# Do you feel the lack of torch-passing is stopping the next generation from achieving true greatness?



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Consider this.

The way that I've always understood generational transitions of greatness is for the incoming crop of great fighters to beat the veterans on their way out, and for those fighters to then contend with each other. We all know the ceremonial torch-passing bouts, which often include a hungry underdog or tentative favorite who fights an all time great who still has something left, and makes a claim by dominating and then having great success and competition thereafter.

Let's look at some of the 90's-2000's greats (and near-greats) as an example.

De La Hoya beat Chavez, who hadn't lost since before his bout with Meldrick Taylor. He also beat a very game Whitaker, who hadn't lost in years since Ramirez, and also unofficially beat Trinidad, who more dominantly beat Whitaker a short while later (establishing his own elite status). These were signature wins which opened the door to the later success in his career.

Erik Morales beat Daniel Zaragoza emphatically, and went on to have a great trilogy with Barrera and the two racked up great wins in their divisions. Morales made an epic stamp on his legacy by beating Pacquiao, who himself had established his greatness by beating Barrera after an impressive win streak. Pacquiao then turned the tables in a rematch in which Morales was doing fairly well and stopped him, before repeating the process in a rubber match and going on to establish an unprecedented welterweight career (including a marquee win over Cotto, who himself established his elite status by beating Mosley who beat Oscar emphatically in his prime) and reigniting a legendary rivalry with Marquez, who had also beaten Barrera himself. In his later career JMM lost to Mayweather, a man given the golden touch by De La Hoya as was Pacquiao in highly anticipated bouts, and recently to Bradley in most others' eyes, a guy floating at the top of 140 for years. Mayweather also established victories of strong lineage against Mosley, Cotto, and Hatton.

Roy Jones beat a fading HOFer in McCallum, who of course had epic bouts with Toney (who Jones beat himself), who had beaten Barkley as his initial signature win, who had stopped Hearns and competed viciously with Duran. Hopkins went on to beat Tarver, RJJ's conquer, and his clearest standout loss in his later career was to Chad Dawson, an elite talent who has been stopped twice since.

Tyson's heavyweight reign was born in the wake of conquering older established champions in Holmes and Berbick, and died with his vanquish at the hands of two intertwining rivals.

I could go on.

Excuse the confused rambling, but you see, there's a very clear and connected web that goes decades deep into great bouts and victories and rivalries and legacies which carry over generation to generation, giving birth to new eras of pound for pound stars and historic fighters. I'm no historian, but I've followed enough decades of boxing to see the constant circle of life transitioning. But I see a problem.

Today's young guns aren't cutting it. *There aren't any torches being passed.*

Let's take a look at the bona fide greats of our era. Pacquiao has only authentically lost to Morales, and since then, to Marquez. Marquez has been beaten by Mayweather, and most recently, lost an SD to Bradley, who while is still somewhat young, has seen plenty of action in the ring and has been around for a while. Mayweather has been fighting young guns in Ortiz, Guerrero, and the most recent hype baby in Canelo. None of them could do it. Bernard Hopkins most clearly lost to Dawson, who's career immediately fell into peril. Shane Mosley's weight as a faded great has run out, as has Jones'.

So my question to you is this: what are the new kids on the block to do?

Is clear and direct lineage to certified ATG's the only way to establish greatness? No. There are plenty of historical greats who's sheer dominance and consistency over their respective divisions or multiple weight classes allowed them to leave behind a truly remarkable legacy. Ricardo Lopez, Julio Cesar Chavez, Joe Louis, Carlos Monzon, Antonio Cervantes, etc...so there is hope for the promising young champions of our time.

Danny Garcia, Andre Ward, Canelo Alvarez, Mikey Garcia, Gennady Golovkin, Guillermo Rigondeaux, Abner Mares, etc...all have a chance to make their mark with various permutations of longevity, dominance, weight jumps, and authentic top-tier rivals. But something about the fact that NONE of the greats and near-greats of this era have been able to be beaten by younger worthy dominant champions to take their place at the top and continue dominating worries me. I feel like, with the state of boxing as it is right now, the skill level and frequency of competition is just not good enough to legitimize these guys's resumes when put next to the greats of even just yesterday. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of skilled guys today and regardless of the general drop in skill, there are some elite-level well rounded practitioners of the sweet science, but there is a gap just below them that I fear won't compensate for that lack of transition, that lack of torch-passing tradition necessary for the unmistakable stamp of greatness on a fighter's legacy. They could end up on a strange solitary island in time of their own, forced to redefine greatness from the ground up, bereft of a link to the decades and decades of inherited greatness. Just looking at the potential wins for each of these guys leaves me wanting for more, as those wins are far to easy to shelf under the numerous names of past greats, even when wearing the spectacles most absent of any hint of rose color. If true, it's a sad day for the sport.

Please share your thoughts.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

good thread, i think about this alot..

today's youngsters aren't cut from the same cloth, wich is why gys like Mayweather, Marquez, Pac, BHop, Cotto, the Klit bros, etc are over their 30's and for the most part are still considered top P4P caliber fighters and can beat the majority of the young guys around their weight classes..

i wonder if it is just that these fighters are very special, or is it that the young generation just aren't what the fighters of the past were.. idk

but, bottom line is, for the "torch" to be passed, somebody has to beat Floyd or beat both Klit bros..

and Bhop doesn't seem interested in giving Ward a shot...


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> good thread, i think about this alot..
> 
> today's youngsters aren't cut from the same cloth, wich is why gys like Mayweather, Marquez, Pac, BHop, Cotto, the Klit bros, etc are over their 30's and for the most part are still considered top P4P caliber fighters and can beat the majority of the young guys around their weight classes..
> 
> i wonder if it is just that these fighters are very special, or is it that the young generation just aren't what the fighters of the past were.. idk


Right, most if not all of the top guys are the old guard.

I think it's a bit of both. Those fighters definitely earned their spots, but they're not the _very_ best we've ever seen. And this younger generation seems incapable of taking it to them.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Right, most if not all of the top guys are the old guard.
> 
> I think it's a bit of both. Those fighters definitely earned their spots, but they're not the _very_ best we've ever seen. And this younger generation seems incapable of taking it to them.


exactly!

i couldn't imagine any of those fighters that i mentioned getting shut down in their primes by guys that are 30+. and when Bhop, Cotto, or Marquez do actually lose to young fighter, it's always close..


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Like I said in a thread in esb, boxing skill is regressing :hey

Rigondeaux needs to take out Chris John while he has the chance


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> exactly!
> 
> i couldn't imagine any of those fighters that i mentioned getting shut down in their primes by guys that are 30+. and when Bhop, Cotto, or Marquez do actually lose to young fighter, it's always close..


Right, and whoever beats them doesn't carry on dominating. Trout lost to Canelo who lost to Floyd clearly and did worse than Cotto on that level. Marquez lost close to Bradley who isn't even an up and comer, he's an established champ, though I doubt he beats Pac or May. BHop's conquer Dawson got stopped twice, once by Ward (solid win but at a catch-weight) and Stevenson (who's shaping up to be good but not historically _great_ so far.) And before that, Taylor got stopped by Pavlik who Hopkins dominated before getting retired by Abraham and withering into irrelevance.



bballchump11 said:


> Like I said in a thread in esb, boxing skill is regressing :hey
> 
> Rigondeaux needs to take out Chris John while he has the chance


Yep.

And yeah, someone needs to grab that lil fucker's scalp already. That's a juicy and very feasible win for the top guys around that division.


----------



## igor_otsky (Jul 24, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> Like I said in a thread in esb, boxing skill is regressing :hey
> 
> Rigondeaux needs to take out Chris John while he has the chance


john isnt that great.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Yep.
> 
> And yeah, someone needs to grab that lil fucker's scalp already. That's a juicy and very feasible win for the top guys around that division.


:lol: ya feel me? I was hoping Gamboa and then Mikey Garcia would do it, but both outgrew the division too quick.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

igor_otsky said:


> john isnt that great.


I know, but he's the only veteran on the elite level of his division that I can see losing to one of the young buck AND that I'd enjoy it :yep

GGG would beat Sergio now, but I wouldn't enjoy that fight.


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

Great topic Bogo. And I agree with cellz and bball on this too. While training technique has allowed some to stay on top longer than before, boxing, being ju st a fraction as popular as it obce was, is not attracting the youth it once did. Once upon a time, everyone wanted to be Ali, Tyson, and Sugar Ray. Now with boxing's popularity taking a back seat to more mainstream sports, kids want to be LeBron instead. Not difficult to blame them.


----------



## igor_otsky (Jul 24, 2012)

peds


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The conversation that inspired this thread:



Bogotazo said:


> I still don't see HOF potential for Canelo or Danny, but that's largely because I don't see anyone they could realistically conquer that would convince me. Actually no, HOF yes simply because they can make waves and become famous and participate in memorable fights, but not ATG.
> 
> *This is getting weird. There are no torches being passed. If something doesn't happen soon, the new generation is going to have to start from scratch on some weird island disconnected from the past eras and redefine greatness from the ground up.*





JMP said:


> Fuck. You're right.





Bogotazo said:


> The lineage involved in asking "who'd he beat?" to qualify a fighter's greatness is going to be dismantled. :conf





O59 said:


> :lol: Yeah. Hopkins is still up there at light-heavyweight, the Klitschko brothers at heavyweight, Martinez at middleweight, Mayweather at whatever division he chooses, etc. It's a bit odd. Pacquiao clearly beat Timothy Bradley, but then lost to Juan Manuel Marquez. Marquez lost to Mayweather but beat everybody else he fought in recent years.





Bogotazo said:


> Right, these guys either don't lose or trade losses with their contemporary Old Guard ATG's.
> 
> Someone said that "we've seen the last generation of ATG's" at some point, and I thought it was bullshit, because we have lots of promising young technical fighters coming up. But if they can't dethrone any of the greats while they're still around, they can't actually prove it. And their era will be bereft of greatness unless someone can dominate multiple weightclasses for long periods of time in unprecedented fashion.


