the only objection i can think of and its not massive is if mayweather ceases to be premiere ww in 2007, what does he do to claim it back now? beat victor ortiz? or was he "champion in recess" sort of thing?
Paper champ, not Lineal? I tend to agree a little with that. Cuevas was a very good fighter and 11 defenses even not as lineal champ is pretty decent, but he never carried the baton so to speak.
How different would Napoles legacy be if he'd had his prime @ WW from 1976-82? Would it be significantly less or far greater?
Atm i'm up to, in detail, the ross-barney fights. Hopefully by tomorrow i'll have more detail on why I chose nelson.
He didn't really lose to Gavilan though, he got the decision at the end of the day. I know it was an unpopular decision with the audience but i'm led to believe that there was a decent amount of writers in attendance who thought the decision to be just. Not sure that there is enough evidence that i have seen (happy to be proven wrong here) that it would be reasonable to go against the judges decision on that fight and place Gavilan as the main man in the division in 48. It gave him the right to be the main contendor to the throne and Robinson then left no doubt after the title fight in 49.
Away from my computer now but i'll get back to you tomorrow. Ok so the main objections so far are cuevas and gavilan in 48?
The dropoff in quality circa Forrest is glaring to me. Sure there were some ups and downs in the strength of the top men beforehand, but usually they were nonetheless fine fighters on their own merit.That recent period saw the start of so-so fighters being consistently at the top and blown up smaller really good fighters taking advantage of it. And in the process getting totally overhyped by the multiple weightclass fans(both the general forum guys and the real old-school favouring ones on here).