Could Sergio Martinez be a top 10 contender in 40s or 50s

Martinez is a remarkably adaptable boxer. Look at how he changed and the opportunity he saw against Williams, his change to lead a fight and outjab the jabber Dzinziruk etc. A lot of these Middleweights, good as they were at what they do don't really have that. However, the Middleweight scene now is weak, so no doubt he wouldn't have the same dominance. Circumstances are different, and ignoring the difference in weigh in times he could definitely be a contender.

 

something something ripped something protein something something tabata intervals something

 

I think Fullmer, Tiger and Cerdan in particular would **** him. Basilio (assuming it's not a pre-prime one like the one that struggled with Chuck Davey) should provide too much pressure as well. He got the better of superior boxers to Martinez later on in his prime to suggest he could handle Sergio. It's hard to see Lamotta losing to Martinez, even though Martinez would provide some problems for a duration of the fight. He could beat Graziano on a good day.


I admit I haven't seen Holman Williams, Bert Lytell, Jose Basora, Jack Chase, Steve Belloise, Cocoa Kid or Eddie Booker but I have seen a fair bit of most of the others and I don't see him beating too many of them to be honest, if we take best on best form.

 

I believe it would almost certainly be the other way around. You understandably fail to see the invisible, kind Sweety. You see, the fumes from Sergio's hair product are laced with a special, aspirating kind of *GHB which would absolutely incapacitate their games. I advise you to do your research. The Nevada State Athletic Commission has spoken in favor of banning it but none of the commissions technically have yet and certainly hadn't back then, so, either era is the same. Second verse, same as the first, my brother. Sergio's "punch" hits a little harder than SRR's,... if you know what I mean. :hey


*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-Hydroxybutyric_acid

 

I agree. i love to watch martinez. But he boxes so frantically and would exhaust himself against the guys you cite. Sooner or later those seasoned guys would catch-up and hurt the colorful Martinez...

 

It's remarkable isn't it.
Martinez favourite over Zale ?

 

Zale would definitely get hit up top, his defense just wasn't that sharp and post War he wasn't the guy who beat Holstak and Apostoli.

Remarkable isn't it, that time actually passes and the status of things actually can change?

 

Zale would likely knock him out. What has Martinez done to be compared to Zale, or Cerdan or even Graziano ?

 

First of all, you are judging complete careers against a guy who is still in his prime, who is not a finished work. That is a crippled argument to begin with. However, I will indulge...

What Martinez has not done is lose to a dozen + ham and eggers right off bread lines.

Like Cerdan, he has largely built his record on regional, anonymous opposition, but he did beat a prime contender many thought destined for greatness, while Cerdan beat the shell of a once very good champion.

Graziano was more popular for being popular than for being good, and spent a career beating up frail welterweights, plainly coming in last in this argument.

 

Hmmm **** indead......Fullmer/Cerdan were hardly ****** types, or devastating fighters in the scheme of things. Technically very solid, plenty of pressure and toughness, we've seen Martinez stave off bigger pressuring types and punnish them, albeit technically less solid ones.

Cerdan and Graziano are both arguably less proven at world level than Martinez, Cerdan like Martinez was fighting much of his career in a weaker continent, Graziano was matched carefully and cashed out

Fullmer and Basilio to an extent made their name off a 37/38yo Robinson who looked ragged, didn't have the same legs/stamina/sharpness, I know especially Basilio did more than that but if they met a peak Robinson, how would we talk about them? They'd present a challenge in inside fighting for Martinez though

Tiger is certainly the best of your rapists, but could be outboxed at times by stylists. Still I think he's the best bet and Martinez may pay for his low hands against Tiger

Lamotta, well he has a few losses to the likes of Marshall (who didn't rate him), Villemain, Zivic, Dauthuille so Martinez certainly wouldn't be the worst man to beat him. I think it would be a close fight and hesitate to pick a winner

Archie Moore certainly doesn't appear to be at his best at MW and may have been pretty beatable. Charles....we don't know how raw he was but I'd still pick him here

I don't think anyone picked him over Robo but beating Zale and Graziano isn't a massive leap, those men didn't face the best of their era (especially Graziano)

Martinez has advantages with his footwork, movement, speed, outfighting over Zale

Cerdan and Graziano are both arguably less proven at world level than Martinez, Cerdan like Martinez was fighting much of his career in a weaker continent, Graziano was matched carefully and cashed out

 

Yes, he could certainly contend, and if he's in Turpin's shoes against the version of Robinson that fought in London that night, he might be able to score the massive upset. Against better versions of SRR...Not so much.

But Martinez could probably crack the ratings at some point were he fighting in the 40's, and hold his own against most of the contenders in that era.

 

Who was the prime contender many thought destined for greatness ?

Martinez has spent much of his career beating guys who weigh around 150 too, welters and light-middles.

I don't think the welters that Graziano beat were especially "frail".
Graziano was popular because he beat decent fighters like Billy Arnold, Harold Green and a great one in Tony Zale in wild brawls. He also beat TOP welters like Servo and Cochrane.
His resume isn't deep but if those guys were fighting Martinez or Pavlik on HBO in 2011 they'd be hailed as elite current stars.

 

The argument is weak.
Cerdan was "fighting much of his career in a weaker continent"
and
Graziano was "matched carefully and cashed out"
are true statements RELATIVE TO THEIR OWN ERAS, but in comparing them to modern groomed contenders/champions they were relatively proven.

Almost all fighters are matched carefully nowadays, sometimes deep into their "multi-defence title runs" and "multi-weight title careers", that's the norm nowadays. Fighters getting hailed as near-ATGs, and current p4p elite, with far thinner resumes than Graziano or Cerdan.
The standards have dropped.
Nowadays they fight 30 nobodies, then 3 or four good ones and they are put on some sort of pedestal. This thread being a good example.

 

Martinez wasn't matched so carefully, fighting Margarito in his 18th fight, fighting the better south americans/Mexicans, winning his national title, commonwealth/british champions, Bunema was fresh off beating Karmazin, Cintron was an ex champ. Not the best fighters ever but not necessarily an easy path to the top. Then Williams/Pavlik were top P4Pers with Dzinderuk being a top 154lb champ

Graziano is a perfect example of a fighter doing what you're accusing modern fighters of doing 'fighting 30 nobodies, washed up fighters and fighting for the title without facing any top 10 MWs'. What top MWs did he face Zale aside?

Cerdan for the most part didn't even face the best Euro's before triumphing over a 34yo Holman, Abrams and Zale, without facing any other top10ers.

Overall both Cerdan and Graziano have thin resumes in terms of top10 opponents, neither are more proven than Martinez is currently is from 147-160

 

Martinez would have been taxed to the limit or just roughed up all to hell by Gene Fullmer alone...that would have been enough..just Fullmer, for him to hop into the first time machine to safely whisk him back to this mediocre age where he's far more successful. He's a good fighter, but after meeting Fullmer, win or lose, he wouldn't be the heart throb anymore for so many homos in the Lounge and General forums.