Kid Gavilan - head-to-head monster?

The point is, the best win was over Cuevas, and I don't think Cuevas would be included in many people's all-time top 50 welterweights, the rest of his opposition would have a hard time getting anywhere close to all-time top 100.

 

A lot of goal posts being moved here.

You're willing to place jones as a h2h monster claiming resume doesn't win fights. Jones never beat a lhw of the quality of charles.

Then you make resume demands on hearns knowing damn well he never beat a ww as good as gavilan.

You are being patently inconsistent here. You either put an emphasis on resume or you don't. Both have a similar level in the division, truth be told. Both are seen as h2h monsters based on their showings in the ring.

I personally don't know enough about gavilan to make boy serious comment but on a hunch i'd say he's less regarded at ww as charles is at lhw. You seem willing to make the leap of faith for jones but not for tommy and this inconsistant approach leads me to cry bias.

I could be wrong and maybe you have a valid explanation of your viewpoint but i'm sure i'm not the only one seeing it this way.

 

The consensus (nowadays) is that Charles is the greatest 175lber of all time.

A lot regard Gavilan as the 2nd greatest Welter.

Not much between them either way. In terms of greatness, I have Gavilan between 26-30 and Charles between 2-5.:good

 

Do you have a ww Top50 and would you mind posting it?

btw. great work with your blog, just found it recently. Impressive work. :thumbsup

 

I don't see them both having similar level in the division, I think Jones' was by far better (I'd expect several names of his opponents to appear in all-time top 50 lhw).

Charles never faced a boxer like Jones either (Burley doesn't look alike in style and is considerably slower than Jones, plus he was smaller). But this is an off-topic for this thread.

Charles has become somewhat overrated nowadays (whereas I remember Jersey Joe Walcott considered a greater fighter than him, which was puzzling to me), although he is still a great-great fighter, no doubt, I have him P4P #10. While Gavilan seems to be underrated due to many close or controversial losses. I rank Gavilan P4P #7.

 

I would expect Hill to he in a top 50 175lber list.

Who else?

 

just been doing some reading on gavilan.

these robbery claims seem quite legit at first glance.

from what I can gather it seems only the robinson rematch and the ratford fights are genuine losses on behalf of the kid; atleast during his prime anyways. being outgunned by bobo brings no shame and the other two losses that seem legit are to womber and saxton, both criticizing gavilan for lack of action so it could be round about this stage he burned out because his fights didn't have the same intensity and shortly after the saxton loss he compiled a losing record.

That's just after some surface reading but judging by the number of rematches (successful at that) he had and the consitent (the crowd booed the decision; gavilan consistently landed the harder punches) writeups across the losses it could be something worth looking into further.

The ratford losses seem strange and I can only conclude it was a styles thing with ratford having his number. Robinson seems to unanimously deserve the rematch verdict and bar two lacksidaisical losses that seems to be it from what I can gather after a cursory glance.

Had Gavilan been awarded these victories he seems to have deserved, his record reads a lot better and going into his final defence could be as good as 121-5. add that to his already great run as champ which spanned from 1951 - 1954 including 7 defences and a stack of great names in his W column.

After just my reading (and video watching) today I see no reason for him to rank behind Leonard and I see good reason for it to be debated between himself, armstrong and napoles as to who deserves the number 2 spot.

Could we be discussing one of the most underappreciated boxers around?

His style is both effective and crowd pleasing which makes me wonder why all the dubious decisions took place? race perhaps? cuba's affiliation with the soviets in the cold war? I dunno and I won't find out today because I need to get back to marking books (the joy).

 

As I touched on, Gavilans punches would tear Mantequilla to shreds I imagine. And he would get some off.

 

If I was betting.

A. I would wager completely on

1. Thomas Hearns. With his skills and size on paper he should beat everyone at 147.

2. Ray Leonard. Seeing what he has done in his career. Leonard is one of the few boxers who can constantly beat boxers who's skill set is better than his. If I had to chose one boxer to bet on all the time at any weight that he fought at Ray Leonard would probbly be my choice.

3. Ray Robinson. They fought twice, Robinson won both. Gavlin gave a good acount of himself.

B. I would place my money on both boxers

1. Floyd Mayweather. When it comes to two boxers with outstanding skill sets in fanasty bouts. I tend to go with the taller/longer guy. In this case Gavilan 5′ 10½″ /71" over Mayweather 5' 8"/72". Mayweather's own boxing skils and posibily more importantly his boxing IQ makes him someone I would give a chance to beat anyone at 147. Also being something of a freek of nature 5' 8"/72" dose not hurt either.

2. Emile Griffith. Like Mayweather a short guy with long arms and great skills.

3. Perenell Whitaker. I'd pick Gavilan over Whitaker for the same reason that I'd pick Hearns, Leonard, Robinson and Mayweather over him at 147. They are not nesscarly bettter than Whitaker, but they are all close and are bigger than him.

4. Barney Ross. I think Ross has the same problems that Whitaker would have. It is not a question of his skills. He just gives up too much in size.

To sum up. There are only three guys that I think would beat Gvilan outright. they are all outstanding boxers who have good size.
There are four other boxers who have may have slightly greater skills, but lack size.

 

Ripcity just shut down this thread. :deal

 

Of course Ray Leonard and Jose Napoles,maybe. I can't see many more doing it.