Jose Napoles vs. Alexis Arguello at 135

He took Monzon's punches. His chin was made of titanium. Not to mention he was every bit as elusive, if not moreso than Pryor to go along with being a better counter-puncher. He probably hit about as hard as Alexis at Lightweight, too.

Two guys, both big punchers, one of them stronger and more skilled with a better chin. Why is it difficult to see how that guy wins?

 

One guy is nimble and elusive, the other needs to set his feet to throw. Arguello would not get off as often here.

And when have you ever seen Napoles lose his cool?! Monzon dented him but couldn't put him over, that's a small Welter jumping to middle to take on a beast for any era, let alone that one. And Napoles stayed on his feet.

Arguello just isn't going to have the usual variety here. Even with his intelligence, timing, accuracy and composure, Napoles just isn't the kind of opponent for him to do his best work on.

 

Love Alexis but if focused Napoles does a number on him .... putting aside the always present risk of a cut ...

 

who said it's difficult :huh

I said it's a competitive fight I think alexis would edge.

I said I was surprised I'm the only one to vote for alexis.

 

Wanna put some clothes on that mate? ;-)

 

That's what this lead me to believe:

Did you not mean any of that, then? Just felt like sayin' it?

 

Napoles was a great fighter. I just think that he and Alex were at their respective peaks at different weight classes. Alex is maybe the greatest Jr. Lightweight. Napoles was a top 6 or 7 Welterweight. But a mythical PFP matchup would be a great fight I'd pay to see.

 

no that was me spinning flea's question to how I felt it is viewed by myslef. refer to my first posts for clarity.

Even in that post I actually stated it was rehtorical and my default positon would be to favour alexis until convinced otherwise.

either way this is a fantasy matchup between 2 ATG's and I'm surprised it's so one sided.

 

genuinely don't have a clue what you mean haha

 

Because it's styles, not stature that dictate the way a fight goes.

No probs :good What I men is, dress your statement up. For example, if I was you:

'Napoles was great at darting in and out, but against a natural counter puncher like Alexis, a slow starter, Napoles may find himself doing the majority of the leading, and therefore not maximising his punch potential and leaving a smart, durable and dangerous fighter in front of him for too long. As the fight goes into the later stages of a 15 round battle, I think Napoles, who could get lackadaisical at times, would be easier for Arguello to time, especially considering Napoles' face may well be grotesquely swollen by the time those rounds come. Arguello piles it on late to force a late stoppage or close points decision'.

To be honest, the above is pretty nonsensical, and I've had to sell Napoles short to even make it vaguely feasible. As I say, can't really envision Arguello winning, as great as he is, his tools are better suited to different jobs than 'Mantequilla'.

 

Cokes also had offensive variety and a precise right-hand which he could triple up. Napoles rinsed him!

 

right I get you, asking me to justify why it is I choose to make alexis my default pick?

man it's hard thinking too seriously about fights that haven't happened. especially fights like this that I'd love to see and the more I think about the more it annoys me I won't see it.

as a general rule I'd favour the greater fighter of that weight class unless someone could put up an argument stylistically that makes me change my mind.

the truth is, there's no right or wrong answer, of course, good arguments have been made in favour of napoles, but in a fantasy fight like this I don't tend to change my pick unless I later discover something I never previously considered

e.g. I'd assumed frazier had a weak chin, since watching more of his fights and dismissing that conclusion, I give him more consideration against big punchers.

I don't personally perceive alexis to have any weakness that napoles would exploit so clearly for me to change my mind. A lot of people use the pryor fights as an indicator, I don't think it's that great a signal, however with napoles being able to do everything better I see why some might say "he lost to him, this guy is better at everything, he's lose to him also".

Did the extra 5 pounds make the difference? was it just alexis being on the downslide, I can't honestly say. For some reason I don't seem to think it's overly relevant.

You note how napoles is iron chinned, nimble and an ATg counter puncher who could nullify alexis's attack and get off himself. Has napoles ever faced a similar foe to alexis, stylistically speaking?

as I said, I try not to take fantasy match ups too seriously because even if every ESB member disagrees with me, we'll never know any better anyways.

to bring out the old cliche, anything can happen on the night.

 

I spend ages writing this and find you have made a comparison atsch

so after watching pryor-arguello and napoles-cokes you think it should be evident that napoles has the edge?

I'm gonna respect your opinion but agree to disagree. :good

 

By the time Arguello took on Pryor, he'd sort of degenerated into more of a get hit and counter kind of guy than the more defensively elusive slip and counter boxer of earlier times. Busceme was his final match before turning 30, and he did a dedicated job of slipping shots in that one. (James was challenging Alexis in Busceme's native Beaumont, and tried to run away with the decision, something Arguello fully realized and acted to render the challenger's aggression ineffective.)

 

NO!!!! I am basing it off watching pretty much everything there is of both men, the only way you can get a genuine understanding of any fighters +/- points.

On Cokes, it's not a great comparison admittedly....but look how Cokes applied his offence and you'll probably see what I mean. And Napoles dominated Cokes (twice!)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mu2L0NxRfHA[/ame]

Watch it all, but 9:20-9:25 is f'n breathtaking stuff!