Modern Super Fights vs Old Time Super Fights

:hey

Oh these are Ring magazine's rankings. That explains the ******ed decision not to rank Lewis .

 

Really isn't fair...

For example: Guys like Morales and Barrera, if I were discussing their ranking in the decade they are listed under, suffer from having a lot of their luster in the 90-99 decade.

"Super Fight" generally implies a massive build up leading to massive revenue... in my opinion. Or massive significance. Being future HOF'ers doesn't matter, for example, in Hopkins/Jones II. That was not a super fight.

 

Flaw with a system like this is that Joe Louis vs. Max Schmeling II isn't listed as a "super fight" when it absolutely was the definition of such.

 

I never thought that making some top rankings is a right concept to use while acknowledging boxers' careers, but you could say that Loi ahead of basically any of those guys.

Also, I don't believe that the Ring magazine left him out because they "figured that his record was padded". A padded record is a relative term and if you really think about, there is a question whether any of those "higher regarded" boxers were in fact better than Loi's opponents or not. The concept of being recognized in American media (as the Ring is an American magazine. You could bet that Ortiz' opponents were unknown in Europe) is very much related to the popularity of a fighter, so in theory, we don't know for fact that some boxer so good based on his popularity or the "big fights" he was involved in. There could be some almost unknown boxers who are significantly better than the popular ones, it is common even today. So in reality, it is not relevant if (for example) Ortiz fought this known guy or that known guy, he fought another great champ in Loi and Loi proved that he was the better one. We don't even know for a fact that Ortiz was Loi's toughest opponent. Loi also defeated Manca, Perkins, Vecchiato and many other good opponents as well. It is a fact that he was never knocked down in 126 fights (which is almost impossible to achieve) and that he lost only 3 times, avenging all losses. Realistically, he is obviously one of the greatest boxers of all time. As for "who would I expel from that list", maybe that's not an appropriate question, because his would title days were late 50s and early 60s, so it's not like he exactly fits in either decade, and it could also be a reason why he was left out by the Ring magazine. But as for the comparison, ask anyone related to boxing in Italy to choose between Loi and Nino Benvenuti (who is included in that list), the answer would be Loi without even debating about it.

The European boxers used to fight most of their careers and spend their best days in Europe, fighting for the European championship, and they would mostly chase the world title just prior to retirement, so many quality Europeans didn't even get to fight for those "world titles", because the concept of pro boxing as a sport was structured around the United States, without much focus overseas, so it far from being a global sport back in the day (many aspects of that concept are present even today, such as the "world" governing bodies, which are in fact American organizations that changed their names to "world" orgs, but are still in fact American based), so it's not surprising that the Ring magazine, being an American publication, is mainly focused on the sport in and around the US, but it also doesn't hold much of a legitimacy when it comes to "rating" those boxers, especially outside the home country. Of course, they are doing a fair job today when it comes to ratings and champions, but they are still just an American publication.

 

From what I have experienced it, that is from what I've watched and felt the tapes of the fights, knowing those facts and others about fighters and Championships, these are what I can say that were definitely Superfights:

Jack Dempsey - George Carpentier
Jack Dempsey - Gene Tunney I & II

Jim Braddock-Max Baer
Joe Louis - Max Schmelling II
Sugar Ray Robinson vs Jake LaMotta
Willie Pep vs Sandy Saddler
Jake LaMotta vs Marcel Cerdan

Archie Moore - Joe Maxim
Archie Moore - Yvon Durelle I
Sugar Ray Robinson vs Gene Fullmer
Sugar Ray Robinson vs Carmen Basilio
Joe Louis vs Jersey Joe Walcott

Emile Griffith vs Dick Tiger
Emile Griffith vs Nino Benvenuti
Carlos Ortiz Flash Elorde

Carlos Monzon vs Jose Napoles
Carlos Monzon vs Emile Griffith

Leonard-Duran
Leonard-Hearns
Leonard - Hagler
Sanchez - Gomez
Spinks-Holmes
Pryor-Arguello I & II

Whitaker - Chavez
Nunn-Toney
Toney-McCallum I
Jones - Toney
De La Hoya vs Chavez I & II
De La Hoya vs Trinidad
De La Hoya vs Shane Mosley II
Bernard Hopkins vs Trinidad
Bernard Hopkins vs De La Hoya

Pacquiao vs Morales I, II & III
Pacquiao vs Marquez I, II, III, IV
Pacquiao vs Barrera I
Morales vs Barrera I, II & III
Vasquez vs Marquez I, II, III & IV
Calzaghe vs Kessler
Calzaghe vs Hopkins
Froch vs Ward

 

The superfights in the past were bigger events. Maybe not money-wise with PPVs vs. Closed Circuit and increased prices...maybe there were counting inflation, I don't care to get into that.

They were bigger events, certainly in the US, because boxing was so much more mainstream then. Now it's a niche sport, which makes me kind of sad and envious.

The end result though, Superfights have always resulted in some excellent fights, some average ones, and some dull ones.

 

I believe that you missed my point. I was trying to point out that the Ring magazine was focused on the American public, not necessarily the fighters who were American by nationality. Of course it has a big influence on the surrounding region (Mexicno/Central America, Canada) and doesn't have such a legitimacy in Europe. Most of those fighters were fighting for the American public, therefore it's natural that they were recognized by an American magazine.
It's not like Loi fought strictly in Italy, but he was fighting most of his fights home which is normal for a boxer who is highly popular in his country. He traveled to the US and Australia a couple of times, went to France, UK, Tunisia, Austria, Switzerland, so that's already far away from "feasting on bums in his backyard", not to mention that he fought many good fighters as well.
Anyway, traveling isn't a measure of someone's quality as a boxer, so I'm not sure why is there "but Ortiz traveled" in the debate. Of course I have nothing against Ortiz, just pointed at him for the comparison as he was a guy from that list that fought Loi.

 

Lennox Lewis??

 

I think the 80's was the decade of the SuperFight. Leonard-Hearns, Arguello-Pryor, Hagler-Hearns, Duran-Leonard, etc... The anticipation for these fights had to be lived thru to be believed. And most of them delivered. The modern superfight is kind of a joke to me. The one true superfight out there had been blatantly ducked so there is not much to talk about there.

 

None of the following were super fights:

Calzaghe vs Hopkins

Roy Jones vs Calzaghe

Roy Jones vs Hopkins II

 

What determines drawing power? Elly Pical had 80,000 fans turn up to some of his fights whilst 10,000,000 watched Rigondeaux Vs Amagasa...in terms of "drawing" they draw a much bigger audience than Mayweather has done