Jose Napoles vs. Alexis Arguello at 135

OK, but go to the first video in this thread, not the one I'm refering to.
In that clip not set to music, you can also see he moves in and out on the same count every time. There are athletes who can get away with being abousuality predictable. Take Mayweather and his pull-counter for example. However I don't see Napoles being one of those guys.

 

yeah surely arguello would incorporate samba timing into this training for his fight, yes, it's irrefutable

 

You're making my head hurt. You really don't need to post anymore.

 

Just got images in my head of Napoles strolling round the ring humming a samba tune, timing his attacks of it.

And Eddie Futch in Arguello's camp pounding out different samba beats on a drum as Arguello trains to get him used to it.

 

Lol this is exactly what i'm talking about: how can one be "wrong" in a fantasy match up between two atg's?

You realise the fight will never and has never happened?

 

I'm just joking.

But if the fight did happen, hypothetically, Id sure as hell put money on Napoles.

 

To be honest I wouldn't put any money on anyone in this matchup.

 

Id bet on anything though.

 

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_methods[/ame]

 

Really? In a real life scenario you'd bet on anything? Taking hypotheticals out of the situation (since we have a tendency to disregard cuts losses and the like purely for the fun of analysing their skills), if this fight were to actually come off nowadays you'd be willing to bet a large amount on Napoles even with the strong possibility that his face would be ripped open by some of Arguello's shots? I sure as hell wouldn't. Napoles was the superior fighter, but what Duodenum said was correct. If you're a bleeder, there are few worse to go up against than Arguello. He's certain to land his share of hard shots, too.

Again, Napoles was the superior fighter, and I'd favour him to get the better of the action for the most part, but with a tide-turning variable like that in play I wouldn't be confident in making a large bet. Usually I wouldn't put too much into it, but with a sharp-shooting hammer-fist like Arguello it's a different story.

I'd favour Jose, but wouldn't be surprised if the other outcome turned out to be true.

 

as a maths undergraduate I used to bet and gamble every day, made a decent living off it for a few months until I convinced myself I'd found some formula underpining the gambling world. Needless to say I was wrong and I haven't gambled since.

 

Well not anything, but most fights when I can afford it.

I see the Arguello chance of victory, hell, I'm one of his biggest fans. I also think it would be pretty competitive like a 10-5 or closer decision. But with his name recognition and Napoles obscurity, I'd figure you'd get pretty good odds on a Napoles win. And plus I'd favour him anyway.

Also another question, how prone to cuts was Napoles at the lower weights? Do we know if it was a serious problem?

Could you explain the formula?

 

What kinda question is that? He was the same guy, wasn't he?

Anyways, he did lose to LC Morgan (a guy who he otherwise had the number of) by cuts stoppage in the 4th round.

 

I'm just saying his problems with cuts could have got worse as he aged. So at Lightweight he wasnt as bad a bleeder as he was later.

But I see he was.

 

That's right. And don't ever forget it!