Hector Camacho Sr. : Great or close ?

Good shout that I need to think through and maybe hear some more responses on. I am certainly not a Camacho fan and still feel Mancini should have edged a decision in their fight.

But Camacho is along with a handful of fighters who are so close to being great but cannot definitively have it said that they are or are not IMO

 

As far as pure physical ability and skills he may have been better than Leonard, Hagler, or Hearns at Jr.lightweight. 1st time I saw him I thought he'd go on to R.Robinson type ATG level. He was that special.
But, as was proven with him a fighter can have level 10, physical ability, skills etc. But if he's only a level 4-5 mentally
you get what we saw with Camacho Sr.
Whether it was the women, drugs, lack of dedication, Camacho's career is the ultimate poster child of what could have been in boxing.

 

I thought Camacho was at his best at 130. When he was there, he was probably as good as about any other 130 pounder in my time. As he moved up in weight, he was less and less effective.

So my vote is great at 130, very good at 135.

 

Only very good at both. If you look back at his career, until he got old and decided he needed the paydays, he was VERY carefully matched, almost on the level of a post-Hamsho Czyz.

Too protected to be remotely great.

 

At 130, as great as it gets IMO. Only the likes of Mayweather, Pacqiuao, Arguello etc are above him there. Throw in his main wins, vs Ramirez and Rosario, and you have a guy who's pretty damn close to great, if not outright. I certainly think he's better than say, GGG or Canelo, who often get called great.

 

His talent was great but I don't think he was. He didn't challenge himself against the best enough when it mattered and seemed content to fight at a certain level rather than push himself. That's my take.

 

I think he fell just short. The Rosario fight showed that he had some real iron and will to go with his panache and athleticism (and I think he did deserve the verdict - just), but bizarrely that fight ended up seemingly emphasising any hidden vulnerabilities and uncertainties Camacho had in his mind, when really it should have been the fight which helped dispel them. He largely flattered to deceive from that point onwards.

Outside of that he has good wins, sometimes in a very dominant fashion, against guys like Limon, Solis, Ramirez, Boza, Davis etc....But generally those guys were also beaten well enough by most other top 130 - 140 pounders during that era. There's a touch of the De la Hoyas about him; very adept at beating those guys just a level below great themselves, never disgraced even in defeats when they did come...But just doesn't quite have those couple of key wins you need to really elevate himself into the highest bracket. He never turned a supposedly 50:50 against another pound for pounder into a one-sided rout or masterclass, never scored a win over a great in their prime etc.

To me the Macho Man is knocking on the door of greatness, but can't quite push it open.

 

Agreed. At the end of the day you're only graded against those you fought. The dessicated remains of what had once been Bazooka Limon, Greg Coverson (underrated scalp actually) and a close points win over Cubanito Perez isn't necessarily the stuff of legends.

 

Fell short for me.

 

Nah. If anything he gets overrated nowadays based on his physical tools at the lower weights. He just never had that much skill, in my opinion. No versatility or legitimate plan B outside of surviving. What he had he used very well, though. In and out, in and out. That was his game. His awesome hand and foot speed made it very effective, simple as it was.

Amir Khan with a chin (and he actually committed to his punches) pretty much. Couldn’t fight on the inside or even at mid range for any extended period or his limitations would show their ugly heads.

His physical gifts made his simple style extremely difficult to beat for all but the best. But they could, would, and did beat him essentially every time. Because he wasn’t quite one of them.

 

He's an interesting candidate for this question. I think he unquestionably had great talent, and is deserving of his HOF induction. But at the end of the day his resume of wins places him in the very good category. Limon, Solis, Ramirez, Rosario, Boza-Edwards, and Mancini are a good collection of top wins, but I don't think it's the resume of an ATG.

However, I do think you could argue he was great at 130. I don't think there's anybody in that weight range who would have an easy night with him. I also think he's been a little overlooked at 135.

 

I actually agree that he's overrated as a technician. Pure speed can give that impression (Haye's skills and technique were a shade overrated as a Cruiser and Heavy for the same reason). Even against Ramirez, which is right up there with his best wins and performances, you can see him plateau a little after six or seven rounds, and start to run out of ideas. His attack was pretty repetitive. But he was so quick and fit at that stage that it didn't matter - a guy with Ramirez's style and vulnerabilities couldn't take advantage. But better fighters could and eventually would.

 

He was great for a short period

He didn't do anything significant after abdicating the WBC title in late 1986.

He won the bogus WBO 140 lb title and fought carefully selected opposition.

I would say he's similar to Donald Curry in that way

Both flamed out albeit for different reasons

They do deserve their HOF status. There are weaker careers in there

 

Lookin back now at his career, id say very good win s. Idk, maybe if the big four hadn't been around in i80 s, he'd have possibly being seen as much more of a dominant presence. But yes, not a great fighter but certainly he could seem as close.