My stab at a top 50 all time p4p

Even sweet scientist agress that if whitaker would have fought the comp ortiz did, he would have some losses. The counter argument is that whitaker didnt beat a lightweight that ranks in the top 25, when ortiz beat two that are top 15. Hell if you were to do a rop 50 lightweights of all times, only ramirez haugen and pendleton would get in.

How can we say whitaker beats everyone consectively if he himslef never beat a great lightweight. I said he would have beaten benny leonard but if he were to have fought joe brown once, laugna 3 times, loi 3 times and locce, we are supposed to belive he goes 8-0 against that group, come on buddy.

It just kills you to admit that ortiz beat 6 greats, when whitaker beat about 3(im including buddy mcgirt as a great)

 

You can make the arguemnt that whitaker won belts at 147 and 154, but if i remeber correctly, ortiz fought when there was 1 champ at welter, 1 champ at 154, am i not correct?

 

Whitaker beat Chavez, Nelson, and De La Hoya in my opinion. That is 3 ATG's. Ortiz had a better resume at LW, I am not denying that, I am talking about a head to head matchup between the two, which is the question you seem to be avoiding.

I have not seen Loi fight, so I can't accurately judge, but based on what I've heard, being a slick pressure fighter, in 3 fights, I see it as a possibility that he could beat Whitaker, sure. The others? No.

 

He never won a single title or even fought at any of those weights as Whitaker did(defending his WW title 7 times I believe), but you're correct on your other point.

 

I never said ortiz would necessarily win the fight, i just said that since hes a well rounded fighter with very few weaknesses, it would always be a close fight whenever they fought each other.

Fighters like whitaker dominate slow plodders. A well rounded fighter always gives a 'boxer' a hard fight.

 

he didnt fight at either weightclass, maybe its cuz he felt he wouldnt have much of a chance at beating the prime emile griffith or curtis cokes.

 

He may have been robbed in a few, but he'd probably only legitimately lose once in a series with Duilio Loi. Assuming he is relatively prime. Of course a Whitaker in Rivera type shape could lose to plenty of Ortiz opponents.

I'd say only Ramirez gets in. But who are the two top 15 lightweights that Ortiz beat? Laguna is more top 25-30. As for Duilio Loi, I suppose you could rank him there, he did have many fights at lightweight, though not too many of his career defining ones. Joe Brown is also top 25-35 I'd say.

Whitaker never beat a great lightweight AT lightweight, but he did beat some great lightweights imo (DLH and Chavez) at welterweight and did take some good lightweights to town. It doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to see him beating some great lightweights. I don't think he'd lose to Laguna for instance. Nor Joe Brown. Ortiz had his smaller guys that he beat (Ramos, Elorde) and Whitaker had his (Nelson, Paez).

I think of all Ortiz's opponents, Whitaker might lose a bout to Loi which he'd reverse, but I'd fancy him to beat the rest. I don't see anything ridiculous in thinking that.

Ortiz has a deeper resume, but IMO Whitaker has the greater wins: Chavez, DLH and Nelson are all fighters I'd have in my top 100 all time. The only fighter Ortiz beat that I'd have in my top 100 is Duilio Loi, and Loi got the better of him in their series. Whitaker's dominance and how outstanding he looks on film also helps tip the scales in his favour.

If someone did have Ortiz higher than Whitaker though, it wouldn't be the worst crime ever perpetrated. A lot depends on how you see the DLH fight going and probably how wide you felt the Chavez-Whitaker fight was as well (e.g. if you have it 7-5 for Pea, then you could possibly think that a better Chavez at the peak of his prime would take Whitaker).

 

So SS, No Joe Brown in the top 100 either?? Wow.

 

No space I'm afraid Demp. It might sound bad, but when you see the the guys I have in the top 100, I think it's understandable (although perhaps not ultimately agreeable).

Bear in mind not even the likes of Kid Lavigne, Battling Nelson, Freddie Welsh, Jack McAuliffe, Billy Petrolle, Sammy Mandell, Ken Buchanan, Esteban DeJesus, Jimmy Carter, Shane Mosley, Sugar Ramos, Pedro Montanez, Rocky Kansas, Wes Ramey, Willie Ritchie and Willie Joyce make my top 100, and that's just naming fellow lightweights. He doesn't sit bad when you see him in that company.

 

i thought nicolino locce is in ur top 100, ortiz won that fight unless ur blind.

 

Ritchie was a impressive fighter, think you for the fight with Rivers a while back. One of the best of all time. I though he make the top 70 at least lol.

 

Winstone was the best fighter Saldivar fought imo.He'd be fine in the HOF by current standards though it's unlikely the American tv centric voters will ever consider him.

 

Based on what was he the best? Certainly not on resume, and you think he was better head to head than Laguna? He lost to Legra as well, not long after fighting Saldivar. I don't get where you're coming from.

 

He was past it by the time he won the title and had already uoutpointed Legra earlier.


Yes i think he was better than Laguna.His skills were exceptional and i don't see many featherweights outboxing him.

Laguna was the more durable of the two though, so i can see why some would favour him when allied to his success at lightweight.

Laguna was not experienced when he fought Vicente and i didn't think he did well at all in the truncated version i have.That version would have been outboxed by the Howard that Saldivar beat.

 

Being as Laguna was younger at the time he faced Saldivar, you may have a point, but seeing as Winstone won his only world title around the time of the rematches with Saldivar(against Seki), I wouldn't say he was that far past his best in the rematch with Legra. It's not like he had that long of a career to begin with.