ripcity, why would you bet money on both boxers? doesn't that defeat the objective and guarantee a loss of money?
3 fights in 4, I'd say. At least a split. He deserved at least as much against Griffith (unfortunately Griffith was untouchable at MSG, but from the 3 I've seen and what I've read otherwise, Rodriguez may've swept the series), and a prime Griffith no less, not the weight-drained version that Napoles fought (although that's not to say that Griffith would've ever necessarily beaten Napoles). That's neither here nor there, though. I actually think Rodriguez matches up even better against Napoles than he did Griffith.
Surely he realises that if betting on both boxers was viable it would leave a lot of bookies out of business.
I consider Rodriguez to be better than Griffith, who I dislike. A spoiler more than anything. But then I hold Napoles in very high regard. Around '68-'70 he was a ferocious welterweight as well as very smart. It's right that Griffith struggled to make the weight for the Napoles fight (from what I've heard anyway) but watching the fight I didn't see any evidence that Griffith would fare better had he been slightly improved in every category. Napoles beat him handily and it's easy to assume he'd have done the same against a mildly stronger version of The Great Bore. Of course, there's Curtis Cokes - another common opponent of Napoles and Rodriguez. Not that it matters a great deal when talking about Napoles-Rodriguez as a fantasy fight, because as we know, styles make these encounters and not the numbers behind them. As it turns out I believe Napoles matches up well with him. Anyway, I wouldn't like to say Cokes was finished by the time Napoles got to him. Far from it, infact. I've always considered him to have been in a fair state; perhaps not quite as sharp as a few years earlier, but near enough, seeing as he was at the end of a winning streak consisting of several contenders. It would be a completely understandable proposal if we said Cokes' longevity was fast forwarded and worn out during his two bouts with Napoles. It would also be understandable if I said Napoles' dominance over Cokes, who, as it happened, beat Rodriguez, carried at least some bearing on a potential Napoles-Rodriguez match up.
He seemed to go right out of it after the knockown. I would say that was as much a part of Napoles' dominant victory as the weight. EDIT: Can someone give me a breakdown on the Cokes-Rodriguez fights? Heard they were fiercely competitive but have never seen/dug up a report, any info' much appreciated, I love LMR and really rate Cokes (very cultured right hand)
Haha, I was thinking similarly as I was typing. I know Rodriguez lost to Cokes but I don't know much else. Never know, it might be that Rodriguez was winning like he was with Benvenuti until he got blasted out (in the last fight).
Rodriguez was down in their first fight, and lost a Split Decision over 10. Part of me thinks these bouts may've been similar to the Griffith bouts, really just depending on what the judges favoured. Rodriguez won the UD in the rematch, anyway. Here's a small breakdown of the last fight, which was ended on cuts in the last round. I'm sure Raging B(_)LL could tell you more, as I remembering him posting in depth on the subject. http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Luis_Manuel_Rodriguez_vs._Curtis_Cokes_(3rd_meeting)
For some reason that link seems to be ****ed, so just put a ")" at the end of the link and it'll show.
Griffith looked like **** from the very beginning against Napoles, he wasn't just slightly out of sorts, he had no business being at Welter.