Did Ramirez dump the Mancini fight ?

If he didn't, though, and it went deep - surely you can see how Mancini's style might wear Rosario down?

...and who ever blew Mancini out early?? Or came even close?

 

Boza better than Mancini? Highly debatable. Certainly not at Lightweight. Boza didn't have much left when he fought Ramirez.

Mancini - Ramirez was styles. Ramirez was painfully slow of foot and Mancini was always moving forward. Mancini made Ramirez back up. End of fight.

 

:good

Nothing fishy in the least.

 

Ramirez was never any better than Mancini really.Both were good fighters.Neither were ahead of the pack in their era and could beat and lose to various other lightweights of that decade.

Both gave great performances against Arguello.Both benefited from good management and protection...neither ever had problems being frozen out of things and Ramirez got more chances than he really deserved imo.

 

btw Boza Edwards was past it by the time he fought Ramirez.Hardly a notable win.

 

Well, let's see ... he beat Jose Luis Ramirez for starters. atsch Mancini won easily over 12.

And there was Bobby Chacon ... who was coming off his Fight of the Year win over Boza Edwards. Mancini stopped Chacon easily.

He fought competitively against Arguello. Mancini was leading after 10 rounds (Ramirez wasn't leading after 10 against Arguello). But Mancini faded at the end. (He was only 20, after all.)

He fought competitively with Camacho, Ramirez didn't.

I don't see your argument at all.

Mancini was a top fighter for a brief time while Ramirez was a top fighter for a much longer period. But, head to head, when they fought Mancini beat him.

If Ramirez fought Mancini in 1989 instead of 1981, he probably wipes the floor with Mancini. (Then again, maybe he doesn't.) He just made the mistake of fighting Mancini while he was beginning to peak. That's all.

I think Ramirez had better wins and a better career overall. Definitely. Sometimes, it's all about when you fight a guy.

 

This, thank you. Beat me to it.

Besides, as Lora noted, Boza was a total shell by the time he fought Ramirez. He barely got by Ali Karim Muhammad en route to that fight, getting knocked down twice int he first round and having to squeak by on a decision.

At least I think that was the one right before it. The point being, anyway, he was done by 1987.

 

:think I don't think I've ever seen Mancini treated like a C+ nobody. (just as I've never heard anyone claim he was some kind of top 5 lightweight ATG or anything)

Kind of alarming, he always seemed like the kind of guy where everybody is on the same page as far as rating him. Short-primed world class guy with a style that was built to be effective for a while but not to last, by no means flawless but able to elevate himself above run-of-the-mill pressure fighters and distinguish himself with a bit of hardware that he probably, at minimum, would've acquired in any era. A guy that maybe wasn't as talented as he was famous - especially in his region or among his demographic - but also wasn't a phony or smoke & mirrors by any stretch. Kind of a better little Bobby Czyz. :conf

What is the agenda here?

 

Ramirez regardless of how he performed that night is probably Ray's best win. I think Ray matched him in strength and his work rate was too much for Ramirez. Boza was pretty much shot when he lost to Ramirez, so no surprise there, and Rosario was dominating Ramirez, dropping him twice before getting caught and hurt, so maybe Ramirez just wasn't as great as some believe and the Mancini fight not really that much of an aberration.

 

Yes.

 

Great point. Mancini was guided smartly by Dave Wolf. He beat weak competition to win and defend the WBA title. And Ramirez was a favorite son of the Mexican based WBC.

 

I'd agree that it really is no aberration but not with the implied conclusion drawn from that (or, inversely, causal belief supporting that) about Mancini and Ramirez being of significantly lesser quality than Boza and Rosario. I think all swam in more or less the same pool, give or take a little depth variance one end to another.

 

Rosario probably had the clear edge in talent compared to the other three, but he rarely was able to put all his tools together and fell in love with his power so quickly.

One of the most disappointing fighters of the 80s.

 

Mancini was a world class fighter.

There is no such thing as a world champion fighter who WASN'T managed smartly and protected. It took Arguello going into the championship rounds to wear down Ray to a stoppage the same with Bramble. Ray in his prime was the type of fighter you protected your fighters from, he had power, speed, stamina, chin and heart maybe one of the physically strongest fighters of his time. He fought like a swarmer ala Frazier and like Frazier had a sledgehammer left hook that could put your lights out.

A fight with Rosario would have been interesting because Rosario could fight and hit like a mack truck. If Rosario doesn't stop Mancini early he gets stopped late rounds Mancini wasn't as precise or as mean as a Chavez but his strength and workrate were second to none and power comparable his style breaks the heart of opponents.

 

Totally agree. Nice post. I also think that a Rosario-Mancini shootout isn't the forgone conclusion in favor of Chapo that many suppose. He didn't like to be crowded or rushed either, just as Ramirez didn't, only more so. If you could do that and hurt him, he was done. Mancini's style fits that game plan to a tee.