Alexis Arguello - What If...

Not only do I think Arguello would have knocked Fernandez out a few months later, I think Arguello would have knocked Fernandez out the actual night they fought had it gone 15.

Still, I don't see how that in any way diminishes my point that Arguello struggles with movers and the Fernandez fight is an example of that.

Also, it's one thing to lose to Esteban Dejesus, who is a brilliant fighter in his own right, it's another thing to lose to a Vilomar Fernandez level fighter.

If he is even struggling with Fernandez, that alone is a worrying sign, irrespective of the fight outcome.

Marcel is a much, much better fighter, so proving that Arguello could eventually overcome Fernandez doesn't really in and of itself give Arguello a pass in regard to what is a weakness of his.

Whilst there might be some merit in thinking that the Fernandez fight is not conclusive evidence of the point that Alexis really struggles with movers, likewise there is merit in not dismissing the fight as totally irrelevant.

 

Allow me to present my own take on Arguello's first match with Fernandez. Alexis, in my opinion, was better over his first ten rounds against Vilomar than near peak Duran had been, and also better over the first ten rounds than Howard Davis, Jr. and Hilmer Kenty later would be. In fact, many believe Fernandez was robbed outright of a 12 round decision win over Howard, and then the WBA LW Title over the championship distance against Kenty. (It should be mentioned here that Hilmer came from behind, then became hampered by a severe leg cramp. I believe this hindrance might have made the difference if this one had been held in New York, or on more neutral turf, instead of Cobo Hall in Kenty's Detroit.)

Unlike Duran, Davis, Jr. and Kenty, Alexis later dominated Vilomar in a ten round rematch (decking him in round four), not needing the championship limit or even a 12 rounder to even the official score.

Marcel did it cleanly over the championship distance, a huge psychological advantage to carry into a rematch.

Fernandez did not uncover a blueprint for defeating Arguello over the championship distance, he was the beneficiary of being able to compete over five fewer rounds after arguably getting the better of Duran over 12. This wasn't the sort of one sided boxing lesson the fabled Willie Monroe-Marvin Hagler I is reported to have been, and in fact Alexis displayed some surprising hand speed in this one. He knew he could use his legs as he did over a ten round period, but sustaining that movement for five more rounds would have been problematic.

When at his very best, Vilomar could compete with absolutely anybody in the world. He was credited with an MD win over Arguello right when he was peaking, yet Alexis arguably was more competitive with Fernandez over their first ten rounds together than anybody else who boxed against Vilomar in the six year period covering 15 bouts Fernandez had between 1974 and 1981.

Their rematch was the most lopsided decision loss of Vilomar's career.

 

Duo, love your posts, but if you think Fernandez did anything but take an absolute pasting from Duran from round 1 to the end, I sincerely suggest you review that fight.

That fight was bordering on a DLH-Camacho like beatdown. The only thing Fernandez did was run for his life.

 

:bbbQuality rebuttal.:good

I think Vilomar looked like a waterbug flitting about the ring, but Davis, Jr. (somewhat biased in favor of a fellow cutie) opined that he thought Vilomar was ahead against El Cholo after 12 rounds, in an interview before his own bout with Fernandez.

Certainly, I think Vilomar got credit for doing better than expected. Let me ask you this: if you were to stop Duran-Fernandez after ten, and compare it to Fernandez-Arguello I, would you consider Alexis or Roberto to have been doing better? (Also, if you stop Duran-Fernandez after ten, and compare it to Duran-Edwin Viruet I, who do you think did better against the Panamanian beast, Ed, or Vilomar?)

It has been a long time since I've reviewed Duran-Fernandez from beginning to end (much, much longer than since I've seen Fernandez-Arguello I), so yes, perhaps a comparative review is in order. My point really is that too much is made of Vilomar getting the MD over Alexis, and not enough of Arguello pushing it to an MD on Vilomar's adopted NYC turf. It was no boxing lesson, but an abbreviated competition.