 @turbotime @SJS20 @Teeto @HandsofIron @the cobra @Flea Man


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

i think part of the problem is the business aspect of boxing is slowly saturating the value of the young prospects.

some managers/promoters knew that if they have a talent in their hands, they would rather have him pad his record, earn an undeserved ranking from the alphabet organizations, and shoot down who is the weak titlist at that time. 

gone are the times when young fighters take on a handful of ranked contenders, fellow prospects, old gatekeepers and spoiler journeymen before even challenging for a title.

if they are not ready, then they will never be. specially if the guy on top is an atg.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

-The older fighters last longer because they only fight once or twice a year.

-35 is the new 30. The younger guys have to be just as serious with their conditioning as the old fighters now are. Bradley doesn't beat JMM the other night if he doesn't show up looking like a boulder.

-The more established fighters get to pick who they want to fight (Martinez vs. Golovkin? No.)

-Torches are still being passed, it's just that no one cares anymore. Dawson has already beaten Hopkins. Bradley just beat JMM and has a disputed victory over Pac. Garcia beat Morales. Vitali, even in losing, inherited Lewis' torch and then dipped it into a giant ashtray. Pac could be brutally ko'd by Rios in a couple of weeks and no one will proclaim Rios "the next big star in boxing". 

The name of the game is branding now; getting your name out to the masses.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

The greatness of an era is defined by the competitenivess of it.
When everybody is fighting each other it's a good era. (140 right now is an example of it)

You can have all the talent ever in a division, it only matters when the fights the fans want are made and we've gotten these fights.
The fewer zeros there are in the division, the stronger it is.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> -Torches are still being passed, it's just that no one cares anymore. Dawson has already beaten Hopkins. Bradley just beat JMM and has a disputed victory over Pac. Garcia beat Morales. Vitali, even in losing, inherited Lewis' torch and then dipped it into a giant ashtray. Pac could be brutally ko'd by Rios in a couple of weeks and no one will proclaim Rios "the next big star in boxing".
> 
> The name of the game is branding now; getting your name out to the masses.


Well, like I said, Bradley is more or less JMM's contemporary, and Dawson couldn't continue Hopkins' dominance of the division. His career is in crisis while Hopkins continues to prosper. Vitali inherited Lewis's torch in a sense, but he's part of the old guard now. Nobody is beating him or his brother and starting a new era of dominance. Rios could start his legacy if he sparked Pac and went on to improve and rack up truly great wins at welter. But IMO the torches aren't being passed. The older guys are beating each other, and any younger guy that gets a win seems to squander it. Get me?


----------



## tezel8764 (May 16, 2013)

Good Thread @Bogotazo.

One for the oldies. :lol:


----------



## Uncle Rico (May 24, 2013)

I agree, Bogotazo. The worrying drop in skill level and competitiveness is the main reason.


----------



## Uncle Rico (May 24, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Well, like I said, Bradley is more or less JMM's contemporary, and Dawson couldn't continue Hopkins' dominance of the division. His career is in crisis while Hopkins continues to prosper. Vitali inherited Lewis's torch in a sense, but he's part of the old guard now. Nobody is beating him or his brother and starting a new era of dominance. Rios could start his legacy if he sparked Pac and went on to improve and rack up truly great wins at welter. But IMO the torches aren't being passed. The older guys are beating each other, and any younger guy that gets a win seems to squander it. Get me?


Yep. Having the torch passed to you isn't you just beating the main man. It's you beating him, taking over his thrown, and staying there for a respectable amount of time - something Dawson has failed to do.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> The conversation that inspired this thread:
> 
> @*turbotime* @*SJS20* @*Teeto* @HandsofIron @*the cobra* @*Flea Man*


Mmm. Good thread, interesting discussion. Marquez may retire after the Bradley loss but it's an odd "passing-of-the-torch" situation because Bradley has been relevant for a few years now. Lomachenko bursting on the scene however....


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Well, like I said, Bradley is more or less JMM's contemporary, and Dawson couldn't continue Hopkins' dominance of the division. His career is in crisis while Hopkins continues to prosper. Vitali inherited Lewis's torch in a sense, but he's part of the old guard now. Nobody is beating him or his brother and starting a new era of dominance. Rios could start his legacy if he sparked Pac and went on to improve and rack up truly great wins at welter. But IMO the torches aren't being passed. The older guys are beating each other, and any younger guy that gets a win seems to squander it. Get me?


I definitely get what you're saying. I guess we'll have to just wait it out. I kinda like the way things are right now. The old formula was becoming an embarrassing caricature of itself, with people like Alvarez and JCC Jr. undergoing exactly one challenge before getting a chance to take down a couple of old fighters. They didn't have to work their way up to the goal and were washed because they a) had no realistic preparation for the task at hand and b) just were not good enough.

...But imagine if these inferior fighters had managed to win based solely on their youth advantage. I don't think boxing is better for having Canelo beat Floyd, or Martinez losing to Chavez. I'm content with waiting for other truly great fighters to come along, even if that means they have to light their own torch, a la Hopkins.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Good thread. I have been thinking about the next generatino of fighters lately. it's pretty obvious that there isn't much going through at the moment. Hopefully the ABA can make a better transition for the european amatuer talents. The next generation surely isn't coming from the states, it's definitely europe. There aren't nearly enough of those guys coming through and talent has definitely been squandered in the past.


----------



## KO KING95 (Jul 21, 2012)

I agree, if something huge doesn't happen, such as an upset or a current P4P fighter gets beat by a talented up and coming prospect with a promising future, i feel that this generation will not have a definitive end even after the truly elite fighters retire, and right now the list is pretty slim in regards to the likely hood of that happening.

Look at Alvarez against Mayweather for example, Alvarez is a very talented hard punching young fighter, however against Mayweather he looked out of his depth, which is nothing to be ashamed of but none the less a one sided fight which Floyd had no trouble winning, Alvarez still likely has a great future ahead him but he couldn't beat a 36 year old man (who has aged very well and still looks on top form but that isn't the point) moving up in weight who started his career as a super featherweight and was fighting against a man who not only fought at an overall significantly higher weight but was even big for light middleweight compared to other fighters in the division.

Right now things aren't looking too good, inside fighting as a skill appears to be less and less common these days, and a lot of fighters appear to not quite have the mental strength of past fighters due to the fact that it is becoming easier and easier even for those from poor unprivileged backgrounds to make a living and lets face it boxing thrives from less opportunity as it receives men with few other options who put all their focus into the sport as they need to make as much money as possible to secure their futures and it appears as though because life has become just a little bit easier fighters are just a little bit less dedicated.

Bottom line is physically younger fighters may be stronger and improving physically but they don't have the skill sets and mental strength of the very best fighters now and of the past.


----------



## MrJotatp4p (May 23, 2013)

The young fighter of today are not cut from the same cloth. Its just a fact. They don't seem to have the hunger to be great either. I have said it before in another thread about jumping rope as an example. These young guys don't hit that that shit like fighters of the past and some of the current older great that's still in the game. I could be wrong but its just my opinion and what I see. I don't hear or see these young fighter doing road work of 5 and 6 miles in the mornings and you seem them just hitting the bag with power to impress while guys like Mayweather and a few other older cats are using straight technique and applying movements etc as if its their opponent thats the bag. 

Also one problem is boxing business and how its changing the mentality of this young generation. Most guys want to slug it out and please the fans instead of using the art/ sweet science of boxing. Hell we even have promoters and such calling guys like Rigo boring when in the old days that teaching that he does in that ring would be admired.


----------



## sim_reiss (Jun 6, 2012)

I think my definition of a torch-passing is a little different. A real torch-passing for me is a highly-touted young contender (25 or less) clearly beating a veteran who is perhaps past-prime but not generally regarded as shot. Real/significant torch passings are rare because they need a lot of stars to align to occur. The main impediment is that the young prospect has to have the financial muscle behind him to entice the veteran into such a fight or the veteran mistakenly believes the prospect is an easy nights work. For me, right now at world level, only Broner and Alvarez have such clout. The problem for those two is that given promotional issues they would have to take the torch from a seemingly ageless, once in a generation talent who is still at the peak of his powers.

At British level, there are a couple of fights that would represent torch-passings - if upsets occur in Groves-Froch and Fury-Haye they would be significant points in the timelines of the UK super-middle and heavyweight divisions. However, they don't have the global significance a fight like Oscar-Chavez did...


----------



## MrJotatp4p (May 23, 2013)

KO KING95 said:


> I agree, if something huge doesn't happen, such as an upset or a current P4P fighter gets beat by a talented up and coming prospect with a promising future, i feel that this generation will not have a definitive end even after the truly elite fighters retire, and right now the list is pretty slim in regards to the likely hood of that happening.
> 
> Look at Alvarez against Mayweather for example, Alvarez is a very talented hard punching young fighter, however against Mayweather he looked out of his depth, which is nothing to be ashamed of but none the less a one sided fight which Floyd had no trouble winning, Alvarez still likely has a great future ahead him but he couldn't beat a 36 year old man (who has aged very well and still looks on top form but that isn't the point) moving up in weight who started his career as a super featherweight and was fighting against a man who not only fought at an overall significantly higher weight but was even big for light middleweight compared to other fighters in the division.
> 
> ...


Absolutely KO!! :good


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Look at recent US Olympic boxing teams. Something is happening to USA boxing.

Props to Bernard and Mayweather, making the young look weak.


----------



## fists of fury (May 24, 2013)

I think this is the only heavyweight era where the dominant champ(s) never actually took the torch from an older, established great. 
Vitali tried but failed. Wlad didn't get any torch passed on to him either. They never beat the man who beat the man etc...


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Definitely a huge part of it. I told Hands of I forever that Mayweather/Marquez/Morales/Hopkins/Pacquiao era would be the last era of true ATGs. Now they will come few and far between eachother. Bradley is putting in good work as is Froch. 

But it's looking downhill from here. Criteria also will have to be adjusted for guys like Golovkin, who may jsut rule for a long time like a guy like Monzon did.


