Best bantamweight: 1990-2010

You mean to say he's a more accomplished fighter (in terms of the opposition he faced), not necessarily a better one. The two are not directly correlated, regardless of what seems to be the consensus on this forum. Different eras lead to different opportunities for different fighters, people need to realize this above all. If the comparison can be legitimately made (though there are extenuating circumstances where it can't, such as with fighters lacking film, longevity or any quality opponents to compare), I believe a judgement between two fighters can be done based on their ability and skill-set. In that sense, I feel Canizales is a league or two above Marquez.

 

i don't feel he was shot to pieces. he was still dangerous, was champion, and had come off that great win over singwangcha

he looked shot in the rematch, though. a definite decline after the first fight beating from veeraphol.

tatsuyoshi and seabrooks definitely had the toughness to bring the best out of veeraphol and canizales, plus the limitations to help veeraphol and canizales show off their impressive skills

mayweather got a lot of credit beating gatti - who like tatsuyoshi had eye problems and a battered look about him - and i feel sahaprom's mastery was akin to floyd's. a masterclass.

 

Not much love for Marquez on here!

Anyway, what I'm driving at is the daunting task he faced particularly in the Austin and Vazquez fights, and how this helped bring out some of the best offensive boxing of Marquez's career. How he was put in a crisis and really showed something, in victory and in defeat.

I'm not sure Canizales was past it in the Wilfredo Vazquez fight. He wasn't even 30 years old, was he? Canizales was timid throughout, and didn't put up a big stand until about round 8 or 9. Orlando was under some early pressure, and he didn't exactly respond with greatness. Not the way Marquez responded in some of his heated rivalries.

 

He was about 30-31...not past it but probably starting to fade..and perhaps he was not one of those fighters who was made for weight jumping. When you consider he was a ranked contender by 21 and he started his title reign at 22, its not unreasonable to assume he could have been starting to get a bit shopworn..as longevity is different for everyone.
For me by Jones there was little doubt he wasnt at his best anymore.

He apparently looked very average in his fight preceding that...defensively I thought he had lost a step by the Bohol fight..but its hard the gauge that considering Rolando was well past it by then.

I feel Marquez gets a little overrated if anything rumour...because as I said of the Gatti factor.

He is quite possibly one of the hardest punchers ever at the weight...but apart from that Orlando has him in every other department IMO..If you think he doesnt I just cant see it sorry.

 

skills wise, rafa and tapia a way up there...rafael marquez could have been top 5 ATG at 118 had he stayed there for quite sometime...

 

Nah....I doubt he would have been able to face all of his rivals for a start, guys like Hasagawa and Sahaprom were to comfortable where they are..Plus Veeraphol would have beaten him..Not to mention the fact I really I dont know how long he could have comfortably made the weight.

Comparing Tapia and Marquez for skills is like comparing with a BMW with a Corrolla.

Bantamweight is a division with a long history, and a lot of exceptional fighters have laced them up there...Rafa sits well below the top echelon of the division.

 

Rafael Marquez is one of the hardest & most accurate punchers I've seen at bantam. It took a freakishly tough, strong super bantam to beat him (Vazquez). The injuries he inflicted on Vazquez would have stopped just about anyone else...To beat such a massive, hard hitting, skilled southpaw like Austin as well impresses me. Rafael's skills are excellent.

Tapia was definitely more versatile, more speed and movement, though not necessarily better. Shame JT didn't get the decision in the 2nd Ayala fight.

Veeraphol's only drawback is the useless defences he had home in Thailand. Some real mismatches. But when he risked his title in Japan he was certainly made to work, and showed his best vs some tough cookies.

Maybe Canizales did peak early. He was definitely past it by the Junior Jones fight.

 

Rafa had a solid skills, did all the fundamental things very well.

But I found him to be a bit of a lunger...stance often to wide and he was tad lacking in imagination, as the first Too Sharp and Chapo Vargas fight showed.
What he did do he did very well, coupled with his amazing power and physical size for the weight he was a hard man to contend with. Offensively he was extremely good at the weight and he was proficient defensively when he needed to be.
But I dont put him in that top echelon when it comes to skills at the weight..Olivares, Sahaprom, Rose, Canizales, Chandler, Pintor, Konadu, Jofre, Hasagawa, Fenech, Medal, Davila, Lora, are just some I would say trump him for skills at bantam.

Not on par with someone as dynamic, versatile and well schooled as Tapia.

 

He lunged a bit v Austin - a very tall, very tricky southpaw!

I think Marquez would have beaten Tapia. Tapia had that speed coming up from super fly, and amdittedly was very agile, very quick, very fast thinking. Unlucky as well, perhaps in both Ayala fights. If not the 1st, cetainly the 2nd.

Tapia was great v Ayala. Produced terrific work under pressure.

For great single wins, Marquez v Austin, Hasegawa v Veeraphol (1 and 2) impress the most.

For best virtuoso performance v Someone Good, Veeraphol v Tatsuyoshi 1 & 2 (Canizales-Seabrooks not too far behind).

I think often one fight can say prove a lot more than many a routine title defense. Obviously as someone's mentioned, economic factors have to be taken into account - Canizales big at home, routine defense = major event in Texas.

My ultimate take on Canizales - some terrific performances earlier in his title reign, a W over Bones Adams that looks better now, whereas the later fights never really lived up, ending up in anticlimax (disappointing loss to W Vazquez) and comprehensive defeat (J Jones).

 

He lunged a lot against Chapo and Toosharp.and a little against Mabuza..He had a tendecy to do it with his jab, thats why Vasquez made him pay so much with counter rights.

I dont think its unreasonable to say Marquez can beat Tapia at 118...given the trouble Tapia had with the pretty stock, standard Ayala the first time around.
But more often then not Ive got my money on Tapia in a series...its a good fight.

 

My vote goes to Tapia. The drugs ****ed up what still was a cemented ATG carrer. He was a complete fighter and had the durability to match the skills. Canizales might have had the most dynamic rise to the top and perhaps the most skilled of the bantams but his carrer seemed to burn out too fast. I know he had the most title defenses but I thought his prime would last more than 3 or so years. Marquez had a fine championship reign and we have seen what he is capable of. Those are the clear cut top 3 (resmue and skill both factored in).

1. Tapia
2. Canizales
3. Marquez

 

I love this thread you don't ever hear many of these names and this is a boxing forum!

[yt]K2Qq7yyBoCg[/yt]

[yt]Kq_5ySy8dxI[/yt]

These might be the 2 best since Zarate. So underrated and overlooked.

 

Chuck this guy into the mix aswell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpAjfnPNM0o

 

yeah that is an utter masterclass by Veeraphol over a tough champ, in front of probably 27,000 japanese fans. that is just perfect boxing, in my opinion. is the above fight the rematch or the 1st fight? both are on youtube.

i do like tapia and canizales. BUT tapia didn't have that many bantamweight title fights. and for such a boxing master, orlando did not show wilfredo vazquez and junior jones too much!

 

veeraphol has a shot on being in the HOF but he has to wait..chang and moon must be inducted first