Who do you rate higher at welter weight through the 50's??? Gavilan was ranked 2 in 50, 1 in 51-53 and 8 in 57 Basilio was ranked 2 in 53-54, 1 in 55-56 (moving to MW in 57) They fought in 53 to a disputed SD [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swThbyUcSok[/ame] Overall I have a hard time seperating them...who do you rate higher (keep in mind i am only refering to the 50s at ww and not MW or anything else!)
Both were in my top ten i believe when we put our lists in Rumsfield's thread. Gavilan was slightly higher. Maybe he was slightly better due to some versatility issues stylewise. But does that always translate into that versatile fighter being 'better'? No i don't think it does. Basilio of course had success at 160, albeit against an aging/aged Robinson, and he was slaughtered by a prime Fulmer. Gavilan has losses in spots, but to very good/great opposition mostly. He also has the win over Basilio, albeit by SD.
Welcome!!! Good to see you here! There is a lot more action, topics here...but I still like the atmosphere over there too!!! Enjoy!
Gavilan, he is the elite of the Welterweight division, Basilio is just below that, I actually had Basilio beating Gavilan, but Gavilan's reign is better IMO and on film he looks the better fighter.