"Some fighters have the talent, but the talent ain't out there"


----------



## knockout artist (Jun 5, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> good thread, i think about this alot..
> 
> today's youngsters aren't cut from the same cloth, wich is why gys like Mayweather, Marquez, Pac, BHop, Cotto, the Klit bros, etc are over their 30's and for the most part are still considered top P4P caliber fighters and can beat the majority of the young guys around their weight classes..
> 
> ...


I agree, the younger crop today just aren't as good (with the exception of Ward).

An interesting fight coming up is Froch v Groves, Froch is the champion at 36 years old he's fought everyone worth mentioning at SMW. Groves is 25, and is stepping up for the first time, can Groves dethrone Froch?


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Definitely a huge part of it. I told Hands of I forever that Mayweather/Marquez/Morales/Hopkins/Pacquiao era would be the last era of true ATGs. Now they will come few and far between eachother. Bradley is putting in good work as is Froch.
> 
> But it's looking downhill from here. Criteria also will have to be adjusted for guys like Golovkin, who may jsut rule for a long time like a guy like Monzon did.
> 
> "Some fighters have the talent, but the talent ain't out there"


now that you mentioned it, ggg is another guy whomay not have the proper torch passing ceremony. i have doubts sergio and his team would want to spend his last days against a man who could put a serious hurting on him.

although, once sergio is gone, ggg will likely be the man.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

sugarshane_24 said:


> now that you mentioned it, ggg is another guy whomay not have the proper torch passing ceremony. i have doubts sergio and his team would want to spend his last days against a man who could put a serious hurting on him.
> 
> although, once sergio is gone, ggg will likely be the man.


I doubt Martinez is chomping at the bit to get in there with Golo. I have nothing but respect for Martinez, but I'd rather see him cash out vs Cotto, and then fight Golovkin.

I think Golovkin KO's him but Martinez is prideful and would sign the fight.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

All solid posts in here guys. I appreciate the discussion. And I believe we're all relatively on the same page as to what passing the torch means. It's more than just picking up a loss, it's inheriting the position over time. 

Might be interesting to theorize how the young guns of today can establish theirs. If nobody dominantly beats Pac, JMM, Hopkins, Floyd, or the Klits, it might be all but over. :-(


----------



## Trash Bags (May 17, 2013)

floyd's generation is truly remarkable. the next crop is good, but not as good. it's gonna be a while before we see fighters as talented as the ones you've mentioned. experience also makes them hard to dominate.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Wow nice post Bogo.

I seriously believe that we shouldn't fear whatsoever. I mention this a lot when talking about generations: The movement to no headgear and 10 point system, the growth of boxing in Eastern European countries, Japan, Eurasia and China will all mean we will be getting top pros. Even as we speak in the World Amateur Championships in Almaty, there's been a lot of knockdowns lately and competitors who were otherwise competitive are no longer to the extent that they were such due to the changes.

I'd say wait a while. Super Middleweight will be very impressive. We have Ward who will retire as an ATG already. Golovkin will end up there, Canelo may even end up there. Murata looks like he'll be in the mix with the best within 2 years. You have Ukrainian monsters like Khytrov, Mytrofanov and Derevyanchenko who are in World Series of Boxing, with Mytrofanov taking a break from that to go to Worlds in Almaty. Any of these three who go pro WILL be complete monsters. Khytrov hits so hard its fucking scary. If these guys go pro, Super middleweight will be mental.

...In terms of nationalities, Sergio Martinez will be passing the torch to Brian Castano, a hard hitting middleweight with a good style in pros, who had a WSB record of 2-0 with a KO win and also a win over Derevyanchenko who has an 18-1 record in WSB. I strongly advise you to check him out, he's currently pro with 5(4)-0 record. Brian has amateur victories over Esquiva Florentino, Errol Spence and someone else very good as well.

Quigley is even going to join who to me, looks like a Froch 2.0

Featherweight is stacked as fuck I'm afraid....GOATchenko, Uchiyama, Gamboa, Mares, John, Santa Cruz, Salido, Jhonny Gonzalez who is like 3 'good' names away from HOF IMO, Frampton soon, Rigondeaux who will fight the 126lbers..

Trinidad passed the torch to Cotto, who passed the torch to Verdejo: 




- This guy sure as hell looks impressive! If he didn't face GOATchenko in amateurs in Olympics, he would have got a medal.

I think we're just in a 'down-time' but we will have great boxers again.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Wow nice post Bogo.
> 
> I seriously believe that we shouldn't fear whatsoever. I mention this a lot when talking about generations: The movement to no headgear and 10 point system, the growth of boxing in Eastern European countries, Japan, Eurasia and China will all mean we will be getting top pros. Even as we speak in the World Amateur Championships in Almaty, there's been a lot of knockdowns lately and competitors who were otherwise competitive are no longer to the extent that they were such due to the changes.
> 
> ...


But how are they going to get there? Sure, there will be high quality fighters coming up, but they won't have a link to established greats. None of the young guys are cleaning out the old ones. How are they going to prove it? Ward can't be an ATG already because his best win is Carl Froch. His overall body is very solid but not historically great. What kind of rivals is he going to get? If he cleans house and moves up, then yes, he can establish greatness. But what about the rest? Unless they become Lopez's, Chavez's, and Monzon's, they won't have truly ATG resumes.

I hear you about there being great talent coming up, I don't think the sport is going to dry up in terms of quality fighters, it's simply absent of young fighters good enough to overthrow the old ones. And to me that's a problem in terms of establishing greatness. Every generation past has seen a passing of the torches. When I say that, I mean a beating of a great with something left and continuing to dominate in his place.


----------



## KO KIDD (ESB EX-Patriot) (Jun 3, 2013)

Floyd beat Oscar

Pacquiao wiped out Morales to at the time really end Morales before the comeback, he also wiped out De La Hoya

Taylor beat Hopkins but it was a short term passing of the torch but middleweight has had logical passings of the title from Hopkins to Taylor to Pavlik to Martinez

Hatton beat Tyszyu to take the torch at 140

Wasnt Calderon beaten when he was old thus passing the torch

That Estrada guy beat Viloria to pass the torch at the lower weights 

Dawson appeared to take the torch when he beat Hopkins Tarver Johnson Harding to lift the old guard out of their trenches but Hopkins is back but it a way Stevenson took the torch from Dawson 

I named some flimsy examples but torch passing still occurs, I think management has gotten smarter, Lennox Lewis got out at the right time, Calzaghe got out at the right time, Hopkins had a brief retirement, Mayweather had a brief retirement, Pacquiao took tough fights but negotiated terms in his favor


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

I really thought we were going to have a nice torch passing with Rafeal Marquez to Juan Manuel Lopez (who used to have great potential). I then thought we were gonna have a super fight with him and Gamboa, but that went to hell


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KO KIDD (ESB EX-Patriot) said:


> Floyd beat Oscar
> 
> Pacquiao wiped out Morales to at the time really end Morales before the comeback, he also wiped out De La Hoya
> 
> ...


No those are good examples, I included some of them in my post (Missed the Taylor-Pavlik-Martinez one, that's good) but a true passing of the torch is more than just a loss. None of those younger guys could hold on and dominate after beating a true ATG (like Hopkins' case). Estrada and Calderon aren't ATG's. Pac did it but nobody is beating him except JMM, his contemporary rival.


----------



## KO KIDD (ESB EX-Patriot) (Jun 3, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> No those are good examples, I included some of them in my post (Missed the Taylor-Pavlik-Martinez one, that's good) but a true passing of the torch is more than just a loss. None of those younger guys could hold on and dominate after beating a true ATG (like Hopkins' case). Estrada and Calderon aren't ATG's. Pac did it but nobody is beating him except JMM, his contemporary rival.


You dont think Calderon is a ATG? I'm not arguing that he is because I honestly didnt follow his career but he was a big deal for a while did the guy that beat him do much

and as I said I think you see the torch pass less as management improves and veterans have safer outs. Most guys dont hang around like they used to or take brief retirements


----------



## allenko1 (Jun 27, 2012)

to answer the OP, no. the new guys just need to win. make good business decision and they'll be right there. do basketball players owe it to new players coming in? no. just beat the guys, and win impressively after that. nobody wants to say it, but that's why Tim Bradley gets heat. had an opportunity to take the torch and what happens? awarded a victory he didn't deserve, goes life and death with an ESPN fighter, and then plays patty cake with and old man on Saturday. again, win impressively, make good business decisions...


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

WTF? The torch isn't "passed" it is SNATCHED!

It isn't the fault of old timers that these young men don't step up and snatch their destiny. If these old guys can sit on top and gobble up paydays for what they have been doing all their lives and the sanctioning bodies keep setting/allowing reasonable mandatory challengers who the old guys defeat? I don't see a problem.

To be The Man you have to beat The Man. Ain't nothing changed.


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

hard to carry the torch from Mayweather, Pac, JMM,Klits to some rather obscure nobody with known talent.

We all know Floyd is going to give Broner his stamp of approval.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KO KIDD (ESB EX-Patriot) said:


> You dont think Calderon is a ATG? I'm not arguing that he is because I honestly didnt follow his career but he was a big deal for a while did the guy that beat him do much
> 
> and as I said I think you see the torch pass less as management improves and veterans have safer outs. Most guys dont hang around like they used to or take brief retirements


I don't, he's solid but I don't consider him an ATG nor do most I think. But yes I think the management aspect might have something to do with it.



allenko1 said:


> to answer the OP, no. the new guys just need to win. make good business decision and they'll be right there. do basketball players owe it to new players coming in? no. just beat the guys, and win impressively after that. nobody wants to say it, but that's why Tim Bradley gets heat. had an opportunity to take the torch and what happens? awarded a victory he didn't deserve, goes life and death with an ESPN fighter, and then plays patty cake with and old man on Saturday. again, win impressively, make good business decisions...


