For Those Who Love Alexis Arguello

Dead serious no joke pea. I don't rate Arguello or Monzon. Watched Arguello on a few occasions and genuinely didn't excite me as a fighter. Anyway, I will leave this thread. I don't rate a lot of the older fighters, so maybe it is personal bias coming into play. I really don't think either of these guys are that good though, and think they are very much over rated.

 

How do you explain him going toe to toe with a dynamic, speedy volume power puncher like Pryor. When in fact Pryor will dismantle all lightweights and jr welters we have today.

 

How is that "in fact"? How is that factual in anyway? Look, ignore what I said, I will go rewatch his stuff again. The first times I watched him fight I was far from impressed. Will have a look again, as I may have been guilty of judging to quickly.

 

Older fighters? They fought in the 70's and 80's, not the 20's and 30's, which I could understand. Do you not rate Ali, Leonard, Hagler, etc either?

His technique was textbook perfect. Why do you think a guy like JMM is very effective in today's game? Textbook perfection. Variety of pin point accurate punches. JMM was slightly faster, but Arguello is taller with the better reach and MUCH better power. He was in no way, shape, or form technically inferior. Even someone like Amsterdam will tell you that about Arguello and especially Monzon.

Monzon was not considered exciting in his day either, but was very effective. His size and especially reach worked for his style, and his demeanor and toughness worked for his persona. He had a very long reach, one that he would time perfectly, just like Arguello, with a good jab, measuring the distance prior to following up with a straight right who's reach you couldn't escape. He was very difficult to hit clean with his reach and height, and was very difficult to avoid with his punches with the reach as well. He timed things perfectly. You have to analyze someone like Monzon over more than a few fights to get his style, you can't just watch hoping to be blown away.

I don't understand how you can say someone was technically sound and top notch, and then say he wouldn't last in today's game because of a lack of refined technique, that's an immediate contradiction.

 

Hey I agree he was very methodical and looks slow...Its just when he fights a jackrabbit of an opponent like Mancini he knocks them out..It could be a style thing.

In general though some of these older fighters are overrated for one reason or another. Monzon I agree and Salvador Sanchez as well. But Alexis and guys like Duran..they're the real deal

 

I watched him vs Ramirez, Castillo and Chacon(from memory).... Especially vs Castillo and Ramirez I was far from impressed. He just seemed to circle slowly, and throw the jab out. Fundamentally he was very solid, but overall I didn't think he did anything that well. He didn't utilise great head movement, i didn't see great torque of his punches, and actually saw a lack of hooks and body punching during his fights. His jab seemed very easy to counter due to the consistency and lack of speed. A guy like KT at 140 IMo would have knocked him to next week, just like Mayweather would have absolutely boxed the ears off him.

 

MSTR- what is Diaz going to offer that Arguello can't handle? You think that Arguello was predictable, but I think Diaz is pretty predictable to be honest. Yes he throws MANY combinations but thats all he throws sometimes. He seems to throw combos all at once in bunches and then won't do anything for 10 seconds except rest. I think this is a key to dismantling him to be honest. Arguello could keep his distance with his excellent range (and also cover up if needed) on Diaz's combos then its a perfect time to unload his excellent uppercuts because Diaz tends to end up on the inside or trying to clinch after he blows his load. In any case scenario Arguello ends up keeping his distance with Diaz missing or he could time out his fluid uppercuts at the end of Diaz's combo throwing. Just my .2 cents.......

 

I said older fighters because i feel many are over rated. Leonard, Hearns, Haggler I rate very highly. It depends on the fighter obviously. In general though I don't share your thoughts regarding many of them. He is technically sound, but IMO you need to be a "special" fighter to be the best. I don't see anything that he does particularly better then most top level fighters. Certainly nothing IMO that would let him compete with the elite. No great speed, no evasive defense, not unorthadox in his offensive, or even with a very large ofensive arsenal. Only above average power.

 

They thought the same in Monzon's day, which is why he never was a fan favorite, yet continued to beat the best from all continents.

Arguello had average speed, not bad though if you've seen him in his prime. His timing made up for it, his ability to put the punch in the right place at the right time, and his ability to finish an opponent when hurt. With lack of speed comes great timing in a great fighter, and with Arguello's punching power, timing is crucial.

 

I think Arguello would very much struggle to keep Diaz off. Diaz is much more effective on the inside, and a FAR better combination puncher. Diaz with his high guard I blieve could effectively get inside on Arguello without to much hastle, as Arguello wasn't particularly quick on his feet.

 

Arguello is one of the best fighters to watch from a technical standpoint. Everything was done to textbook perfection and he had brutal effectiveness to go along with it. Great fighter, great warrior, but an even better man...

 

MSTR, I don't think we can actually convince you otherwise with words until you see more of them. So try to analyze their styles against other good fighters to see what makes them effective, instead of trying to be impressed. I had the same problem watching Monzon early, though never Arguello.