"The Formidables": Who were the greatest fighting machines in history?

You're welcome Seamus. Spinks would be my one controversial pick. I can well understand people picking Rosario, he was at the absolute peak of his powers that night against my fave lightweight. Rosario had been in good form.

 

The judges cards were rubbish, I agree. It was a closer fight. But I don't think you can argue that Vasquez won it unless you didn't take 2 points away from Vasquez for rabbit punching as the ref did.

Do you have a round by round for the fight Seamus?

I had the fight 116-112, maybe being a little favourable to Pete, and if I didn't take two points away from Vasquez it becomes a terribly tight affair.

One thing I disagree with you about though is that Vasquez had a much harder jab. Vasquez had the harder everything else that night (especially body shots, which I think fractured one of Whitaker's ribs), but not a harder jab. The jab basically won Whitaker the fight in and of itself for me. He was landing it hard and flush when everything else looked slow and wide in comparison.

BTW, interesting that you consider Vasquez a better fighter than Norris. I think it's a damn shame they didn't meet. I would not for a second be surprised if Vasquez knocked Norris out. Mind you, I wouldn't be surprised for a sec if Norris ko'ed Vasquez either. Would have been close to a 50/50 fight for mine, with Norris having maybe a slight edge because of his faster hands which are likely to get in first and sting Vasquez.

 

Regarding the Duran-Whitaker fight, one thing that I think makes it really hard for Whitaker to win it is that Duran was really good at feinting in order to get within range to land body shots. I don't think Whitaker faced anyone that could feint half as good as Duran, so it will definitely be something new to contend with.

Also, I don't think anyone successfully went to Whitaker's body throughout his career other than Julio Cesar Vasquez, but when he did he did hurt Whitaker. If Duran can get in his body shots, it could be a telling factor.

Another thing that makes me think Duran wins this fight is when I watch Whitaker against Poli Diaz. Diaz had quite a bit of success early rushing in quickly and swinging wildly and ferociously at Whitaker. He didn't land much clean and he probably lost all bar one or two rounds but Diaz was unsettling Whitaker and if he was a bit more accurate with his shots, he really could have got in the fight. Duran would have the footspeed like Diaz did to roar in, but would do so with much more effective punches, and whilst Whitaker will likely start to time his rushes like he did Diaz's, he may pay a toll before it happens which will rob him of some early rounds which figure to be the more winnable for him and which are needed to pull out the duke.

 

Duran didn't really fight anything like Poli Diaz though, and while he may have slightly unsettled Whitaker at times, who wouldn't be unsettled by some guy swinging his arms around like an ape? He still managed to get schooled and embarassed by Whitaker.

Duran was much more caculated than that. He'd use feints to get in as you said, which could give him some success(Whitaker obviously had more than his share of success with tactics like this as well), but a guy like Diaz I don't see as a suitable comparison because of his wild, unpredictable style compared to Duran's fierce, but calculated approach, one that didn't require running in like an ape and flailing around hoping for the best. And honestly, I don't think Diaz really did unsettle Pea at all. In fact, timed him pretty damn well and started to embarass him after a while, resorting in Diaz running around the ring to avoid further punishment.

I think Duran showed more than enough trouble against slicksters as opposed to straight up and down boxers or punchers. There are too many excuses surrounding Duran's lack of success against this type of fighter to provide a good argument it seems, because he was always "unmotivated" or "past his prime" according to anyone you'll argue with.

 

Having a very happy Easter are we?

 

I don't think much distinguishes the rushes Diaz made at Whitaker and the rushes Duran made say against Leonard early on in Montreal. I mean, other than skill of course. Sure Duran feinted more so, but he was moving in ferociously and throwing some wild (but more accurate) shots at Leonard, just as Diaz was to Whitaker.

Sure Whitaker schooled Diaz, but Diaz imposed himself a little early, including putting Whitaker down once (which wasn't credited because Al Rothenberg was a bigger Pea nuthugger than me or you - did you ever notice that, lol, he even laughs sometimes where Whitaker pulls some antics).

About Duran's problems with boxers, I think we can say yes he was troubled by Viruet, but I'm not really one to give too much credence to the second Leonard or Benitez schoolings that he received. Thatt was a fairly past it Duran, and unless you want people to start bringing **** up like Whitaker-Rivera as an example of how Whitaker can't handle pressure, I don't think you should go there.

YES Duran did have some struggle with boxers, but I think he also distinguished himself against them enough (e.g. Buchanan, Marcel, Fernandez, Viruet II, Leonard, Bizarro when he had had enough of Bizarro's ring a ring a rosey,) to show that he could get the better of just about any of them. Pea too? I tentatively say yes...

 

Damn, i just spent 30 mins typing up about 7 second tier portraits and then fricking crashed before posting lol.

 

Well, my problem with that is that Duran only had his way with Leonard(still a very close fight) when Leonard chose to brawl. Even in the first fight, when Leonard chose to box, move, and stick the jab, he seemed to throw Duran off temporarily until he inexplicably abandoned his plans. These are reasons I think Pea stands a very good chance, because he wouldn't even think about brawling with Duran, and would instead opt to box off the backfoot for the duration of the match.

But whatever, me and Robbi(who's favorite fighter just so happens to be Duran) are apparently the only ones who see it this way and I'm tired of arguing a point that will come to no clear conclusion no matter how much of my life I put into it.

 

Fair enough.

 

That's farked... who were the seven names you had in mind?

 

Well it was about 7, let me go back in thought. Remember these were second tier

Holmes - Shavers
Rosario - Bramble
Camacho - Ramirez
Duran - Moore
Sanchez - Gomez
Nelson - Fenech II
Fenech - Callejas
Curry - McCrory
Hearns - Benitez
Braxton - Saad


had summaries written up and damn everything lol. Just wanted to get off the beaten track a little, tho i guess Sanchez isn't.

 

About the 4th round of the telecast Clancy comments how much harder Vasquez's jab is than Whitaker's and essentially, how much more effective it is. I don't like to throw around the word "fixed" but the entire publicity and build up to this fight made it seem as though it was a procession. JCV controlled the action (as well he should, he was bigger and plenty skilled) and the scorecards were mailed in from the week before. This fight was an out and out sham, which because Vasquez fought only in SA and Europe, was digested easily by the American public.

If Troy Waters put Terry Norris on the canvas, JCV would have put him through the canvas.

 

Off topic, but ever seen the stories of the Waters brothers, their dad and mom? Old Cec got Dean to shoot his step mothers lover, talk about a wild lot.