It's not the same in basketball. In boxing, as I said, most ATG's establish a legacy by beating a great from the previous era impressively. I feel like the guys Garcia, Canelo, Golovkin, Ward will end up beating won't be as good as the old guard leaving and thus they'll be stuck with inferior resumes falling short of ATGness unless they can dominate their division(s) with serious longevity and consistency as the other fighters I mentioned did.



bald_head_slick said:


> WTF? The torch isn't "passed" it is SNATCHED!
> 
> It isn't the fault of old timers that these young men don't step up and snatch their destiny. If these old guys can sit on top and gobble up paydays for what they have been doing all their lives and the sanctioning bodies keep setting/allowing reasonable mandatory challengers who the old guys defeat? I don't see a problem.
> 
> To be The Man you have to beat The Man. Ain't nothing changed.


Well, that's what I meant. Snatched, taken. It's not happening.

It's not a problem in terms of the old guys, they're supposed to keep staying atop and doing their thing, it's a problem for the future. If there is no link to past greats, you're left with a huge obstacle in terms of making yourself into an ATG.


----------



## BoxingJabsBlog (Sep 20, 2013)

This era too, theres a lot of good but not a lot great. We have to come to terms with that as fight fans.


----------



## allenko1 (Jun 27, 2012)

Canelo just in there with Mayweather. didn't do anything. they've basically given him that torch. Golovkin has great matchups in his career. whether or not he gets them, has to do with good business. Garcia, is an example of what I mean. he even has it better because, he's been the underdog in biggest fights so he's always impressive. Ward is in a poor spot because the good guys in and around his weight he's beaten already. he either waits for Golovkin to move up, hope that Chavez jr gets himself together, move up to light heavyweight, move to heavyweight, or move down to 160 to fight Golovkin Martinez. which is already something he said he wouldn't do...


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

DobyZhee said:


> hard to carry the torch from Mayweather, Pac, JMM,Klits to some rather obscure nobody with known talent.
> 
> We all know Floyd is going to give Broner his stamp of approval.


Pac got snuffed Pactard. His torched was snatched and snatched again.

Stop mentioning Pacfraud in the class with greats. He is an exposed bum.

The Pactard dream is over. :yep


----------



## Elite (May 22, 2013)

Good thread and I agree. I would post more, but others already posted what I wanted to post.


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

Great thread, Bogo. I remember when you raised this point to me about a month ago. It really does appear that the new generation for the most part is going to have to start fresh and solidify their status from the ground up.

I think Ward would have the opportunity to have a passing of the torch moment if Hopkins would fight him. I expect Hopkins to eventually fight Kovalev and lose there, so there's a possibility of a new generation talent having a scalp over a legitimate ATG who still has credibility as a fighter. Of course the job wouldn't be done and Ward and/or Kovalev would have to have a long-time reign displaying dominance and clear superiority over the B-level fighters at 175. Guys like Rigondeaux, Golovkin, Lomachenko, Mikey Garcia, etc. will have to just go about their business though and try to continue adding to their resumes by beating everybody in their weight range and trying to establish dominance. They wont have those decisive wins over true greats from past eras, which I can see making it tough to assess how they'd fare in mythical matchups. Ranking them historically will be difficult also for reasons you've already touched on.

I also agree with you on the general decline in skills. Looking at the welterweight division in comparison to the mid-late 1990s/early 2000s in something else. I think Oba Carr and Maurice Blocker would have beaten Tim Bradley, let alone Whitaker, De La Hoya, Trinidad, Mosley, Quartey, and Forrest. Compare that crop to Broner, Thurman, Alexander, Ortiz, Khan, Karass, Berto, Malignaggi, and Maidana...night and day. That's also a reason why I don't see Mayweather jumping much in the all-time rankings even if he adds 3-4 more welterweight victims to his resume. These guys simply aren't historically good enough to push fighters up in the rankings that much.


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> Pac got snuffed Pactard. His torched was snatched and snatched again.
> 
> Stop mentioning Pacfraud in the class with greats. He is an exposed bum.
> 
> The Pactard dream is over. :yep


Quite possibly one of the worst posts I've seen here.


----------



## The Comedian (Jul 24, 2012)

JMP said:


> Compare that crop to Broner, Thurman, Alexander, Ortiz, Khan, Karass, Berto, Malignaggi, and Maidana...night and day. That's also a reason why I don't see Mayweather jumping much in the all-time rankings even if he adds 3-4 more welterweight victims to his resume. These guys simply aren't historically good enough to push fighters up in the rankings that much.


If Floyd can get Garcia, Broner, Bradley, and a few others it just strengthens his spot. Maybe pushes him up 1.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

JMP said:


> Quite possibly one of the worst posts I've seen here.


Why Pactard? Because it is incorrect? Right. It isn't.

Pac is a complete fraud and media fabrication. The guy built a career on fighting old, weight drained, and/or flat footed fighters coming off of losses. This fight makes it painfully obvious that the loss to Bradley was NOT a fluke because Pac couldn't hit Bradely either and Pac had no chance of EVER beating Mayweather. Pac's only claim to fame was being able to compete with Mayweather which is obviously a joke. Pac didn't deserve to ever be considered any more than a interesting challenge to FMJ.

He is now right where he should be. A local fighter fighting cherry picked fights. Bradley baked Pac's cake and JMM iced it. Torch snatched! :deal


----------



## Brauer (Jun 24, 2013)

Great thread. Its an issue I've though about a lot. I don't want to say that the younger generation is less skilled, even though it is a possibility due to the loss of popularity. I don't have an alternative explanation to this phenomenom, but wish to find one, mostly because I'm in state of denial. It all comes down to Mayweather. It all depends on who beats him.

It is also the reason for which I am so strongly opposed to matching young prospects early in their career: I want to see them blossom before one is struck down, thus creating a new star.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> Why Pactard? Because it is incorrect? Right. It isn't.
> 
> Pac is a complete fraud and media fabrication. The guy built a career on fighting old, weight drained, and/or flat footed fighters coming off of losses. This fight makes it painfully obvious that the loss to Bradley was NOT a fluke because Pac couldn't hit Bradely either and Pac had no chance of EVER beating Mayweather. Pac's only claim to fame was being able to compete with Mayweather which is obviously a joke. Pac didn't deserve to ever be considered any more than a interesting challenge to FMJ.
> 
> He is now right where he should be. A local fighter fighting cherry picked fights. Bradley baked Pac's cake and JMM iced it. Torch snatched! :deal


----------



## FloydPatterson (Jun 4, 2013)

Easy Matchmaking?


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> Why Pactard? Because it is incorrect? Right. It isn't.
> 
> Pac is a complete fraud and media fabrication. The guy built a career on fighting old, weight drained, and/or flat footed fighters coming off of losses. This fight makes it painfully obvious that the loss to Bradley was NOT a fluke because Pac couldn't hit Bradely either and Pac had no chance of EVER beating Mayweather. Pac's only claim to fame was being able to compete with Mayweather which is obviously a joke. Pac didn't deserve to ever be considered any more than a interesting challenge to FMJ.
> 
> He is now right where he should be. A local fighter fighting cherry picked fights. Bradley baked Pac's cake and JMM iced it. Torch snatched! :deal


This is hilarious :rofl Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

JMP said:


> This is hilarious :rofl Thanks for the laugh.


As long as you don't attempt to refute it? :fire

You are welcome. :thumbsup


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

turbotime said:


>


:yep

When will they realize? Pac was not and never was that dude. Pac was more like Icarus...










...flew too close to the Sun, i.e., actually getting the fight with FMJ, so his wings melted off, i.e., he started ducking drug testing.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> :yep
> 
> When will they realize? Pac was not and never was that dude. More like Icarus...


Just like Margarito/Mosley were the dudes to do it atsch


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

This is a great question. Definitely a question that requires a considered response. You should include this somewhere in the next round of the 'CHB most informed poster competition' or whatever it was called.

There are several questions packed in here:

1) What constitutes a passing of the torch fight?
2) How do you identify 'generations' of fighters?
3) How is greatness achieved?

Great thread. Good read.


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

I think it's less talent and skill in boxing than before, as I think the number of people who grow up 100% focused on boxing as their sport of choice has dropped. It's too many opportunities to make money in other sports, while taking less punishment and not having to get to the top 5% that make good money. Of those that choose to box, most nowadays are going in looking for highlight reel KO's or brawls to excite fans.. It's almost the only way to make good money.. Top skilled boxers like Rigondeaux are looked at as boring and make less than lesser skilled boxers who produce KO's against lesser competition. It sucks.. 

The lack of a decent number of true elite talents throughout the divisions in the newer generation means fans will never give them the benefit of the doubt against the older generations of boxers. Which means they'll never achieve the greatness those did, in the eyes of fans.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Just realised I didn't answer the question.

All it takes is a little patience.

There is simply not enough talent at HW to imagine a torch being passed.

I think Hopkins _will_ pass the torch.

You could argue Stevenson has already taken the torch from Dawson but he's half a decade older than him (_what constitutes a passing of the torch fight?_).

After Calzaghe retired you could argue that there was no torch to be passed at SMW, only one that can be _picked up_ by the winner of the Super 6.

I think Martinez _will _pass the torch.

We should all come together in appreciation of Mayweather's inability of being able to pass a torch.

I don't think anyone knows where Chris John is hiding his torch.

I think the actual idea of 'passing the torch' is somewhat rooted in nostalgia and not really representative of how the sport works. As another poster mentioned, genuine 'passing of the torch fights' happen very infrequently.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> Why Pactard? Because it is incorrect? Right. It isn't.
> 
> Pac is a complete fraud and media fabrication. The guy built a career on fighting old, weight drained, and/or flat footed fighters coming off of losses. This fight makes it painfully obvious that the loss to Bradley was NOT a fluke because Pac couldn't hit Bradely either and Pac had no chance of EVER beating Mayweather. Pac's only claim to fame was being able to compete with Mayweather which is obviously a joke. Pac didn't deserve to ever be considered any more than a interesting challenge to FMJ.
> 
> He is now right where he should be. A local fighter fighting cherry picked fights. Bradley baked Pac's cake and JMM iced it. Torch snatched! :deal


Bald I like you but it's disrespectful to call Pac a complete bum and then call people that disagree with your harsh assertions Pactards. This ain't ESB.


