fights, if they were filmed, would have enhanced the legacies immensely of both Olivares and Quarry...rather than just the testamony of the printed word.
Olivares performed at a very high level of skill vs Jesus Pimental, and of course vs Lionel Rose...and reverted to a boxer..a matador vs the very tough and skilled Chucho Castillo...reverting in form from a killer puncher to a skilled, classy boxer in regaining his bantamweight title. In short, you're selling Olivares painfully short here...he was way beyond, even if was for a relatively short time, both Rosario and Taylor.

 

I think Ruben is really underrated today myself. I have the old mags that covered the Rudkin fight and Rudkin was like in awe of Ruben after the fight. Shame that one is not available, but who knows, some day it might pop up. Ruben's record as a bantam was sick. Not sure of the exact number, but he was something like 60-0 with 58 knockouts at one point. He was one of my early favs when I was just getting into boxing at 10-11 years old. And of course, back then getting any info on a guy like him was next to impossible here on the east coast usa.

 

Can't agree with most of this. Rosario was actually quite one-dimensional. Taylor was fast, which can be confused with skill at times. Not to say he wasn't also skilled, but neither was on the level of Olivares in that regard. It's not even very close.

 

Rosario? Are you thinking of Benitez maybe?

 

Nail meet hammer. Neither of the mentioned fighters have anything on Ruben Olivares and that poster exposes their lack of knowledge of the sport by saying such things. Then again, I can't even recall how many times I've seen people confuse Taylor's blinding speed with actual skill. People make the same mistake to this day with fighters. "He's fast, must mean he's good!". Zab Judah syndrome.

 

So now instead of conceding you were incorrect about your previous assertion now we're combining two of the only fighters you know about for some reason? What's the point?