Better Resume - Whitaker or Cesar Chavez?

The reason why I used Gomez as an example because while some feel Chavez is the best 140lbs ever most believe that Gomez was the best 122lbs ever and he only weighted 4 more pounds against Sanchez. And while you mentioned Gomez never impressed at feather the same can be said about Chavez at welter.

 

On wins only over world class (at least top five for the weight at the time) oppostion: (The number being for the quality of the win (easy/struggle) and quality of opponent out of ten)

Chavez beat: a prime Mario Martinez (7); A solid Castillo (6); A young Black Mamba (7); a peaking Lockbridge (6); prime Laporte (6); prime Rosario (9); aged Ramirez (6); peak Mayweather (8); prime Taylor (8); slightly over the top Camacho (7); and a prime Randall (7).

Whitaker beat: a near peak Mayweather (6); a near peak Haughan (7); an aged Ramirez (7); a peak Pendleton (8); a peak but light Nelson (8); peak Nazario (6); a past his best and small Paez (6); a near peak McGirt (7); an injured but near peak McGirt (8); a strong, bigger peak Vazquez (7).

I make that 77 points to Chavez; 70 to Whitaker. Both also beat their fair show of lower rated contenders, so overall I reckon the slight edge goes to Chavez.

 

Chavez should not get an 8 for beating Roger Mayweather at 140. He struggled in that fight, even though he was clearly ahead at the time they stopped it.

It's funny that you include the Randall win for Chavez and score it a 7, where he looked very ordinary AND robbed Frankie, but don't include Chavez-Whitaker, which was also a robbery, and where Whitaker worked him. Could also include the first Ramirez fight if we're talking robberies. And if one were so inclined, even the DLH fight for Whitaker, and then of course, it becomes a landslide for Pea.

 

Castillo was shot when he fought Chavez.

 

Notice in just about every Chavez scored opponent its "prime" and "peak". Vice versa for Whitaker with "near peak" being used along with "injured" "aged", etc. Biased beyond belief.

 

bigger, stronger and robbed. that was a ****ing travesty.

 

Not to mention, Mario Martinez on the same level as McGirt? Vasquez just a 7?

 

Seamus, you'll like this one, though i'ts probably more fitting in the scorecard thread:

An Australian Boxing Magazine called 'The Fist' scored Whitaker-Vasquez 117-108 for Whitaker.

 

Ahhhhh, i still have one or five "Fist's" around

 

as the great fred blasie said, "that makes me all double twisted up inside."

it really wasn't even that close of a fight. Vasquez controlled the tempo, landed the harder shots and exhibited the greater ring generalship.

 

You do realize you're pretty much the only one who thinks that, right?

Greater ring generalship? Given the size, strength, and power difference between the two men, I'd say Vasquez should've been able to bully Whitaker around pretty handily had he actually used better ring generalship. The fact that a majority of the fight was fought in the middle of the ring in more of a boxing sense shows that Whitaker implied his style very well.

 

The near peak comments for Haugen and Mayweather in particular are pretty suss.

When exactly was Haugen's peak then? He should have been undefeated when he faced Whitaker with quite a title reign.

And Mayweather's? He carried his suspect chin all through his career, but he had already beaten the likes of Serrano, Martinez and Fuentes before he faced Whitaker. He would not lose another fight for a couple of years after the Whitaker fight, taking on the likes of Pazienza, Brazier, Gonzalez and Arredondo.

 

:good

It's not a bad the ole' Fist. It was quite an Australasian magazine really, used to give quite a bit of time to our neighbouring asian fighters which was good.

 

your avatar should disqualify you.

that fight was a full-on, pre-ordained coronation of Whitaker, trying to market him as some sort of Sugar Ray Robinson GOAT. It was utter bull**** and had it been fought in a civilized country that understands boxing, Vasquez would have walked away the victor. Even Gil Clancy was shaking his head at this one, only to be corrected by "the brass" to toe the line.

 

Gil Clancy ended up having Whitaker ahead even WITHOUT the two point deductions Seamus. Unless of course you're claiming that he was told to toe the line midway through the fight...

By the way, are you on camera in the 7th row? Maybe I can spot you out :good