How do MAB, EM & JMM do better than Rocky Lockridge if they fought in his era?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by sweet_scientist, May 25, 2011.


  1. sweet_scientist

    sweet_scientist Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,744
    88
    Nov 8, 2004
    Barrera, Morales and Marquez are generally considered to be a class above Rocky Lockridge I take it, so I'd like to ask what people think they would do in Rocky's place to distinguish themselves from Rocky and show they are higher calibre than he ever was.

    I also take it that most won't be satisfied in saying that the only reason they rank Marquez, JMM and Morales above Lockridge is because they were lucky enough to fight in a different era, so I'm looking for a good explanation here, or breakdown of how the three greats do against Lockridge's level of comp.
     
    sweet_scientist, May 25, 2011
    sweet_scientist, May 25, 2011
    #1
  2. natonic

    natonic Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,581
    83
    Jul 9, 2008
    I agree in ranking these three above Lockridge, but I don't think it's by a great amount. Rocky did what he did well and was not easily deterred. I think where the three differ (especially Barrera and JMM) is the diversity of their attack. One fight I can point to is Laporte - Lockridge. Laporte was able to find the range and unleash some huge shots early in the fight because Lockridge could be very predictable in his attack. Each of the three would have been able to deal with (and I think defeat) Laporte just by boxing him more effectively.
    Lockridge gave Pedroza all sorts of hell twice, but I think his style would have been tailor made for Sanchez and Sanchez decisions him easily. Again, the three present a more difficult puzzle for Sanchez (although I think he would beat all three).
    I believe Chavez hurt his hand in his fight with Lockridge. Regardless, he was able to defeat Lockridge by changing his style and often punching in retreat. This is the type of fight I could see the post Junior Jones version of MAB using against Lockridge and likewise for JMM.
    To sum up, each of the three were more versatile than Rocky. They were more adaptable whereas styles made fights with Rocky.
     
    natonic, May 26, 2011
    natonic, May 26, 2011
    #2
  3. sweet_scientist

    sweet_scientist Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,744
    88
    Nov 8, 2004

    I think styles make fights for all the fighters here named nat.

    For instance, JMM and Morales are susceptible to being outfoxed by boxer types. MAB has shown weakness against guys with hard straight lefts (Jones, Pac).

    It's pretty easy to pick out one or two fights from each guy's career and say yeah that showed flaws in their game. It can be done for all the above fighters.

    I agree that MAB and JMM are probably more diverse than Rocky, but not necessarily more effective all things considered imo.

    Just returning to the first part of my question though: how do you feel MAB, EM and JMM do against Rocky's competition? Do they win fights he lost?
     
    sweet_scientist, May 26, 2011
    sweet_scientist, May 26, 2011
    #3