Wilfred Benitez and Felix Trinidad...Who do you rank higher...

Patience, determination, willingness to test himself against the best are all irrelevant.

And no, Trinidad does not have skills.

 

His attacking skills were superb.

He had a good jab,wicked hook and fantastic body punching which is a great skill in itself.His footwork wasn't the greatest but he eventually invariably caught his man in the end.

You don't dominate Pernell Whitaker (even a faded one) like Tito did without possessing some skills and to say he had none is silly.

He got whipped by Hopkins and Wright who are two of the best technicians out there which hurts his standing but prior to this he showed effectivness against a wide array of styles and opponents and I think it's unfair that this seems to get disregarded.

 

The flip side of that coin is that he got soundly outboxed by all three of the best three fighters he ever faced (B-Hop, Winky, Oscar).

I like Tito and think he was a top fighter, but I think to say his skills were superb is pushing it a bit.

 

I only said his offensive skills were superb.

Defensively he was there to hit,his footwork was slow,he could be out thought,out manouvered and if his power was nullified as it was against Hops and Winky then he floundered badly.

BUT when Tito was winging left hooks and ripping the body he was some offensive machine and wasn't the skill less one dimensional slugger that people say.

He was one of my all time favourites from a spectator point of view but I'm not blind to his many faults either.

 

Only an idiot would make such a dumb ass comment.

 

I still think "superb" is a bit much for Tito's offensive skills. Just my opinion.

 

Fair enough but out of curiousity where do you think Tito was lacking?

I mean he doesn't compare offensively with guys like Louis or Robinson but he was pretty damn effective in his own right.He was a natural puncher more than a boxer but it made him the force he was for a long time imo.

 

I dunno...He was a hell of a combination puncher during the early to middle part of his reign and he worked nicely off a jab on the way in. Plus he could counter-punch a bit when required (He did it against Oba Carr and Yori Boy Campas) so he's not nearly as one-dimensional as he's made out to be.

 

I know the question wasn't directed at me but if I may answer it, I think Tito lacked a great jab that his fellow welterweight counterparts Quartey,Pernell,Oscar all had. He had a good jab no doubt as seen when he used it against Yory Boy Campas but it wasn't that strong commanding jab that the 3 mentioned fighters had.

 

It's not that I think he lacked anything as such, more of a discrepancy with your use of the word "superb". For me, Tito was always effective, a potent attacking force, but he lacked a great jab, and I think a fighter whose arsenal could be described as "superb" would be someone with more a bit more variety and adaptability in his game. I just think you guys are overstating his abilities a little. His power outweighed his skill, quite considerably. It's nitpicking sure, but that word just jarred a little. Tito was not superb in any regard IMO, just damn good. Maybe if he'd performed against his best opponents I'd think the same as you, but turning it on against Oba Carr is not the same as turning it on against Oscar De La Hoya.

 

Very true but as you said he did have a good jab and couple that with his combination punching,body attack and brutal hook and you have a helluva formidable offensive machine but I see what you're saying :good

 

Actually I agree with much of what you say.

Titos perfomances against Oscar,Hopkins and Winky served to highlight his limitations against elite fighters who weren't going to go to water against his arsenal and had the ring generalship to exploit his deficiencies.

That being said his deficiencies weren't offensive more technical like stated earlier ie average footwork,defensive lapses,a lack of versitility to disrupt another fighters tempo etc.

So I stand by calling him a "superb" offensive fighter but I perfectly understand why you don't and wont hold it against you personally (Yes I've been reading you and PP going at it in the Pac-Hamed thread.****ing priceless reading it is)

 

:good

 

Trinidad was a great fighter but for me you have to rate Benitez higher. The wins against Cervantes and Duran alone eclipse anything Tito did.

 

I agree with you he was a great offensive fighter and had very underrated hand speed. The best version of Trinidad as a fighter is the 1994 version who was a true power boxer. But as he went along in his career he slowly started getting away from the boxer puncher he was in the mid 90's and was too straight forward in his approach.