2 HOF fighters that are almost forgotten, more so Brian Mitchell. Both showed great skills in the ring and also look great on film, but with a pretty weak list of opposition IMO. Who would you say has the better resume/achievements? This content is protected This content is protected
I'll vote for Mitchell. Only a single loss (avenged) and only KD once iirc. He was very, very consistent. Moreover, his defences were all on the road, which is considerably harder.
Canizales was far more impressive to watch, but yeah, there's a good case to be made that Mitchell had a more difficult and accomplished run.
Canizales has that Lomachenko / Derevyanchenko type footwork which is just such a pleasure to watch. He's got a lovely sense of rythmn and probably greater 1 punch power than Mitchell. I'll agee that he's more fun to watch when he's on song. What impresses me about Mitchell is the way that he adjusted on the fly. You can't really see it on the highlights, but if there was something about a fighter that gave him problems, he'd figure it out through the fight and by the end rounds he was usually pasting the other dude. He was a very well rounded fighter, and could do a bit of everything. Notice the way Mitchell stands in the pocket and seamlessly fuses his own defence (usually slipping) with his offence. Sometimes with Mitchell it almost looks like they rehearsed the moves beforehand: "ok so you hit me in the face, I swing, you duck, then you hit me in the face again ..."
I think Canizales at his peak was the better of the two, but Mitchell had a better resume, especially when you factor in Tony Lopez. Mitchell was more steady and more consistent, but purely in terms of quality I don't think Mitchell was ever as good as the Canizales who dismantled Seabrooks.
Because this is an original thread, and it deserves something different than the norm, I want to introduce this idea that maybe the better AND greater fighter...is the one who looks the most like Freddie Mercury during his stache era, at their own most Mercurial peak. And then I still don't know the answer.
Two really excellent Fighters. My vote would go to Mitchell. He was always in the other fellow's back yard or at best a neutral venue. He was a real tough, all round technician who did everything to a very high degree.
Lol, you know me well! But seriously I would pick Mitchell still. I would say Orlando is greater than Gaby, but I maintain Gaby was better IMO
What's up my pal. I remember Gaby having the heavier hands but what were his other qualities that you felt made him better than Orelando
Not much bro, hope all is well with you. It is likely implicit bias that makes me favor Gaby over Orlando. I really like both of them and Orlando certainly gets more appreciation, but I don’t think much separates them either way. I like the way Gaby works the body and love his effort against Chandler even though he came up short. I personally figure Gaby would beat Orlando and I am partial to think he would do better h2h against a variety or opposition and styles. Could be that I am wrong but since it is hypothetical we will never know. I do think Orlando has him in the resume department and hence say he is greater. But I did like watching Gaby more.
