Both fighters dominated relatively weak divisions. Ricardo Lopez undefeated at Minimumweight, Orando Canizales breaking Ortiz's record for consecutive title defenses. From what I have seen of both, these little two guys had technical ability in abundance. They both had terrific uppercuts, and could work the combination's beautifully to head and body. If rankings were done purely on ability, you'd be hard pressed to leave these two guys out of a top 50. However, they did beat relatively poor competition, so who for you was the more efficient operator, and who should go down as the greater fighter? I know many people may feel it isn't close, but I don't think Lopez beat significantly better competition than Canizales did, who at least tried to move up and take on best at 122lbs.
Canizales fought the better fighters.Especially if you include the past prime stuff. I'd say it mostly comes down to personal preference here.Who you think was the inherently better fighter.Both can have the same broad criticisms levelled at them in many ways.
Have you seen the Orlando Canizales vs Wilfredo Vasquez fight? I haven't, but I know it was a closely fought fight. Was it possible Orlando did enough to win?
I haven't watched it for ages.It was a fairly even fight from what i remember.One i mght revisit soon.
Lopez quality and quality of opposition is pound for pound better than Canizales, Ricardo is a top 40 all time fighter, Orlando is probably not making the top 100.
:verysad Lopez ain't a top 40 level fighter, he doesn't have the resume...period. Name one great fighter he defeated?
Rosendo Alvarez is the only one who could even be said to be very good imo, he was about on par with someone like German Torres.Very tough, strong dangerous, but limited. It's always seemed like one rule for Lopez and another for everyone else that had long reigns against mostly mediocre fighters at the lighter weights.
I thought so. Unfortunately, I think only part of the fight is on Youtube. Interesting what Canizales' legacy might've been with a "W" over Vasquez.
I remember watching that fight and I had Vasquez edging him by like 1 point and I was pulling for Canizales. From what I remember Canizales fought somewhat cautious towards the end and he had already lost a step. I remember thinking that a prime Canizales would have definitly pulled that one out. As for Lopez vs Canizales . Id say Lopez by a long shot,he was just the more complete fighter and although Canizales was great,I think Lopez was just a clear level above him. Canizales probably had tougher comp though. Someone mentioned Alvarez being the only real good fighter Lopez beatl,but he also dominated Will Grigsby who was a pretty good fighter. He also beat alot of former champs Sorjaturong,Vorapin,Potelo,Nene Sanchez and a few more. I have taken slack on this site before for rating Lopez so high but I actually Think Lopez is a top25 atg. Id have Canizales between 80-90. If Lopez was a bantam moving up to 122 he would have handled Vasquez and kod him.
Canizales for me. Lopez has gotten far more overrated than underrated these days. Canizales not only fought the better opponents, but IMO was the more varied and skilled fighter. Much more fluid, aesthetically pleasing style for me.
Canizales should be ranked higher p4p both as a fighter with a superior skillset and for his resume. Granted, his opposition was hardly stellar but at least he had some decent to good contenders sprinkled in with the mediocritys he faced, whereas Lopez faced a barren wasteland of fighters who simply were not in his class on a regular basis thus allowing him to reign supreme.