----------



## LandB (Jun 12, 2013)

no i think there are lots of other things that hurt the new generation chance of becoming an ATG

I don't think there is a problem in talent the problem is the way its nurtured. I've watched a few interviews where the older trainers state that trainers are more like fitness coaches now rather than teachers now. Then you the promoters and managers now cherrypick so hard in order to keep the "0" that their aren't that many dig deep learning fights anymore between 2 up and comers on the way to the top. instead you get a list of shot fighters and journeymen both coming for a pay day on the new fighters resume. So fighters get rushed along and basically get gifted a paper title and are then expected to fight the world class prime fighters in their division or the torch bearers and then they just look some what of an incomplete fighter doing it e.g. floyd's last opponents, bute against froch, any one wlads defended his title against and broner against anyone thats turned up to win etc.

Now when they lose, get a gift or look bad they dont blame the fact they didn't have the required skill or enough experience and address that issue, they blame it on the sports nutritionist, move up a weight and find a another paper title, hit the ceiling and disappear in obscurity or tell themselves it was a schooling. So the new breed just aren't the complete fighters that the older fighters are.

The market has changed so now the biggest personalities make it to world level rather than the most talented boxers making it to that level the fighters want the biggest paydays as quickly and fans want quick success and are not prepared to wait for their fighter to be modeled into a complete fighter before stepping up.

Then you have social media where fans have full access to their favourite or least favourite fighter and will say all sorts of things so the boxers feel rushed into taking on fights they aren't ready for. it also makes it trickier for the promoters to put a positive swing on things 

Everyone is just not prepared to wait for their fighter to be modeled into a complete fighter before stepping up.

People always talk about the current generation are not as good as the previous generation though


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

JMP said:


> Great thread, Bogo. I remember when you raised this point to me about a month ago. It really does appear that the new generation for the most part is going to have to start fresh and solidify their status from the ground up.
> 
> I think Ward would have the opportunity to have a passing of the torch moment if Hopkins would fight him. I expect Hopkins to eventually fight Kovalev and lose there, so there's a possibility of a new generation talent having a scalp over a legitimate ATG who still has credibility as a fighter. Of course the job wouldn't be done and Ward and/or Kovalev would have to have a long-time reign displaying dominance and clear superiority over the B-level fighters at 175. Guys like Rigondeaux, Golovkin, Lomachenko, Mikey Garcia, etc. will have to just go about their business though and try to continue adding to their resumes by beating everybody in their weight range and trying to establish dominance. They wont have those decisive wins over true greats from past eras, which I can see making it tough to assess how they'd fare in mythical matchups. Ranking them historically will be difficult also for reasons you've already touched on.
> 
> I also agree with you on the general decline in skills. Looking at the welterweight division in comparison to the mid-late 1990s/early 2000s in something else. I think Oba Carr and Maurice Blocker would have beaten Tim Bradley, let alone Whitaker, De La Hoya, Trinidad, Mosley, Quartey, and Forrest. Compare that crop to Broner, Thurman, Alexander, Ortiz, Khan, Karass, Berto, Malignaggi, and Maidana...night and day. That's also a reason why I don't see Mayweather jumping much in the all-time rankings even if he adds 3-4 more welterweight victims to his resume. These guys simply aren't historically good enough to push fighters up in the rankings that much.


Beautiful post. Agree with everything you've said. And when somebody beats _them,_ how are we to judge that win if we can't even place the former on a proper ranking scale?

Ward and Hopkins would be great. Kovalev beating Hopkins and then losing to Ward, not sure how attenuated that is. Might be like Pacquiao beating Raheem instead of Morales or something. But Ward has a chance out of sheer dominance. Beat Bute, clear out 175 including Hopkins, and fight a legitimate heavyweight. Call me crazy but I think he can do it.



allenko1 said:


> Canelo just in there with Mayweather. didn't do anything. they've basically given him that torch. Golovkin has great matchups in his career. whether or not he gets them, has to do with good business. Garcia, is an example of what I mean. he even has it better because, he's been the underdog in biggest fights so he's always impressive. Ward is in a poor spot because the good guys in and around his weight he's beaten already. he either waits for Golovkin to move up, hope that Chavez jr gets himself together, move up to light heavyweight, move to heavyweight, or move down to 160 to fight Golovkin Martinez. which is already something he said he wouldn't do...


Garcia is in a good spot, as is Golovkin and as would a serious Chavez Jr. I just don't see them beating greats or anyone else that really matters to validate their ATG status.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> I think it's less talent and skill in boxing than before, as I think the number of people who grow up 100% focused on boxing as their sport of choice has dropped. It's too many opportunities to make money in other sports, while taking less punishment and not having to get to the top 5% that make good money. Of those that choose to box, most nowadays are going in looking for highlight reel KO's or brawls to excite fans.. It's almost the only way to make good money.. Top skilled boxers like Rigondeaux are looked at as boring and make less than lesser skilled boxers who produce KO's against lesser competition. It sucks..
> 
> The lack of a decent number of true elite talents throughout the divisions in the newer generation means fans will never give them the benefit of the doubt against the older generations of boxers. Which means they'll never achieve the greatness those did, in the eyes of fans.


Yeah good points there, the top tacticians are spoilers and counter-punchers, the truly great pressure fighters are rare (GGG is the closest thing right now).

That last line is exactly the problem. Without upsetting or dominating a great from the past era, you hit a ceiling that's near insurmountable.



Kurushi said:


> Just realised I didn't answer the question.
> 
> All it takes is a little patience.
> 
> ...


The thing is, I feel like a passing of the torch fight is like the examples I gave. Chavez/Whitaker-DLH; DLH-Floyd/Pac; Morales/Barrera-Pac;

Are they really that infrequent? I feel like with a majority of ATG's, you can point to an ATG they beat, or someone who beat an ATG that they beat. This generation doesn't have that, except for the odd win picked up by a youngster that then squanders it. Dawson beat Hopkins but didn't take over and dominate, he got stopped twice since then while Hopkins returned to beat his own record.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

LandB said:


> *People always talk about the current generation are not as good as the previous generation though*


But eventually the old guard was toppled. They're still going strong today and look to retire without picking up any dominating losses.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> Just realised I didn't answer the question.
> 
> All it takes is a little patience.
> 
> ...


JMM and Bhop are definitely beatable at this point, but "passing the torch" isn't just about them losing to a young guy, but it's whether the young guy can maintain his dominance afterwards.. i feel the only person that's capable of doing that against B-hop is Ward. whether Bradley can stay on top after his victory over JMM, who knows.. i think he needs to rematch pac before anything else tho...


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Bald I like you but it's disrespectful to call Pac a complete bum and then call people that disagree with your harsh assertions Pactards. This ain't ESB.


I like you too man.

Why is it disrespectful to (flippantly) call Pac a complete bum? Nobody has any problem calling any other exposed hype job a bum. Nobody has any problem calling Mayweather a "fraud", "ducker", etc... Why is Pacfraud the exception? Looking at his record, i.e., opponent selection, catch weights, opponent dodges, etc... Pac qualifies as a fraudulent hype job. He obviously has some skill, but he got in with Bradley and couldn't touch the guy with two broken feet. (Unless you count the "booms" from Lampley.) The same Bradley who went on to do the same to JMM. This is a fact. I still hold that Pac is probably the most intriguing opponent for Mayweather at this point due to his speed.

He didn't "disagree". He made a disrespectful comment. My response was in kind, but contained clear Boxing based reasoning. Why you feel the need to say something to me and not him makes no sense.

What is your point in saying this isn't ESB? Because "we" don't allow disrespect here? Will you be commenting on every crass comment between fans of opposing fighters or just when they pertain to Pac? Where is your defense of Khan? Judah? Broner? Garcia?


----------



## allenko1 (Jun 27, 2012)

time is on their side. yes it is. and ours because we get to watch. Saturday is Alvarado vs Provodnikov on World Championship Boxing. who would think that last year, two years ago?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> I like you too man.
> 
> Why is it disrespectful to (flippantly) call Pac a complete bum? Nobody has any problem calling any other exposed hype job a bum. Nobody has any problem calling Mayweather a "fraud", "ducker", etc... Why is Pacfraud the exception? Looking at his record, i.e., opponent selection, catch weights, opponent dodges, etc... Pac qualifies as a fraudulent hype job. He obviously has some skill, but he got in with Bradley and couldn't touch the guy with two broken feet. (Unless you count the "booms" from Lampley.) The same Bradley who went on to do the same to JMM. This is a fact. I still hold that Pac is probably the most intriguing opponent for Mayweather at this point due to his speed.
> 
> ...


Who says that about Mayweather on here? It's not tolerated for any fighter. Calling ATG's "bums" is not welcomed. It's not relevant to the thread and it serves no purpose and it brings down the sport, because those that Pac beat and those that beat Pac are dragged down.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> JMM and Bhop are definitely beatable at this point, *but "passing the torch" isn't just about them losing to a young guy, but it's whether the young guy can maintain his dominance afterwards*.. i feel the only person that's capable of doing that against B-hop is Ward. whether Bradley can stay on top after his victory over JMM, who knows.. i think he needs to rematch pac before anything else tho...


Why should a 'passing the torch' be about what happens after the torch is passed? Surely it's about who the torch is taken from.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> Why should a 'passing the torch' be about what happens after the torch is passed? Surely it's about who the torch is taken from.


Maybe the terminology is wrong then, but I think most people are considering it "taking the throne", "taking over the mantle", that type of thing.

Torches aren't past whenever an old great loses. It's when their successor can dominate in their place to some extent. Barrera didn't "pass his torch" to Junior Jones. But he did to Pac.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> Why should a 'passing the torch' be about what happens after the torch is passed? Surely it's about who the torch is taken from.


i guess u make a point, but you know where i'm getting at..

if someone beats Floyd convincingly, then loses in his next fights against inferior opposition, the torch passing would mean nothing.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> i guess u make a point, but you know where i'm getting at..
> 
> if someone beats Floyd convincingly, then loses in his next fights against inferior opposition, the torch passing would mean nothing.


