Pound for pound year end number one; 1990 - Julio Cesar Chavez 1991 - Julio Cesar Chavez 1992 - Julio Cesar Chavez 1993 - Pernell Whittaker 1994 - Pernell Whittaker 1995 - Pernell Whittaker 1996 - Roy Jones Jr 1997 - Oscar De La Hoya 1998 - Oscar De La Hoya 1999 - Roy Jones Jr. Toney snuck in there on some lists towards the end of 1994 very briefly before getting thrashed by Roy Jones. Who do you think was the fighter of the 90's? This content is protected
If you're confining it purely to what each man achieved between 1990 and 1999, then I think it's comfortably Jones. More of his peak performances and / or best wins fall between those parameters and he was dominating his opponents just as comprehensively right at the end of the decade as he had been at the beginning. Whitaker is, for me, the greatest fighter to appear in the list above, however his best work straddles two decades (Uncle Roger, Haugen and Ramirez all beaten before 1990) and his real prime years probably ended about half way through the decade, with his win against Vasquez in 1995. Any time after that, he was clearly losing a step and not the same force he'd previously been. Throughout 1996 and 1997 it was clear he was on the slide, and by the end of the decade he was being decisively beaten by an elite Welter in Trinidad (albeit Pea was a lot more competitive for about seven rounds than people seem to remember / give him credit for). Whitaker possibly the greatest fighter to have fought in the nineties (at a high level with considerable success, I mean), but Jones definitely the fighter of the nineties, if that makes sense. I know we have the benefit of hindsight, and I know money talks all languages - but realistically De la Hoya should never have topped those lists at any time.
I think it would have been hard to put Jones as number coming off the Montell Griffin disqualification. I think he really shouldn't have been ranked no. 1 at that time. I'm not sure who should have been ranked no. 1 at that point, you could put an asterix next to that period to say that it was a bit of a weak period in the decade in terms of having a pound for pound number one.
I wasn't even alive at the time, but from just having knowledge of the era, that looks pretty spot on to me. Chris' question is interesting. Believe it or not, I'd have Pacquiao as the greatest man to fight in the 90s, then Floyd, then Holyfield, then B-Hop and Jones are interchangeable on my list somewhere thereafter. That said, what Jones achieved in the 90s is insane. I think Holy is slightly greater on the whole, but he has too many losses to be called fighter of the decade. Beating Bowe and Tyson is great, but beating Toney and Hopkins is greater.
I think given the nature of the loss you could justify keeping Jones at number one despite the Griffin defeat, but I think the bigger point is that he'd already wiped Griffin out spectacularly by the end of 1997 and so should really have still been top dog by the year's end. I think in 1997, De la Hoya still hadn't really had any big and / or dominant wins against genuinely top-level fighters, or at least any in their primes. The Chavez and Whitaker wins looked outstanding on paper, but neither really fitted those parameters. I think in 1997 De la Hoya's best wins were still to come (Quartey and Vargas in particular), but of course in between those wins were a couple of defeats which barred him from being pound for pound king anyway. I just don't think there was ever a time when De la Hoya deserved top spot, despite his glistening record and longevity.
Holyfield is an under rated pick imo, it depends if you excuse his losses to Lewis and Bowe by the fact he has naturally a smaller guy. I guess it's hard to be the fighter of the decade putting in spirited performances in losing efforts (at least against Bowe). I don't think he was 100% for the Moorer fight.
