There are certainly some interesting possibilities, and the best thing with this thread is we're talking Aussie vs Aussie match-ups. It's hard comparing MICHAEL & FENECH though. They both ultimately achieved world titles. But they couldn't have possibly taken more different paths. FENECH took the short route: Just prior to losing his first match (Nelson II - 1991), he'd fought 27 times for 26 wins & 1 rip-off draw (Nelson I). Along the way he'd won IBF bw, WBC sbw & WBC fw world titles. MICHAEL took the long route: Michael had already had 55 bouts (for 44-8-3), racking up numerous Aussie & Commonwealth titles along the way, by the time he managed to suck Lester Ellis into their IBF sfw title match in 1985. Fenech achieved plenty, and with dud hands. Michael fought more often, and probably against better opponents. Who was better at their best? We'll never know!
Whatarock, mate, thanks again for your comments... knowledgable and openminded. With these match ups, the dilema we face is the personal 'downfalls' of Green, Harding and Andries which made them the exciting fighting machines they were.... Hardings main strength was the ability to absorb everything thrown at him early on, knowing his fitness and intestinal fortitude would carry him through until his oppenent was sapped, and then open to punishment.. This might have been a serious issue had Green faught him, as Danny did become careless, almost inviting punches to land in the later rounds, for the sake of returning serve on his oponents... The fight is one i could not give a result too.... either way, a KO would have eventuated... Ive pondered on the Green/Andries match up for years mate.. To be honest, I would be suprised if Danny would have got the better of Andries.... Andries was a complete fighter, in the most unorthodox sense... throwing punches from seeminly powerless angles, which carried dynamite, and with his spirit and willingness, I think Danny would have faltered in the later rounds also.... Once again, it my own opinion.. In closing, it a tragedy that Danny was in constant battles with his own fitness in the last 3 years of his career, and I believe we actually missed a much better fighter than he presented on various occasions, but, thats the fight game.... and he was a dnamic fighter, with a dynamic heart... Cheers mate... keep punching.
couldhavebeen... im sorry to have missed your comments earlier... and, just as i appreciate reading the posts from Whatarock, i also enjoyed your words. One thing to factor in to the equasion is the doldrums that boxing went thru from the time TV ringside dissipated... until the the 84 Olympics when, a young kid from Marrickville certainly offered some light on the national front, due to the termination of his gold medal prospects and the disgracefulness of the 'recount'.. Barry Michael had tried valiently to keep the light shining on boxing in Vic, yet, almost unwittingly, he was also the death of it.. Having demolished Graeham Brooke and frankie Ropis in his effort to gain recongnition, he had also eradicated a few topline fighters.... Numerous hiccups had clearly slowed the interest of boxing through the late 70s .. early 80s... economic matters nationwide being one.... but, when all is said and done, Barry Michael is burdened with the solitude of being a great fighter in the wrong era... I hope you understand my meaning. As our own nation was also recovering, the kid from marrickville did serve as an inspiration for those trying to regain their feet, hence, Jeff Fenech became an inspiration.... and a fantastic tool for the great Bill Mordey to Manage... and manage very well.. I guess the 'we will never know' is the thing which inspires the questions and arguements.. as i have suggested earlier... Dave Sands and Les Darcy are, with their own carreers 2 of the best "we will never know" interests in the history of, not just Australia, but the boxing world. Keep Punching.