Right. I guess we can split the categories this way; there's getting old and/or someone having your number, VS legitimately passing the torch. Usually the dominant fashion of the loss plays a part too along with the subsequent success.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Who says that about Mayweather on here? It's not tolerated for any fighter. Calling ATG's "bums" is not welcomed. It's not relevant to the thread and it serves no purpose and it brings down the sport, because those that Pac beat and those that beat Pac are dragged down.


That is your assertion. I will be sure to @ you if it happens.

Who decided Pac is an ATG? You? Pac? Arum? The same people who thought Pac could beat Mayweather? The same people who thought nothing of him ducking 50/50 and fully random blood testing with a 14 day cut off? The same people who happily called JMM a possible cheater? Who? What brings down the sport is calling guys ATGs who obviously do not have the skill level to dominate their current era let alone be matched historically. Pac doesn't rate higher than prime ODLH or Mosley on the list of ATGs. They both would have sparked him while prime.

Pac being a bum is quite relevant to the thread. He shouldn't be mentioned in any discussion about young fighters snatching the torch from him because HE NEVER CARRIED A TORCH nor did he carry Boxing! He beat recently beaten, dominated, old, and/or drained fighters and got undue praise for his quite mediocre triumphs due to them looking offensively spectacular to casual fans and fanboys. No more. No less. Every single great win of his has a huge asterisk next to it.

Who exactly is it bringing down? The dudes legacy defining wins (and losses) are against guy who were damned near over 50 fights. None of them were prime. Prime Barrera was schooled by Junior Jones. Twice. Morales was schooled by Raheem the fight before and Pac chose the loser. Younger fresher Diaz was sparked by Holt faster. Why aren't you hyping up these men to support the sport and their legacies?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> That is your assertion. I will be sure to @ you if it happens.
> 
> Who decided Pac is an ATG? You? Pac? Arum? The same people who thought Pac could beat Mayweather? The same people who thought nothing of him ducking 50/50 and fully random blood testing with a 14 day cut off? The same people who happily called JMM a possible cheater? Who? What brings down the sport is calling guys ATGs who obviously do not have the skill level to dominate their current era let alone be matched historically. Pac doesn't rate higher than prime ODLH or Mosley on the list of ATGs. They both would have sparked him while prime.
> 
> ...


Feel free to mention me anytime you see that kind of nonsense.

Pac became an ATG when he beat Barrera and continue to have such dramatic success against Morales,DLH, Hatton, Cotto, Bradley (to 905% of viewers), etc. But this thread is not for that. Please refrain from further calling Pac a bum.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Who says that about Mayweather on here? It's not tolerated for any fighter. Calling ATG's "bums" is not welcomed. It's not relevant to the thread and it serves no purpose and it brings down the sport, because those that Pac beat and those that beat Pac are dragged down.


And for the record Brother I think whoever says that about Mayweather should be allowed to do so as long as their reasoning is based in Boxing, no matter how absurd.

If they want to "support" their point by calling him "a monkey chicken eating gayweather" then that is another matter altogether.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Feel free to mention me anytime you see that kind of nonsense.
> 
> Pac became an ATG when he beat Barrera and continue to have such dramatic success against Morales,DLH, Hatton, Cotto, Bradley (to 905% of viewers), etc. But this thread is not for that. Please refrain from further calling Pac a bum.


I have no intentions of doing that. I can care less what people say. Especially if they have a reasoned defense for it.

Is Junior Jones an ATG? Is Zahir Raheem an ATG? Did anyone think ODLH was a viable competitor for ANY top 5 contender at 147 when they saw that ring walk? What was Hatton's career post Mayweather? Why do the devastating loss, draining, and subsequent exodues to LMW not matter when evaluating the Cotto win? It seems you are making these calls on pure name value. Is Clifford Etienne to be considered a HW ATG? Is Tommy Morrison's win over Foreman comparable to Ali's? Is

Most people DKSAB. If you can produce a highlight reel of Pac's devastating offense against Bradley I promise you I will watch and comment.

Yes this thread is about that, i.e., Pac's career placing him in the discussion of Boxing torch bearing. This thread is about who is holding the torch for Boxing. Pac has never has and never will hold the torch for Boxing. He was a media fabrication. A well matched imperial contender. I call Pacfraud a bum based on logical and reasoned BOXING based analysis.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> I have no intentions of doing that. I can care less what people say. Especially if they have a reasoned defense for it.
> 
> Is Junior Jones an ATG? Is Zahir Raheem an ATG? Did anyone think ODLH was a viable competitor for ANY top 5 contender at 147 when they saw that ring walk? What was Hatton's career post Mayweather? Why do the devastating loss, draining, and subsequent exodues to LMW not matter when evaluating the Cotto win? It seems you are making these calls on pure name value. Is Clifford Etienne to be considered a HW ATG? Is Tommy Morrison's win over Foreman comparable to Ali's? Is
> 
> ...


You could(n't) care less, but I do. I care about the quality of discussion on this forum and want it to be free from the ridiculously biased Pac-Floyd drama that goes on. I refuse to continue discussing this with you.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Maybe the terminology is wrong then, but I think most people are considering it "taking the throne", "taking over the mantle", that type of thing.
> 
> Torches aren't past whenever an old great loses. It's when their successor can dominate in their place to some extent. Barrera didn't "pass his torch" to Junior Jones. But he did to Pac.


Barrera didn't really pass anything to anyone since most felt he lost the right to carry the torch after losing to Jones (a fighter he shouldn't have lost to, let alone get KO'd by) then being in one of the worst fights of all time against Maurin.

Then Morales wolloped Junior Jones and was considered the heir to SR's throne and the rest is history. No one really passed anything to anyone in that era, they had great fights and built their names off of eachother.

Network disputes and weight jumping are preventing that, these days.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Barrera didn't really pass anything to anyone since most felt he lost the right to carry the torch after losing to Jones (a fighter he shouldn't have lost to, let alone get KO'd by) then being in one of the worst fights of all time against Maurin.
> 
> Then Morales wolloped Junior Jones and was considered the heir to SR's throne and the rest is history. No one really passed anything to anyone in that era, they had great fights and built their names off of eachother.
> 
> Network disputes and weight jumping are preventing that, these days.


Barrera is Pac's claim to being an ATG, it's the best win on his resume. Morales was done in the Pac rematch but he still competed well enough and Pac was considered the man after beating those two.

Morales first came onto the scene by beating Zaragoza, and Barrera beat Morales and they had a great rivalry, on top of the rest of their legacy. There's traceable lineage.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> i guess u make a point, but you know where i'm getting at..
> 
> if someone beats Floyd convincingly, then loses in his next fights against inferior opposition, the torch passing would mean nothing.


 @*~Cellzki~* I do know what you mean but I think Floyd is an exception to the rule. I don't see anyone beating him. However, for the sake of argument, if someone who beats Floyd then loses to an inferior opponent in his next fight it doesn't make the torch passing any less meaningful; the passing of the torch from Mayweather to [boxer x] is a very significant changing of the guard. Your characterisation of the subsequent opponent as being 'inferior' is another way of saying that boxer x's contemporaries are more competitive to him than a faded Mayweather was.



Bogotazo said:


> Maybe the terminology is wrong then, but I think most people are considering it "taking the throne", "taking over the mantle", that type of thing.
> 
> Torches aren't past whenever an old great loses. It's when their successor can dominate in their place to some extent. Barrera didn't "pass his torch" to Junior Jones. But he did to Pac.


 @Bogotazo Well MAB was 22 when he lost to Jones so I'm not sure that comes into play. But if we're talking about someone who beats someone else who could reasonably be dominating for a while (aka, Reigns Interrupted™) then that opens up your definition of torch passing to fights such as Rigo/Donaire (potentially) and Gonzalez/Mares (potentially), but excludes someone like Stevenson who's beat two guys coming of losses but who feels like a changing of the guard (even though he;s in his mid thirties).


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> You could(n't) care less, but I do. I care about the quality of discussion on this forum and want it to be free from the ridiculously biased Pac-Floyd drama that goes on. I refuse to continue discussing this with you.


What part of my argument lacks quality? You don't care about quality of debate. If you did you would address the facts contained in my argument.

What part of my argument is biased? You saying Junior Jones didn't beat a better Barrera? You saying Zahir Raheem didn't beat Morales? You saying Holt didn't spark a fresher Diaz faster? You saying ODLH looked ready to compete that night? You saying Cotto wasn't damaged goods? You saying Hatton wasn't done? You aren't saying anything, but leave Pacfraud alone.

I didn't ask you to discuss this with me in the first place. You decided to start issuing veiled threats ignoring the sideways comment made to me first. That is weak.


----------



## MGS (Jun 14, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> If they want to "support" their point by calling him "a monkey chicken eating gayweather" then that is another matter altogether.


whoa how'd I end up at boxing scene


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> _*Barrera is Pac's claim to being an ATG*_, it's the best win on his resume. Morales was done in the Pac rematch but he still competed well enough and Pac was considered the man after beating those two.
> 
> Morales first came onto the scene by beating Zaragoza, and Barrera beat Morales and they had a great rivalry, on top of the rest of their legacy. There's traceable lineage.


Exactly. If this is true than Junior Jones is an ATG. Why? Not only did he whip Barrera he whipped him TWICE. If Junior Jones isn't an ATG, Pac isn't either.

Morales was dominated by Raheem so therefore took the torch. Why is Pac considered the man when he beat the man who was beaten by the man.

Yes it is traceable. Question is does it lead where you think it does?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> What part of my argument lacks quality? You don't care about quality of debate. If you did you would address the facts contained in my argument.
> 
> What part of my argument is biased? You saying Junior Jones didn't beat a better Barrera? You saying Zahir Raheem didn't beat Morales? You saying Holt didn't spark a fresher Diaz faster? You saying ODLH looked ready to compete that night? You saying Cotto wasn't damaged goods? You saying Hatton wasn't done? You aren't saying anything, but leave Pacfraud alone.
> 
> I didn't ask you to discuss this with me in the first place. You decided to start issuing veiled threats ignoring the sideways comment made to me first. That is weak.


