The 'lost' middleweight generation (1987-1994)

That's what Mike felt. Manny said of all the sparring he's witnessed Hearns vs Mike was the best shame we didn't see those two fight probably the two best light middleweights ever.

 

Champions (WBC, WBA, IBF):
-Thomas Hearns (WBC: 1987-88)
-Iran Barkley (WBC: 1988-1989)
-Roberto Duran (WBC: 1989)
-Julian Jackson (WBC: 1990 - 1993)
-Gerald McClellan (WBC: 1993-1995)
-Sambu Kalambay (WBA: 1987-1989)
-Mike McCallum (WBA: 1989-1991)
-Reggie Johnson (WBA: 1992-1993)
-John David Jackson (WBA: 1993-1994)
-Jorge Castro (WBA: 1994-1995)
-Frank Tate (IBF: 1987-88)
-Michael Nunn (IBF: 1988-1991)
-James Toney (IBF: 1991-1993)
-Roy Jones (IBF: 1993-1994)

Contenders (including WBO titlists):
-Doug DeWitt (WBO: 1989)
-Nigel Benn (WBO: 1990)
-Chris Eubank (WBO: 1990-91)
-Chris Pyatt (WBO: 1993)
-Steve Collins (WBO: 1994-95)
-Herol Graham
-Michael Watson
-Bernard Hopkins

How many title unifications did we see between the WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO champions?

Many fights were missed, as such the division was lost for years despite good talent. Jones if he stayed at middle weight could have been champion for a while.

 

Imagine if Roy had fought all of Bernard's opponents.

He'd have had the same record number of defences.

 

Well Glen Johnson might disagree, but for the most part it is possible.

 

Roy would have beaten Bernard's opponents with ease.

Roy beat better opponents 1-2 divisions higher.

Regarding Glen, I've got a lot of respect for him. But there's no way he'd have beaten Roy in the 90's, especially the version of himself who fought Bernard.

 

This any good to you Bokaj?

This content is protected

 

Yeah, great footage.

 

Not that I recall. To define an era, the best much meet each other preferably when they are in their primes or near primes. Politics in boxing often prevent that, along with some good old fashion ducking.

 

I doubt Roy would have been able to make weight for all that time. He was huge already in 1993.

 

Totally agree.

 

With all due respect, I think you're putting too much emphasis on unification and one dominant champ. In this instance, I think this is a rare, possibly unique, case where it actually benefited the division that there were more titles. There were too many good fighters for one man to fight them all but all of the fighters in your list fought at least a few of the other names. There were still a lot of good fights. McLellan v Jackson, Jones v Toney, Hopkins v Jones, McCallum v Toney, Toney v Nunn, McLellan v Benn, Benn v Eubank v Watson and so on.

Compare that to eras where one fighter dominated - the 70s with Monzon, the early 80s with Hagler (Fab 4 fights aside and even that quartet was largely comprised of welterweights moving up), the late 90s/early 2000s with Hopkins. The late 80s/early 90s may have lacked a standout champion but I will take that period over the times when there was a single, more dominant champion any day.

I think we were a bit spoiled. Instead of celebrating the matches that were made, we mourn those that weren't and that is as good an indication of the strength of the era as anything else I could add.

 

Lamar Parks turned up HIV positive, ending his boxing career and wasting a lot of talent.

 

True, but you get my point.

I think there's a few MW's who could have followed his timeline and replicated his record.

 

IMO Nunn should have been the next

Toney lacked discipline

McCallum didn't stay very long

RJJ was great but moved up quickly

McClellan was the real deal but injured

Hopkins is underestimated but a great fighter

The main two factors is as stated earlier the depth of talent post Hagler was incredible

The other was the era of fighters mimicking SRLweight class jumping became a bigger thing than"the undisputed" middleweight champion...fighters started chasing titles and boxing culturally embraced this

IMO Hopkins was one of the last 1 division champions who stuck it out and defended until GGG came along

Throw backs in many ways to the Hagler mentality