I'm caught in two minds with this guy. On one hand part of me thinks that he was never better than second best in his whole career and shouldn't really be remembered as anything above that. But then another part of me thinks maybe he was the best up until the title fight with duran: Looking at the circumstances around that time, we had duran winning on a dubious punch and then shortly after he lost a fight (albeit at lww) to esteban de jesus. In the meantime De Jesus beat duran at the tail end of 72 and twice battered ray lampkin in 73. Who was the favourite for the rematch? I'm unsure is it fair to say de jesus was never ever the best in the world in any division, or is it fair to say for a short time in 1973 he was?
I completely agree. I'm currently leaning towards him being the best man at 135 from the first lampkin fight until the duran rematch but I'm open to criticism and reasons against that line of thinking...
De Jesus (at his peak) should be remembered as an unflappable silky-smooth boxer, who could really crack -- 'specially with his left hook
I consider Duran the man from the time he beat Buchanon for the title up to him moving out of the division, but I wouldn't critique that at all, LUF. DeJesus probably runs the lightweight division during the decade if not for Duran, whom it must be considered is arguably the greatest LW of all-time, particularly H2H/Skill-wise. DeJesus is a HOF caliber fighter IMO. Even after the 2nd Duran fight for the title, he went on to more success and became a titlist. The unification bout in '78 was one worthy of notoriety.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj8Mh3TgJFM&feature=youtube_gdata_player"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj8Mh3TgJFM&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/ame]
Yeah Duran was definitely the rightful champ (never lost his title at the weightclass in the ring) I have no issue there. My issue is whether or not duran should ahve been regarded as say "the best at the weight" from february 1973 to march 1974. During this time duran was coming off his loss to de jesus and defeated (at the weight) hector thompson and guts ishimatsu. During this time de jesus was coming off his victory over duran and defeated (at the weight) ray lampkin twice (plus he beat frazer but i'm not sure what the weights are for that fight). De Jesus was a very skilled fighter and has a very decent resume with victories over duran, lampkin, frazer, ishimatsu, medina, yamade, saldivar, garcia and viruet. The only thing missing for me was any worthwhile achievement (not in terms of resume but consequence of resume) but the more I think about the more I think it's fair to say Feb 73-March 74 was his time at the top.
he certainly did and I think I'd have to put him number 3 behind de jesus and then duran during this specific timeframe. it's a shame the two didn't fight each other, that'd have been some fight!
AS he is .. the first and only man to ever defeat Duran at lightweight ... that's a hell of a legacy.
I remember someone (Lora?) said Gonzalez was number 1 lightweight when Duran fought Buchanan. Maybe someone knows a little bit more about that? Yeah, Gato looks very good against Carmona, almost like a twin brother of Napoles.
Right, but it doesn't hurt that Duran wasn't a stranger to fights at 140lbs and while not at his peak, was post-Buchanon and already champion. He was just flat out the only man to beat him at any weight through 73 fights.
I think lora said Gato may have beaten Duran at that time. Have only seen him against Guts so I'm unable to comment on how reasonable that is.