Dude, the thread is about the new guard failing to beat the older greats and take over. If you think Pac is not an ATG, he's part of the old guard, so regardless, it's not relevant to the thread. You are the tiny minority that thinks Pac is not an ATG. When you have opinions like that, it's best not to plug them into threads where it is not at issue.



bald_head_slick said:


> Exactly. If this is true than Junior Jones is an ATG. Why? Not only did he whip Barrera he whipped him TWICE. If Junior Jones isn't an ATG, Pac isn't either.
> 
> Morales was dominated by Raheem so therefore took the torch. Why is Pac considered the man when he beat the man who was beaten by the man.
> 
> Yes it is traceable. Question is does it lead where you think it does?


Jones beat a greener much less accomplished Barrera and didn't go on to beat other ATG's and HOFers in multiple weight classes. Raheem didn't go on to beat other ATG's and HOFers in multiple weight classes. Not every loss is a torch passing.

Not please stop. This thread is not about Pacquiao and his status as a great, which was used only as an example among many others, is not relevant. Please stop.



Kurushi said:


> @*~Cellzki~* I do know what you mean but I think Floyd is an exception to the rule. I don't see anyone beating him. However, for the sake of argument, if someone who beats Floyd then loses to an inferior opponent in his next fight it doesn't make the torch passing any less meaningful; the passing of the torch from Mayweather to [boxer x] is a very significant changing of the guard. Your characterisation of the subsequent opponent as being 'inferior' is another way of saying that boxer x's contemporaries are more competitive to him than a faded Mayweather was.
> 
> @Bogotazo Well MAB was 22 when he lost to Jones so I'm not sure that comes into play. But if we're talking about someone who beats someone else who could reasonably be dominating for a while (aka, Reigns Interrupted™) then that opens up your definition of torch passing to fights such as Rigo/Donaire (potentially) and Gonzalez/Mares (potentially), but excludes someone like Stevenson who's beat two guys coming of losses but who feels like a changing of the guard (even though he;s in his mid thirties).


Well Floyd's conqueror doesn't necessarily have to not lose again, but if they squander the loss, it would be more of a one-off thing rather than a moment of significant change. There's a difference between an old great losing, and a new great beating him and then taking over with continued dominance.

Your next few lines is more what I'm talking about. But is Donaire considered an ATG or just HOF? Mares was solid but he's not truly great. It's lineage but it's not ATG lineage. Stevenson hasn't beaten an ATG, just KO'd Dawson coming off a dominant loss and beat Cloud, who is respectable but not an ATG in any way.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> I understand this. Bradley arguably beat Pac. Marquez sparked Pac. Bradley definitively beat Marquez confirming his status as the new guard. My point is that Pac was never part of any guard other than a guard fabricated by media.
> 
> Nice passive aggressive jab. So disagreeing with Dan Rafael means I should shut up? :lol: If you somehow believe that agreeing with a bunch of know nothings somehow makes one enlightened fine by me. History has shown who's opinion was well grounded and who's wasn't.
> 
> ...


Stop with the goddamn paragraphs about your Pacfraud Manifesto. Do not post in here again about this crap.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Stop.


----------



## Illuminaughty (Aug 19, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Stop.


 no. I want to debate this


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Illuminaughty said:


> no. I want to debate this


Do it elsewhere please. In fact, you and @bald_head_slick feel free to state your opinions here:

http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...-Pacquiao-probably-ranks-80-90-in-an-ATG-list

I'll move your posts there.


----------



## Illuminaughty (Aug 19, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Do it elsewhere please. In fact, you and @*bald_head_slick* feel free to state your opinions here:
> 
> http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...-Pacquiao-probably-ranks-80-90-in-an-ATG-list
> 
> I'll move your posts there.


 why? when it's related to the thread.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Illuminaughty said:


> why? when it's related to the thread.


Sorry, it's not. It's distracting from the thread. This thread is asking whether the inability of up and comers to eliminate the old guard of greats affects their ability to establish an ATG legacy for themselves. BHS takes issue with the fact that Manny is listed as an ATG, but that doesn't answer the question of young guys VS older greats in any capacity, it simply eliminates one example out of many provided to illustrate the point of the thread, and suddenly the thread is an argument about Pacquiao's resume. There's a thread debating Pacquiao's status as an ATG and his ranking, so I moved the posts there. You're free to discuss it.


----------



## Illuminaughty (Aug 19, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Sorry, it's not. It's distracting from the thread. This thread is asking whether the inability of up and comers to eliminate the old guard of greats affects their ability to establish an ATG legacy for themselves. BHS takes issue with the fact that Manny is listed as an ATG, but that doesn't answer the question of young guys VS older greats in any capacity, it simply eliminates one example out of many provided to illustrate the point of the thread, and suddenly the thread is an argument about Pacquiao's resume. There's a thread debating Pacquiao's status as an ATG and his ranking, so I moved the posts there. You're free to discuss it.


 boo..but okay  thankyou for the response


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Beautiful post. Agree with everything you've said. And when somebody beats _them,_ how are we to judge that win if we can't even place the former on a proper ranking scale?
> 
> Ward and Hopkins would be great. Kovalev beating Hopkins and then losing to Ward, not sure how attenuated that is. Might be like Pacquiao beating Raheem instead of Morales or something. But Ward has a chance out of sheer dominance. Beat Bute, clear out 175 including Hopkins, and fight a legitimate heavyweight. Call me crazy but I think he can do it.


When somebody beats them, it's going to force us to really hone in on the eye-test to assess 1) the quality of the win in a historical sense and 2) their abilities as it pertains in a historical sense. It'll be very, very subjective - even more so than past eras. Definitely going to be a weird time when guys establish long reigns and amass deep resumes that are vacant of recognizable current greats.

As far as Ward at heavyweight, I'm curious. I hope he gives it a go above light heavyweight. Maybe test the waters at cruiserweight first for a fight in three or four years. I remember when Hopkins was talking about fighting for the WBC heavyweight title against Oleg Maskaev back in 2006/2007 before Samuel Peter got to him first. It would've been a dangerous fight given Maskaev's heavy hands, sneaky straight right, and physical strength, but the disparity in footspeed, skill/technique, defense, and timing would've made it a winnable fight for Hopkins in my opinion. Stylistically, we all know Hopkins feasts on those slow-footed straight ahead bangers who like to do most of their work in that middle distance where he's just flat-out superior in every dimension.


----------



## Illuminaughty (Aug 19, 2013)

JMP said:


> When somebody beats them, it's going to force us to really hone in on the eye-test to assess 1) the quality of the win in a historical sense and 2) their abilities as it pertains in a historical sense. It'll be very, very subjective - even more so than past eras. Definitely going to be a weird time when guys establish long reigns and amass deep resumes that are vacant of recognizable current greats.
> 
> As far as Ward at heavyweight, I'm curious. I hope he gives it a go above light heavyweight. Maybe test the waters at cruiserweight first for a fight in three or four years. I remember when Hopkins was talking about fighting for the WBC heavyweight title against Oleg Maskaev back in 2006/2007 before Samuel Peter got to him first. It would've been a dangerous fight given Maskaev's heavy hands, sneaky straight right, and physical strength, but the disparity in footspeed, skill/technique, defense, and timing would've made it a winnable fight for Hopkins in my opinion. Stylistically, we all know Hopkins feasts on those slow-footed straight ahead bangers who like to do most of their work in that middle distance where he's just flat-out superior in every dimension.


 did you mean to say ward above super middleweight, not light heavyweight?


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

Illuminaughty said:


> did you mean to say ward above super middleweight, not light heavyweight?


I kind of take it as a given that he'll eventually move up, but you're right. The first step is fighting above super middleweight and seeing how he does against the likes of Stevenson and Kovalev.


----------



## Illuminaughty (Aug 19, 2013)

JMP said:


> I kind of take it as a given that he'll eventually move up, but you're right. The first step is fighting above super middleweight and seeing how he does against the likes of Stevenson and Kovalev.


 yes I agree. I feel sorry for andre ward. he has beaten all his competitors in about two years, had some pretty bad injuries, and there aren't many big fights left in his division. he will have to move up


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

Illuminaughty said:


> yes I agree. I feel sorry for andre ward. he has beaten all his competitors in about two years, had some pretty bad injuries, and there aren't many big fights left in his division. he will have to move up


Agreed. It was looking pretty dim before Stevenson and Kovalev entered the scene with a bang. Those would be some really nice scraps for Ward if he can manage to secure one or both of those fights. At super middleweight, though, aside from a Froch or Dirrell (if he ever decides to fight again), I don't see anything left for him there. He's one of those guys who will probably be limited in how far he can rise in the ATG rankings because of his era being pretty thin.


----------



## Illuminaughty (Aug 19, 2013)

JMP said:


> Agreed. It was looking pretty dim before Stevenson and Kovalev entered the scene with a bang. Those would be some really nice scraps for Ward if he can manage to secure one or both of those fights. At super middleweight, though, aside from a Froch or Dirrell (if he ever decides to fight again), I don't see anything left for him there. He's one of those guys who will probably be limited in how far he can rise in the ATG rankings because of his era being pretty thin.


 yes, I couldn't agree more. I don't think andre dirrell will make many waves at SMW (has he even been seen since his fight against froch?). I think kovalev looks pretty good at LHW


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

Illuminaughty said:


> yes, I couldn't agree more. I don't think andre dirrell will make many waves at SMW (has he even been seen since his fight against froch?). I think kovalev looks pretty good at LHW


He came back after the Froch fight and was schooling an undefeated Arthur Abraham before Abraham fouled him and got DQ'd. He's had some low-level fights since, but nothing meaningful. And unfortunately, I haven't heard anything upcoming for him. Who knows if his heart is still in it? A shame if it isn't because he's a great physical talent.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Illuminaughty said:


> boo..but okay  thankyou for the response


NP, and sorry if I was rude.



