Who are the Top 15 Latin American Fighters in History?.

That's more than fair. I know what you mean you don't want anyone to say 'you don't know what you're talking about' rather than 'fair enough but here's how I see it'. Am I right?

We need to find some middle ground

Anyway, on that thread we were discussing Perez I gve you some more info :good

 

Cocoa Kid definitely has a better resume than De La Hoya, yes.

And yes, based on the wealth of footage I've watched and studied, and am still watching and studying, and will continue to watch and study, I believe the golden ages of boxing to have passed us by.

I'd say the sport's prime ended sometime in the 80's for the most part. The 90's had some exceptional talent as well, but for the most part seemed a bit lacking in comparison overall. Since then it would appear there's been an even bigger drop off in talent. Though of course there are always fighters that are exceptions to the rule, they seem fewer and further between these days. Pacquiao has been the guy most would believe to have been bringing boxing back, and the closest thing we've seen to a true phenom in boxing since a prime Roy Jones. Now even his career's under speculation.

When you compare even the contenders of the 70's and 80's to the champions of today, I think it's pretty obvious the sport has fallen off quite a bit, which is one of the reasons I'm not all that big into the modern game.

 

Yey he did have many good wins. But no way should he be rated above Delahoya.

I also find it amazing that Morales or Barrera werent on that list.

 

Yey you right i cant go for no youngster telling me **** like that, I could see if i were a casual fan or something but when ive been a die hard fan for so long that when i was 12years old i use to have grown ups picking my mind for boxing info and that was 27 years ago!!! So i im likeatsch when someone says "you dont know what youre talking about"

Ok ive known of Perez and his legacy since i was a kid, but i just have not seen too much footage on him. So what info are you talking about?

 

For the most part i agree with you but Cocoa kid did not have a better resume than Delahoya and i would post both of their resumes but to tell u the truth im tired of doing so, I think ive been there done that quite a few times on ESB and ive only been here like 6months! To much typing maybe ill get back to it later.

As for the rest of what you said about the drop off in talent well i agree with you as far as outside the elite. What i mean by that is sure many contenders from the past would be good champs today, but the Pacs,May,Del,jones,hopk,Barr,Moraless would be great fighters in any era in fact all of those guys i just mentioned would beat alot of atgs.

you are correct though the Talent is nowhere near as deep as yesteryear. Only at the top.

 

Anarci, you asked for links to footage of Perez. I've given you info on how to get some (well pretty much any footage that exists) :good

 

YEy thanks i remembered that after i posted:good

 

Right, as my iphone was having a mad moment, my point is, if Oscar fought as often as Cocoa did and had series' with all the best fighters he fought, would his resume appear as it does now?

I for one believe he wouldn't have won legitimate World titles in the day of 1`, not as many as he did anyway. Also, what weight would Oscar fight at? He couldn't drain himself, at his peak he may have had to fight as a fully fledged middle.

A totally different argument, mind you. But what I'm saying is you must take into account the time in which the Kid fought.

Just seen that Pea has posted that apparently a lot of Cocoa's fights were fixed. I didn't know it was to that extent in all honesty.

What I'm saying is, aesthetically at least, would De La Hoya's resume look anywhere as good if he had fought in Cocoa's era? I suspect not.
For me the fact that Cocoa came off so well in his series with Holman Williams bumps him above De La Hoya. However,y ou can only go by which era they fought in, I just feel that Cocoa fought the better opponents.

I wouldn't necessarily rank him over De La Hoya though. Just giving my two cents :good

 

Allow me. We'll use their Boxrec records, considering a lot of Hoya's wins and losses were controversial, and Cocoa Kid is one of the most notorious mob ran fighters in the history of the sport.

Cocoa Kid fought: Archie Moore (0-1), Charley Burley (0-1-1), Holman Williams (8-3-2), Eddie Booker (1-0), Lou Ambers (0-1), Kid Kaplan (1-0), Bert Lytell (0-3), Chalky Wright (1-0), Kid Azteca (0-2-1), Georgie Abrams (0-1), Jack Chase (1-0), Aaron Wade (0-1), Wes Ramey (0-1), Joe Carter (2-3), Oakland Billy Smith (1 NC), Battling Battalino (0-1), Slugger White (1-0), Frankie Britt (2-2), Jimmy Leto (1-3), Izzy Jannazzo (0-2), Jack Portney (3-0), California Jackie Wilson (1-0), Joe Legon (0-1), Eddie Dolan (1-0), Joe Ghnouly (0-0-1), Johnny Jadick (1-0), etc.

Oscar De La Hoya fought: Pernell Whitaker (1-0), Manny Pacquiao (0-1), Bernard Hopkins (0-1), Floyd Mayweather Jr. (0-1), Shane Mosley (0-2), Felix Trinidad (0-1), Ike Quartey (1-0), Fernando Vargas (1-0), Julio Cesar Chavez (2-0), Hector Camacho (1-0), Ricardo Mayorga (1-0), Oba Carr (1-0), Genaro Hernandez (1-0), Miguel Angel Gonzalez (1-0), Arturo Gatti (1-0), Yori Boy Campas (1-0), John John Molina (1-0), Jesse James Leija (1-0), etc.

Oscar's controversial losses are nullified by his controversial wins, so his record would've panned out about the same against the field regardless. There's no question that Kid fought a higher class of opposition, and in much higher quantity than Oscar. The only question mark on his career is to how good he actually was at his very best, considering he was in the back pocket of the mob and it's an uncertainty as to how many of his losses were fixed. The kind of opponents he was able to beat when the fights were on the level shows how talented and capable he was, the series with Holman Williams in particular. He also beat Eddie Booker in the two's only meeting. His success against the rest of the Murderer's Row really stands out, considering it would be a lot more likely that these bouts were on the level than those involving Kid and high profile white fighters and the like. The only guy among the group to get conclusively the better of him was the larger Bert Lytell at the very end of Kid's career.

 

I thought it was a good list. I think Cocoa Kid is alot better fighter than De La Hoya aswell as Marcel.

 

I personally dont feel that De la Hoya belongs on an all time list of the top 15 latin fighters. He was very good but fell short of elite ATG status; and elite ATG's are who belong on this list.

 

Sigh... I'm years if not decades behind you as far as studying boxing history goes, but I'm slowly coming around to the same conclusion. The depth of truly skilled, let alone "great" fighters in most divisions today pales to the ranks of years past.

I'm not giving up on the future of the sport or anything drastic like that, but I do wish more fans would take the time to watch past greats. If they did, I have a feeling we wouldn't have seen General cluttered with those "Pacquiao greater than Duran???" threads post Cotto. Jesus.

Anarci, you're a cool dude, but save DLH for a top spot on your "favorite fighters" list. I'm a massive RJJ fan, but I'm not going to put him in the top 5 of an all-time middleweight list either, much as I might want to. There are some things fanhood just can't justify.

 

Not a bad idea.

 

How can you justify having De Jesus above Trinidad?

Yes De Jesus took Duran's "0" but besides that what other argument does he have?....Trinidad was simply a superior fighter with a better overall resume. Good list though.