Although they had very different styles, both were huge punchers and had careers that were pretty similar - both were longtime WBO champions, both unified titles but relinquished other titles and left WBO title only. So who, in your opinion, had better resume in wins column among these two fighters?
Definitely Hamed for me. I quite like Michalczewski and he does get sold short sometimes, but he never established himself as the best 175 pounder in the world. Yes, there was that brief period in the summer of 1997 then he had the WBO, WBA and IBF and Jones was without a title while he was preparing for the Griffin rematch, but Jones was still the consensus pound for pound number one - Michalczewski was never really considered anywhere near that level, with or without the belts. Beating Hill should have been the start of bigger and better things for Dariusz, but it wasn't. I know plenty of people consider him to be 'lineal' from 1997 onwards when he beat Hill. I get that: Hill had been the first Light-Heavyweight to unify any belts since Spinks had left the title splintered. But to me that always looked like one of those instances where 'lineal' wasn't set in stone and didn't mean all that much. If Ring Magazine had been awarding belts in the 90s, which they weren't at that point, then they'd have had an interesting decision to make and may have had to give their title to Dariusz in 1997, because of the timing of his win. But by the time they reintroduced their Ring belt in 2002, I think they were entirely justified in giving it to Jones instead of Michalczewski. Jones had been operating on a totally different planet. He also had a few struggles (all credit to him for coming back to win, of course, and I'll accept that he was bit long in the tooth by then) against guys such as Hall and Harmon, neither of whom were really top drawer. One or two question marks over some of his better wins, too: bit of a contentious stoppage (albeit I'm not too fussed over it and can see why a referee might have got in there) after losing the first three rounds against Griffin, and then of course the farce against Rocchigiani where he was getting outclassed and in trouble before the powers that be saved him with that ridiculous disqualification. Was there a rematch? Yeah, four years later when Rocchigiani was 36 and hadn't fought in two years. Excellent win against Hill, but as I said he just never kicked on from that. Hamed doesn't have as many world title fights on his ledger, but he was the much more impressive performer for me and while in all probability he was the best Featherweight in the world for two or three years beforehand, by 1998 (beating Vazquez) he'd absolutely removed any lingering doubts and held that status for a further three years. Can't deny that Michalczewski's win over Hill was a very high class one, but outside of that I'd take Robinson, Johnson, Kelley, Vazquez, McCulloch, Bungu etc. over Dariusz's scalps such as Barber, Rocchigiani, Piper, Griffin, Hall, Harmon etc., particularly factoring in the sometimes questionable or unconvincing nature of some of those wins for Michalczewski. Hamed just the greater talent and far more proven against the best his division had to offer, for me. Comprehensively outclassed some really good fighters. And I don't think I really rate Michalczewski's brief pit stop at Cruiserweight to claim the WBO belt there any higher than I do Naz's European Bantamweight title.
Maybe Hamed by a hair, there's little between them resume wise imo, but Michalczewski's win over Virgil Hill is best victory for me. I'd like to have seen Dariusz against Roy Jones back in '97, '98 and while I would have picked Roy, I think it would have been a real test for Jones.
The Michaelcewski perfomance in the first Rocchigiani fight should disqualify Dariusz from any discussions of anything. He got hit on a break during a tough fight, and then rolled around for five minutes acting like he was groggy until the fight was finally called, and then he picked up Rocchigiani at the end like nothing was wrong with him, because the fans were about ready to tear the place apart. And then his team went behind the scenes to get the result changed to a FREAKING WIN. It was disgraceful. Corruption at its finest. Everyone knew he was a ***** from that moment on. It was like if Sonny Liston hadn't gotten up after a few seconds in Lewiston and just kept getting up and falling down and acting all groggy for MINUTES, and then just lifted Ali up at the end ... and then, behind closed doors, they awarded the fight to Liston. It was a total ***** move. And that fact that U.S. boxing writers promoted a ROYCOTT when Jones signed to fight Julio Gonzales, because they were sick of Jones fighting WEAK opponents like Gonzales, and Gonzales was the guy who dethroned Dariusz, has always been hilarious. Hamed by a mile.
Woah woah woah. González was a fine fighter. I won't hear anything else. I am the only Julio César González fanboy you'll ever find.
You would've loved that period, then. Every boxing writer in the U.S. was calling for fans not to buy Jones-Gonzales because Julio was so awful. I bought it. Still have it. It was actually an excellent PPV.