 

Well, it diminishes your point because you are only looking at that particular fight at that particular moment and the way it happened, you are not (really) looking at the scenario I mentioned. (I believe Duran lost not because of who De Jesus was, but because of the importance of the fight) The possibility of Arguello smoking Fernandez (while defending his title) in the rematch are really high. What if Arguello had beaten him the way he beat Ganigan or Busceme for example.... Would you still thinking that he would have struggled against all movers?????? I THINK NOT

I think the problem is that you (and others) usually look at this fight as evidence that Arguello struggles with movers, and nothing else... you are not even looking (considering) other fights similar to this one, and the fact that this was a non-title fight, and that the importance of the fight might have to do a lot with the result, and that's why I mentioned the Duran Vs De Jesus fight.... and this is actually my point.... I am not saying with this that Arguello had no problems with "movers"... NO, I am not saying that, after all most boxers do, and that includes Duran..., but I think you and many others aren't analysing the fight and/or Arguello's (motivation) real problems with these type of fights...10 round fights that is....

Let me explain what I mean... Arguello had other ten round fights while he was a champion, and he did struggle as well, at least in two more occassions that I remember, and he did it big time...

1- Arguello vs Jose Torres: Arguello barely beat him (SD).... many considered this fight a draw, others think that could have gone either way.... Was Torres a great boxer??? Was he a great mover??? The answer is NO, but Torres decked Arguello once in that fight...

2- Arguello vs Jose Luis RamirezSouthpaw) Exactly as above...

So, why did Arguello struggle with these two boxers if they weren't great movers??? What's the explanation for Arguello struggling... Did Arguello struggle (big time) against the rest of southpaw he faced while defending his title??? The answer is NO... He actually beat them all. Did Arguello struggle against boxers similar to Torres style while defending his title??? The answer again is NO... Jose's brothers was actually better boxer and Arguello smoked him in 3,...however, that fight was for the title.

So, if you want to make the fight Vs Fernandez relevant, then go ahead..., but how to explain the rest of the fights where Arguello faced movers and beat them all... and not only that, but he beat them all convincingly....

Marcel lost a ten round fight against Leonel Hernandez just a couple of years before Hernadez faced Arguello, and Alexis beat the crap out of Hernadez in 8 rounds, and on top of that Hernandez was a mover with great footwork and head movement.... How can we explain that????????????

Arguello defeated Busceme, good mover...with a good jab, good footwork, good boxing skilss and on top of that southpaw.... How can we explain that?????????????????

What I am trying to say is that there is more to a fight than just the style, and is the fact that Arguello din't approach Fernandez, Torres and Ramirez the way he should have done it... Why am I saying this????? Because I believe that Arguello would have beaten them convincingly if his title had been on the line....Didn't he do that (never lost) in three different divissions???

Now, let me ask you this... after Arguello beat Olivares at 126 and he became a champion for the first time,...from that moment up to the time he defeated Ganigan at 135.... where is the evidence that you have that can really prove that Arguello struggles big time against movers???? Evidence that can prove that he would fail if he had faced Marcel, for example at 130, while Arguello was in his prime.....

 

Even I knew it and have it on dvd as well.

 

Olivares, Castillo and Fernandez are the main fights, plus JLR who fought much more conservatively than usual.He blatantly struggled with footspeed against MAncini and Pryor when past his own physical peak, but that's slightly different to the kind of mover a Fernandez is.

It's all relative though.It's not as if he was a blundering novice as soon as someone used some lateral movement and it was more over the ten round distance he sruggled.Only elite or near elite cutie types are going to be favoured at winning via sticking and moving over 15.

 

Howard Davis was either talking **** to hype up his own fight or scoring on the sole criterion of running (and he would know all about it).

My scorecards for the fights concerned after 10:

Duran-Fernandez: 9-1 Duran with the 10th being a 2 point round for Duran. (Incidentally, I think this is peak Duran here, better than the Duran of DeJesus III. I actually think this is as good as Duran got.)

