Rank these 4 legends in order Hagler,Napoloes,Olivares,Ortiz

I don't really think it works out that way to be honest. By this logic a fighter could beat numerous lower end top 10 contenders and be rated above someone who fought the better quality, had more longevity, dominance, etc. even if they did not beat as many contenders.

Napoles has three wins over HOFers to Hagler's two, but I'd argue that Duran and Hearns were of better class than Perkins and Cokes. Griffith was obviously not in his best form for anyone who views the fight. Then again Duran was hardly a lightweight and Hagler didn't exactly impress. A lot of things have to be taken into account.

To me, the depth of resume is only one attribute that a fighter can be rated on. When it comes down to it, both did prove themselves against a number of rated opponents, regardless of whether it was 15 or 20 of them. I don't see it making a huge difference. For example we already know Napoles is greater than Ernie Lopez, he doesn't need to fight 10 Ernie Lopez's to prove it even more. Fighting a variety of styles should also be looked at as a positive.

 

Is "Ortiz" Carlos Ortiz or Manuel Ortiz?
If it's Carlos, my ranking would be:
1. Jose Napoles
2. Carlos Ortiz
3. Marvin Hagler
4. Ruben Olivares
if it's Manuel (which I assume it is), it goes:
1. Jose Napoles
2. Marvin Hagler
3. Manuel Ortiz
4. Ruben Olivares
Either way, Jose Napoles is the obvious #1 here..based on overall skills as well as the quality of his opposition.

 

Obviously statistics are only part of it, but then I post them in the confidence that fellow posters will know about Napoles' opponents.

Hagler may have had the most fearsome opponent in Hearns, but I feel Napoles beat a slightly higher level of opposition overall, and more times (of course this counts for something - a lot, infact). Perkins, Cokes, Griffith, Hernandez, Lewis and Muniz were collectively a very strong bunch - slightly more so than Hagler's lot, some of whom were past their best (so we shall not get into nitpicking as it works both ways).

As I mentioned, Napoles being more of a lightweight serves his standing well, as, like Henry Armstrong, he went on to become one of the most dominant welterweight champions ever.

 

I don't necessarily dispute you there. Just wondered whether based your rankings purely on statistics which you do not seem to have done.

 

Nah, course not. Although when I do a list, unless specified otherwise, it's going to be mostly based on accomplishments or how good a fighter was 'for his era.' This is only a factor of fairness, because it'd be hard to compare Fitzsimmons to Mayweather on actual fighting ability.

 

Is it Manuel Ortiz or Carlos Ortiz?

 

It's too hard,

Olivares has a brilliant win resume, he has losses, but Hagler has losses as well, they all do.

 

Hagler is 7-10 ATG P4P
Napoles is 11-16
Olivares is 25-35
Ortiz is 80-100

 

On a serious note Pachilles though, without you telling me that i'm just trying to be cool and oppose mainstream opinion, don't you think it's close? Olivares fought in a greater bantamweight era than Napoles' welter era. As i said before Olivares has losses, but every one of these guys does. Hagler was the most consistent though.

 

Don't worry Jimmy Corkhill i dont paint you with that brush. Yes it is close, you know i rank fighters based on how impressive to me they are on film. I think maybe slightly Hagler and Napoles had more of that gifted physicality and ultimate toughness, as well as comparable skills to Olivares, that put them both 1/3 of a class ahead of Olivares.

Plus considering how many great boxers there are, the talent gap between top 11-20 and 21-30 is not really that significant, if at all. The resumes of Halger, Napoles and Olivares are on the same level. But Hagler can barely be favoured against, its as hard to pick against Napoles, its easier to pick against Olivares.

Ortiz is a class below all 3

 

I see your point Pachilles, spell check on Halger though. I still don't know if it's Carlos or Manuel Ortiz that we're actually supposed to be discussing though. In any case, Olivares>Manuel, Manuel is probably the greatest 118 champion of all time but i can't help but factor in some of his inconsistencies before his title reign, which were even more sever than Olivares', even if they are 'pre-prime'

 

You think Hagler looks better on film than Napoles Pachilles?

 

I think Hagler looks better and more formidable than almost anyone. Ray Robinson and Ali might be the only guys clearly above him in effectiveness and as an all rounder.

With Pep, Whitaker, Jones Jr, Ray Leonard and Duran, it depends what you like. But he is without a doubt in this company for me

 

Thought ya might appreciate this short interview -- with the help of a translator -- I did with Olivares in a bar:

Olivares was raising a few with friends. He looked more super middleweight -- with the look of a man enjoying what he was deprived of during his fighting years.

His hair was still black, full and spiky-straight and the Indian features on his face were even more pronounced when he smiled, which he did easily and often, revealing a gleaming gold frame for his right front tooth.

Q: Ruben, tell me about your two losses to Rafael Herrera.

RO: The first time Rafael took the title away from me, I had trouble making weight, and the second time, he just beat me, fair and square.

Q: After your first loss to Bobby Chacon, what did you learn that allowed you to win the next two?

RO: Good preparation, because we went 15 rounds in those days. I studied Bobby Chacon's tapes. All three fights were very tough. Bobby Chacon is very brave...

Q: You're one of the hardest punchers that's ever stepped in the ring, how did he manage to take those?

RO: Chacon hit very hard also...He was very, very BRAVE...
And he seemed to be struggling to find an even stronger word. I volunteered, "cahones," and he rocked back with laughter, nodding his agreement. "You speak my language," he said, tapping me on the shoulder.

Q: Did you experience any dirty tactics from Pedroza?

RO: Yes, he would hit me with elbows. He was thumbing me in the eyes.

Q: Do you still have a bar? And is it going OK?

RO: I have a bar/restaurant and gym on the same lot, and I'm working with all the young kids from Tijuana.

Q: What do you think of the changes in the rules since you quit, and the new training methods?

RO: There's a lot of intermediate weight classes now. They fight 12 rounds. They make more money now. They fight 12 rounds but they get tired right away. They're missing the inner strength.

Q: How would you do against the fighters they have now?

RO: I respect them but I would handle them.