Who's Greater: Jose Napoles or Felix Trinidad?

Trinidad's greatness gets underrated. I do feel it's warranted to have him as a top 20 Latin great - but no, this is clearly Napoles.

 

If Napoles eyes hold up, then yes see him as a winner, I mean he must be in everybody's top 4/5 yes ? keep well.

 

Napoles and it's not close

 

I love Tito. He’s one of my top three all-time fighters. He’s become grossly underrated these days but he’s not on Napoles’ level. That’s fairly obvious.

 

I have Napoles third all-time Latino. Tito, I have around 14/15.

 

Napoles for me.

Both great at Welter, but Napoles clearly more so. At his best and for very long periods, there was absolutely no doubt about his supremacy at 147, which can't be said for Tito. Some good names on Tito's record between 1993 and 1998, but also mixed in with quite a bit of filler and when the showdown against Oscar to decide who the Welterweight king really was came along in 1999, the majority of people feel (rightly, in my view) that Trinidad was pretty damn lucky to walk away with the unified belts.

Obviously Tito went on a real tear from 1999 to 2001 and you can't fault his opposition or performance levels. Very creditable achievements at 154 (in particular) and 160. But let's not forget that Napoles' list of quality wins and performances aren't limited to Welterweight either, and I don't think it's a stretch to say that his exploits outside of that weight class at the very least bear comparison with Trinidad's. I think we'd all agree he had pretty much shown himself to be the best Light-Welter in the world with his wins over Hernandez, Perkins etc. for at least 2-3 years before he finally moved up to Welter when it became apparent he just wasn't going to get a shot at 140.

That's one of the greatest feathers in Napoles' cap, for me. He made himself a top five all-time Welterweight despite not getting his title shot there until he was approaching thirty, and when he was if anything a natural 140 pounder rather than 147.

Eye test is simply the confirmation, for me. Trinidad absolutely brilliant at a couple of things which helped cover up a few limitations he had, but even then he could be made to look a little ordinary at times, even during his prime years. That's certainly less so with Napoles, who was just about as good as anything the Welterweight division has ever produced when in full flow and who was the much more rounded fighter. If he hadn't cut so easy he'd have gone on to be even greater still.

 

Napoles’ two BIG weaknesses were cuts and booze. I’ve heard people tell me they’d be in the gym with him and he would show up stinking of booze.

 

Napoles was far greater pound for pound. I rate him higher at Welterweight, too, but the gap there isn’t as wide. Even less so in a head to head hypothetical, where the physical differences alone make the outcome highly debatable.

 

The answer is Napoles

 

What I will add is that while Napoles is greater, who actually wins H2H at 147 is up for debate.

Napoles' style is actually good for Trinidad in a way. I would make Nap the favorite, but it would be foolish to discount Tito's chances, because he'd be an extremely live underdog.

I'm not all that confident that Napoles was big and durable enough to handle 12-15 rounds of Trinidad's pressure and firepower.

I think there's a lot of debate on who takes a H2H.

 

Tito was a great fighter one of my fav's growing up but Napoles is on another level regarding legacy.

 

Hmm it was already 14 - 0 in favour of Napoles when i cast my vote. Good to see a sensible thread.

 

Brilliant post - I can't add anything that you haven't already said.