Felix Trinidad/Pipino Cuevas: Whose Welterweight Reign Do You Find More Impressive?

Tito, a good puncher, had the longer reign. However, when Pipino ruled, the mention of his name struck fear in the hearts of men. 11 KO's and a mess of broken bones can attest can attest to that truth. Which is why Cuevas is my pick for this honor.

 

Tito actually had the balls to go out and try to unify the title, and ultimately did so, against a future HOFer to boot (albeit on a debatable decision). That win also earned him status as the lineal champ, something Cuevas never was. He also made history(sorta) by being the first fighter ever to dominate the ATG Whitaker - granted an old Whitaker, but still probably a more notable feat than any single feat by Cuevas.

Tito's reign was clearly more impressive in my book.

 

Cuevas fought more good solid fighters, most of Tito's were trash or washed up, and no Yory boy campas was never good.

On the other hand like My2 says, Tito unified against a better fighter than any of Pipino's wins, and has more notable names like Camacho and Pea.Both were well past their best though.

I think Tito was the better fighter, but would lean towards Cuevas when just talking about reign.

 

In essence we're looking at the quality of the wins, length of the reign and the performances. Titos competition far exceeds Cuevas's, Delahoya/Whitaker/Carr/Camacho/Campas certainly overshadow Cuevas's resume of wins even if ODLH is removed

 

:thumbsup

 

Pongsaklek Wonjongkam

 

I think Cuevas was more impressive. Weston and Shields. Espada, Gray,Weston Shields. Interesting thing is that Hearns fought all those guys also. But Cuevas fought them when they were more prime, although Hearns defended against Randy Shields.

 

Now I did.

Somehow I overlooked the public poll until a few seconds ago.

 

Yeah, But there were some mediocrities on Cuevas' ledger, too. Scott Clark did nothing to deserve his title shot. Backus was done. Tsujimoto and Campanino were decent, but nothing special.Plus there really wasn't that much need for Cuevas to fight Espada for a third time.

Given all that, I think Trinidad gets the edge for me, by virtue of quantity and better quality opponents at the very top level that were fought and defeated.

 

Nah, Campas was worse than most of Cuevas' better challengers and old runner camacho, blocker and Carr were no more than even.Old pea wouldn't beat Weston or Espada either imo.

I thnk the DLH win and your outlook on it is key for Tito's welter period in general.

 

the winner and still champ by a mile Jose Pipino Cuevas!!!!!!!!!!

 

Call me biased, cause I'm not the biggest Tito fan.

But I like Cuevas in this. I feel his destructions over guys like Espadas, Backus, Weston and Sheilds, the way in which he destroyed them was brilliant and these were no bums.

Trinidad did beat Whittaker and De La Hoya, which unified the division.

But I just like the way Cuevas beat the better guys and really did destroy the better guys.

 

I dont think Trinidads is a great reign by any means but Cuevas's always struck me as particularly weak. To be honest outside of the Cuevas/Hearns fights I havent seen much of Cuevas's opponents, they dont seem to have any special wins though and Titos certainly have more pedigree. Now in terms of how they looked against Cuevas they robably looked better but I think a boxer can look better then they are without great skills against Cuevas's limited skills. Whitaker was a shell by that stage, I still think hes better than Espada all the same

The real fight in the division was Palomino-Cuevas, dont know why that didnt happen, but I suppose it made Leonard-Hearns the massive event it wa