Arguello-Fernandez I: 4-3-3 Fernandez with round 6 being a 2 point round for Arguelo.

Duran-Viruet I: 5-5 Even. This might be a little biased for Viruet because I was rooting for him. Duran looked a tad lethargic in this one.

Wasn't a boxing lesson, I had it even in fact, with Alexis about to come on, but still, it was indicative of Alexis's trouble with movement, unquestionably for mine.

 

Depends how it happened. If he struggled for a few rounds and then Ko'ed him, which is the likely scenario, my point would remain and be vindicated. In any case, why suppose things when we can look at the evidence at hand? More on this below.

You would be making a decent point if this was the only instance we had of Arguello's struggles. Lest we forget this discussion was laucnhed off the back of his struggles with Marcel. Mante also mentioned some other fights which Arguello struggled in where fighters took a conservative approach and decided to box with him. Let's not pretend that the Fernandez fight was an isolated incident.

Even if we do put it all down to motivation in non-title fights, which imo is a bit of a cop out, there's still examples within championship fights where alexis had his struggles, eg.g Marcel, a past his best Olivares, Castillo, even Chacon he struggled with somewhat. Mante also mentioned some other fights where Arguello was past his best but struggled with movement. We won't go into those. I think there's enough evidence to make my point without them.

Probably the same way we explain all fights in Venezuela. You better knock the other guy out if you hope to escape with a draw. Just see the Valentine's Day Massacre-esque job he did on Antonio Gomez and he still only got a MD with tight cards.

By removing the repeated reference to the word 'good' in your sentence.

There are bits of evidence like in the fights suggested above, but the real question is, who are the quality movers he faced to prove otherwise? Did he ever face (and beat) another fighter near as good as Marcel again?

I'll accept that Arguello can beat the likes of Fernandez in a 15 round fight, heck on peak form he'd do it in 10, but against the real upper echelon of movers, he'd be in trouble.

Let me just qualify what I mean by adding this aside - I'd pick Arguello to beat the likes of Hector Camacho and Edwin Viruet. But against the elite, I don't think so ( unless of course they have chin issues, in which case they wouldn't be elite anyway.)

 

Argeullo probably reaches his limit with say the Ken Buchanans, Ismael Lagunas, Flash Elordes of the boxing world. I give him enough credit to say that he could potentially beat that level of mover at 126-135. That's no mean feat.

Don't see it happening against a Pep, Driscoll, Whitaker, B. Leonard or Ross level guy though. Don't think it happens against Marcel either, who is close to these guys if not quite up there.

 

Thinman, you may be thinking why does Duran get a free pass and Arguello doesn't when both have shown some problems with cutie types.

My answer is that Duran proved he could handle them to a greater extent.

He dominated Fernandez, he clearly decisioned Viruet in the rematch, by clearly outpointed Buchanan, he overcame Marcel in a tight contest when removed from his absolute prime (though better than most admit), he dominated Dejesus on multiple occasions, he dominated Villa and Mamby.

There's simply more evidence to back Duran up.

 

I forgot all about the Chacon fight.He looked outright poor at times in that one.

Chacon deserved a rematch imo.

 

SC, I thought you were better than this.

"Let me just qualify what I mean by adding this aside - I'd pick Arguello to beat the likes of Hector Camacho and Edwin Viruet. But against the elite, I don't think so ( unless of course they have chin issues, in which case they wouldn't be elite anyway.)

Now, I can see that you have made up your mind... Keep it to yourself all the BS,... I mean WTF

 

Sure you forgot about that one...

You know why, because Chacon is not a ****ing boxer that qualifies as a mover, like Fernandez or Marcel, or Ali...

So AA is one of the most overrated boxers in history....

Think about it.... he struggled with every single style....

 

No, I have no problems with Duran... he's actually one of my favourites.... you just coudn't handle the bite....that's it....