I'm asking this in terms of legacy. Who has the more impressive resume? Who had the more complete set of skills? I feel longevity, overcoming adversity, as well as titles acquired should factor in to all of your decisions. I feel this is a good question to ask. Ricardo Lopez is a bit of a mystery on here in Eastside Boxing. One person will rank him among the top 60 in their respective all-time great lists, whereas others will not even give him so much as a mention. Those same people feel he dominated a weak division, and failed to assert himself as a true all-time great by not, for whatever reason, moving up and fighting the Carbajal's and Gonzalez's of the world. Others, those who credit Lopez as being among the very best of the last 50 years, concentrate on the man's ability, and in the ring, it has to be said the man was nothing short of spellbinding. Very rarely was prime Lopez ever tested. On the other hand, we have the great Marco Antonio Barrera. I always seperate the mans career into three different parts. You have the Super Bantamweight Barrera, who saw off contender after contender with relative ease, beating Mckinney along the way, before being beaten twice, almost mysteriously, by Junior Jones. Barrera's second career saw him enter his peak, in my estimation, showing off a more impressive range of skills in decimating good fighters in Jesus Salud, Enrique Sanchez, before turning in equally great performances against undefeated P4P rated opposition in Erik Morales and Naseem Hamed, establishing himself as the best Featherweight of the decade. His third and final reign as a top level fighter saw him recover from a crushing defeat at the hands of the best fighter in the world currently today, by seeing off the likes of Paulie Ayala, Rocky Jaurez, before yet again beating his arch nemesis, Erik Morales. What do I think? I think that in terms of ability and craftsmanship, the argument can be made that Lopez was a more efficient fighter during their respective peaks. However, all things considered, I see no reason to give Lopez the benefit of the doubt considering Barrera fought better opposition, beat more world champions, and spanned more weight divisions thus winning more world titles. A lot can be said for an undefeated fighter like Lopez, but what's equally impressive is being able to come back from career crushing defeats. Barrera did this on two separate occasions during a long 20+ year career as a top level fighter. Opinions of the Classic?
Great post! If you look at my profile both these guys are my top 10 favorite fighters. I agree that Barerra has the better resume despite not having the record and title defenses that Finito had. I just think in a HTH matchup Lopez would take a very close decision.
Yep i agree if you are basing it on who they fought and who they beat i cannot formulate an argument for having lopez over barrera, marco's resume beats him hands down. I do think lopez was a better more skilled operator though, not by enough of a distance for me to rank him above barrera all time i think.
Lopez resume consists of a lot of mediocre converted thai fighters that tried boxing. There isnt a whole lot of depth to his resume like Barrera. Thats not his fault but the way it is. His struggles with Rosendo Alvarez who was a real strong raw fighter suggests maybe he would not have the decorated record he has, if he fought more credible opponents. Lopez simply never got to prove how good he could really be, and for that I rank Barrera higher.
I also think that Lopez might just edge it in the p4p h2h comparison, but it's debatable given Barrera's best performances and quality of opposition, so i've got no problems with people arguing the other way.
Finito is a fighter I love to watch. I have his career set on dvd and he always boxed beautifully. The absolute definition of a "textbook" fighter. Even though I prefer him and think he looked superior to Barrera at his best, I would struggle to justify ranking him higher if we have to consider resume and acheivements. Barrera's competition is on an entirely different level and he was able to have notable success in 3 weight classes. He also showed great versatility. Lopez showed a real warriors heart against Alvarez (especially in the rematch) so he could fight as well as box. The fact MAB did it against better fighters means I have to give him the edge - although H2H I favour Lopez. If Finito had beaten Carbajal and Chiquita then I'd feel comfortable ranking him higher. Both guys would be in my top 5 Mexican fighters ever, so I rate both very highly.
Alvarez was an animal. The could have matched those two ten times and it would have always made a real grueling fight. Only problem was Alvarez was a nut case that fouled everyone and couldnt stay in top shape.
Lopez might have a slight edge in skills but he simply doesnt have the resume to be ranked higher than MAB.
Boxing rankings are about preferance and situations for the main part, Barrera kicks his ass in terms of resume and longevity, Lopez has the perfect record against lesser opponents and beautiful dominance
