Who do you rate higher?

It gave him the opportunity to look good but a good jab is a good jab is a good jab. A perfect hook is a perfect hook is a perfect hook. There are textbook definitions of how each punch should be thrown, this is universal. There is also adaptation, both of these are able to be observed.

 

resume - almost the same
skills/ability - by far Lopez

 

Calzaghe had the better slaps hands down

 

Lopez should be ranked higher because he throws with better technique?

The effectiveness of Ricardo Lopez's work would have decreased or been called into question, in my opinion, had he been fighting a higher level of opposition. He would have been tested a lot more than he was accustomed too, and perhaps he wouldn't have had the opportunities to throw the "perfect" left hook if his opponent is laying on the inside, or utilizing faints or drawing Lopez onto shots. Lopez was always a few levels above the opposition, and he enjoyed physical advantages down at 105lbs.

 

There is a textbook definition which is known and adaptation of punches can be observed, combine these two facts and its easy to see true skill.

The skill is to throw the punch based on those two facts intertwined, it is not up to him if the opposing fighter can deal with it or not, that is down to the skills/make-up of the opposing fighter.

 

unfortunately for lopez there just is not the depth in the very low weight divisions
Name Record
toto pongsawang 4-0
Kwang soo oh 6-0
Kitichai preecha 7-3

and there is many more and these guys were world title defences atsch

 

If you're not trolling, then you don't know **** about boxing.

 

Calzaghe. Lopez is one of the few highly regarded fighters who's resume is actually less impressive than Calzaghe's. Lopez looked phenominal, but it was typically against no-hopers. The one really good fighter he faced - Rosendo Alvarez - gave him hell both times, even if Lopez was a bit outsized and a shade past his peak.

 

Good post, C.

 

This is the crux of Lopez's dilemma. He fought better fighters than he is given credit for.

One example is Sorjaturong. Lopez dominates him in a couple of rounds and a couple of years later Sorjaturong goes on to defeat Chiquita Gonzalez.

 

in Sorjaturong's 4th year as a professional, and he was 1-1-1 in the three fights prior to fighting Lopez. Not only would he go on to improve as he got more experienced, but he beat an old, past prime Gonzalez.

What other examples are you thinking of?

 

Hey Addie mate, there's no way I'd quarrel with this post at all:

I can easily see where you're coming from, your post is a very fair, very rational, very reasoned assessment.

My own p-o-v on the issue is shaped by the ability side of things. I didn't score Hopkins-Calzaghe for Joe C, but even without that 'win' included, his resume is still a shade stronger than that of Lopez.

However, there are instances where the fighter with the weaker resume will sit above the fighter with the stronger resume. Many people may think Oscar has a better resume than Floyd, yet rank Floyd higher. Many people may think Winky Wright has a better resume than Aaron Pryor (taking the bad Vargas and Taylor decisions into account), yet rank Pryor higher. Many people may think Erik Morales has a better resume than Eder Jofre, yet rank Jofre higher. Many people may think Lennox Lewis had a better resume than Foreman, Holmes and Tyson, yet rank him below all three. I'm not saying I agree with all of these statements, but they are all pretty valid, and I'm sure pretty widespread beliefs.

You see, in my opinion, the gap in ability between Lopez and Calzaghe is considerable. Of course this is highly, highly subjective, but really what isn't when it comes to ranking fighters. One of the key reasons why I rank Mayweather over De La Hoya is because I believe the sfw Floyd was a better fighter ability-wise than Oscar was at any weight. For me, the difference between Lopez (who I believe to be an all-round superior technician) and Calzaghe (who I believe to be a good but flawed fighter with severe technical deficiencies) is akin to the difference between, say, SRL and Pryor or Whitaker and McGirt, or something like that. It is a big enough difference to cover the void.

JMHO, but as I said mate, I rank these two pretty closely and I would not dispute anyone having Joe over Finito, it's a pick 'em as I see it, just depends on your own personal viewpoint on these two guys' resumes and abilities. :good

 

Sorjaturong was nobody at the time, and even though he eventually would prove himself world class, even at his best he was not much more than a tough guy with a big punch. Lacy level, basically.

Any other fighter Lopez beat you care to mention?

It's not as if Lopez didn't fight the top guys at his weight, like say Calzaghe did for most of his reign, it's just that his division was unimaginably shallow. He was the only class fighter there, and as such, was ridiculously dominant.

Calzaghe and Lopez had similar careers and should be ranked near each other for that reason. I'm not sold on Lopez actually being the better, more effective fighter, even if he is more impressive to watch. The objective aspect of the comparison clearly lies on Calzaghe's side though.

 

:good I know exactly what you're saying, and I actually agree with you when you say Lopez is considerably better than Calzaghe, but I just don't like to stray from my criteria otherwise then things get complicated. I reluctantly give Calzaghe the nod, based on his superior resume, because that's the main criteria I look at when ranking fighters, as you know. The difference is considerable, and Lopez wasn't forced into staying at 105lbs, it was a conscious decision he made...and that's a shame.

 

Agreed. I actually think he would've beaten both Carbajal and Gonzalez. It will remain a mystery why he never reached for the stars. He will never be rated as highly as he could have been.