Why wasn,t benitez mentioned with the big four?

Because it would then be the Big 5.

 

Those other guys were over-the-top types either in the ring, outside the ring, or both.

 

Because Rooster doesn't approve of Benitez, and Rooster writes the history of boxing.

 

As a fighter, he was not so great as the other four.

 

Whoah whoah whoah whoah whoah whoah!

Cheated against Hearns? The same fight which Hearns won by about 9 points on my card? Watch it again, without Benitez's balls in your face. It was a competitive, but CLEAR win for Hearns. Leonard beat him even worse, winning as many rounds and stopping him at the end.

 

Merit aside (and no way did he beat Hearns) Benitiez didn't fight Hagler. All the other "Fab Four" fought each other at least once.

 

amen!!!!:happy

 

The way I remember it was the Big Five..not the big four and I grew up in that era!!!

 

................It was the Big Four (I too grew up in that era). It didn't have that catchy title then, but Benitez was never part of that group. As mentioned, he didn't complete the round-robin tourney as the rest did. He never fought Hagler, and wasn't quite as good as the rest of them.

 

Ahhhh...Sorry Sal..I love you Bro ..bute it was the fab five!!!

 

Benitez wasn't on the level of the big 4 ... he beat Duran yet lost to Leonard and Hearns.

He didn't accomplish anything thing outside of being the youngest to win a world title and beating Roberto Duran ...

That doesn't grant much clout --

He's a H.O.F'er based on that but he doesn't have enough inside the ring accomplishments to be considered in the same light of those other guys.

Who have won titles past 154 ...

 

really...wow..you really know your ****...and I mean ****@!!:happy