JMP said:


> When somebody beats them, it's going to force us to really hone in on *the eye-test* to assess 1) the quality of the win in a historical sense and 2) their abilities as it pertains in a historical sense. It'll be very, very subjective - even more so than past eras. Definitely going to be a weird time when guys establish long reigns and amass deep resumes that are vacant of recognizable current greats.
> 
> As far as Ward at heavyweight, I'm curious. I hope he gives it a go above light heavyweight. Maybe test the waters at cruiserweight first for a fight in three or four years. I remember when Hopkins was talking about fighting for the WBC heavyweight title against Oleg Maskaev back in 2006/2007 before Samuel Peter got to him first. It would've been a dangerous fight given Maskaev's heavy hands, sneaky straight right, and physical strength, but the disparity in footspeed, skill/technique, defense, and timing would've made it a winnable fight for Hopkins in my opinion. Stylistically, we all know Hopkins feasts on those slow-footed straight ahead bangers who like to do most of their work in that middle distance where he's just flat-out superior in every dimension.












That level of subjectivity goes everything about what I value in ranking.

It just occurred to me though that I was a bit unfair in my dichotomy of either beating an ATG and going on to do well VS divisional dominance and consistency. A respectable collection of HOFers is good enough, and HOF-level doesn't need any sort of strong incorrigible lineage. So it's possible I guess! Hope!

Yeah Ward moving up interests me, I think a move to 175 is inevitable. Never saw Maskaev but what you describe about Hopkins' ring generalship trumping those dangerous pressure fighters winning the day rings true.


----------



## Reppin501 (May 16, 2013)

I think the perception of "young fighters" is skewed by the bias held by many for their "heros". I think there are plenty of good young fighters who have the potential to be great fighters. Garcia (Mikey and Danny), Bradley, Canelo, Ward, GGG, etc etc.


----------



## Illuminaughty (Aug 19, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> NP, and sorry if I was rude.


 you weren't  i just have time today and i love talking boxing so i wanted to ask


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Reppin501 said:


> I think the perception of "young fighters" is skewed by the bias held by many for their "heros". I think there are plenty of good young fighters who have the potential to be great fighters. Garcia (Mikey and Danny), Bradley, Canelo, Ward, GGG, etc etc.


The question is how they're going to prove themselves ATG if they can't beat any of the old ATG's, hence no torches being passed.

Bradley is not a new fighter.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Barrera is Pac's claim to being an ATG, it's the best win on his resume. Morales was done in the Pac rematch but he still competed well enough and Pac was considered the man after beating those two.
> 
> Morales first came onto the scene by beating Zaragoza, and Barrera beat Morales and they had a great rivalry, on top of the rest of their legacy. There's traceable lineage.


But Morales beat Barrera first so who did he really pass the torch too? Their bodies of work regardless of losing to Pacquiao, they'd still be considered ATGs, Pacquiao without beating Barrera, still an ATG as well.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> But Morales beat Barrera first so who did he really pass the torch too? Their bodies of work regardless of losing to Pacquiao, they'd still be considered ATGs, Pacquiao without beating Barrera, still an ATG as well.


Morales and Barrera bounced off each other in parallel fashion. When Pac beat them, it was more like "move over, there's a new guy in town."

There are enough HOFers on his resume to qualify him but it's sealed with MAB.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Morales and Barrera bounced off each other in parallel fashion. When Pac beat them, it was more like "move over, there's a new guy in town."
> 
> There are enough HOFers on his resume to qualify him but it's sealed with MAB.


Agreed. That was an ATG performance, he didn't just beat Barrera, he completely worked him over.

The amateur system changing is giving me plenty of hope for the future of boxing, soon enough there'll be little need for transition into the professional ranks and more and more pro-styled fighters will be churned out.

More Spence's and less Shiming's.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Morales and Barrera bounced off each other in parallel fashion. When Pac beat them, it was more like "move over, there's a new guy in town."
> 
> There are enough HOFers on his resume to qualify him but it's sealed with MAB.


I think you're being too hard on fighters for not having "Singular" wins against ATGs. I mean Garcia has a win over an ATG but how much does that really count for?

Andre Ward, Donaire, Timothy Bradley are carving out nice careers for themselves and if Ward moves up and dominates light heavyweight he'll surely be considered an ATG by the time his career is over.

Guys like Pacquiao, Morales, Barrera had been boxing as pros since the mid 90s and it took them 6+ years to really break out. I think patience is the key with our young fighters, especially with guys coming out of the amateurs.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> I think you're being too hard on fighters for not having "Singular" wins against ATGs. I mean Garcia has a win over an ATG but how much does that really count for?
> 
> Andre Ward, Donaire, Timothy Bradley are carving out nice careers for themselves and if Ward moves up and dominates light heavyweight he'll surely be considered an ATG by the time his career is over.
> 
> Guys like Pacquiao, Morales, Barrera had been boxing as pros since the mid 90s and it took them 6+ years to really break out. I think patience is the key with our young fighters, especially with guys coming out of the amateurs.


Like I said, I see several ways to achieve ATG status. Singular wins over other ATG's, long consistent steady domination over one or a few weight classes, or a resume consisting of several HOFers (who themselves become HOFers by getting consistent top wins at the top of their division that are below HOF level themselves).

If I'm being harsh it's only because it's the trend generation to generation for a majority of ATG's, and the departures from that standard usually compensate easily in depth. Let's take a look at Garcia. His win doesn't mean much because Morales's torch was out. And who will he have left to beat if he moves up? Few people above him as the years continue. Broner? Berto? Ortiz? Some hype up puncher who enjoys a good year-long run (no lucas)? Hardly the stuff of legend.



O59 said:


> Agreed. That was an ATG performance, he didn't just beat Barrera, he completely worked him over.
> 
> The amateur system changing is giving me plenty of hope for the future of boxing, soon enough there'll be little need for transition into the professional ranks and more and more pro-styled fighters will be churned out.
> 
> More Spence's and less Shiming's.


My issue is the Spence's, as good as they might be, will have a much tougher time proving themselves against historical greats simply because of opponents, not even their own h2h abilities.

I kind of like Shiming, I think he gets unfair hate. He's not really a complete fighter but I like his style.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Like I said, I see several ways to achieve ATG status. Singular wins over other ATG's, long consistent steady domination over one or a few weight classes, or a resume consisting of several HOFers (who themselves become HOFers by getting consistent top wins at the top of their division that are below HOF level themselves).
> 
> If I'm being harsh it's only because it's the trend generation to generation for a majority of ATG's, and the departures from that standard usually compensate easily in depth. Let's take a look at Garcia. His win doesn't mean much because Morales's torch was out. And who will he have left to beat if he moves up? Few people above him as the years continue. Broner? Berto? Ortiz? Some hype up puncher who enjoys a good year-long run (no lucas)? Hardly the stuff of legend.
> 
> ...


I don't mind Shiming either and I'd like to see him succeed, but I feel like he's doomed to fail. I _really_ wanted the guy he was fighting in the Gold Medal bout at the 2012 Olympics to win.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Like I said, I see several ways to achieve ATG status. Singular wins over other ATG's, long consistent steady domination over one or a few weight classes, or a resume consisting of several HOFers (who themselves become HOFers by getting consistent top wins at the top of their division that are below HOF level themselves).
> 
> If I'm being harsh it's only because it's the trend generation to generation for a majority of ATG's, and the departures from that standard usually compensate easily in depth. Let's take a look at Garcia. His win doesn't mean much because Morales's torch was out. And who will he have left to beat if he moves up? Few people above him as the years continue. Broner? Berto? Ortiz? Some hype up puncher who enjoys a good year-long run (no lucas)? Hardly the stuff of legend.
> 
> ...


Garcia could move up and beat Bradley, Alexander, Khan again, Maidana, Matthysse rematch, etc. He only has 26 or so fights. Look at the amount of fights Barrera/Morales had before their breakthroughs.

Time is on his side, same with Bradley, as it was arguably the best he ever looked last weekend besides the Peterson fight against an ATG

Shiming's style is awful :err


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Garcia could move up and beat Bradley, Alexander, Khan again, Maidana, Matthysse rematch, etc. He only has 26 or so fights. Look at the amount of fights Barrera/Morales had before their breakthroughs.
> 
> Time is on his side, same with Bradley, as it was arguably the best he ever looked last weekend besides the Peterson fight against an ATG
> 
> Shiming's style is awful :err


But Morales beat Zaragoza and then Barrera beat Morales. Then Pac beat Barrera and Morales beat Pac. Garcia can become HOF, but ATG? He'd have to have great longevity to compensate for a lack of signature wins. Those are all decent, quality wins, but ATG? I also think Bradley won't stick around too long or ever top his win against JMM.

Shiming is a bootleg Donaire, don't hate.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> But Morales beat Zaragoza and then Barrera beat Morales. Then Pac beat Barrera and Morales beat Pac. Garcia can become HOF, but ATG? He'd have to have great longevity to compensate for a lack of signature wins. Those are all decent, quality wins, but ATG? I also think Bradley won't stick around too long or ever top his win against JMM.
> 
> Shiming is a bootleg Donaire, don't hate.


a bootleg donaire without Donaire's power is nothing special. see = bootleg Roy jones aka Gainer :deal

What about Morales beating Zaragoza? It was a good win sure, but no better than Garcia's over Judah or Matthysse. It was important for Morales as his first title win but DZ was there for the taking and had been stopped and dropped a few times and was looking very old when Morales got to him.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> a bootleg donaire without Donaire's power is nothing special. see = bootleg Roy jones aka Gainer :deal
> 
> What about Morales beating Zaragoza? It was a good win sure, but no better than Garcia's over Judah or Matthysse. It was important for Morales as his first title win but DZ was there for the taking and had been stopped and dropped a few times and was looking very old when Morales got to him.


I disagree, Judah is not on Zaragoza's level. Mathysse has an argument because he was rising fast and in his physical prime and looked complete and was considered a favorite and looked complete and wsa big puncher, but he wasn't as skilled or accomplished as Zaragoza. But Zaragoza was only the beginning, MAB beating Morales and Hamed and Morales in turn beating MAB solidified him, and when Pac beat MAB, Morales beating Pac further solidified him. If Garcia is Morales in this situation, he'll need to find a Barrera and a Pacquiao.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Shiming wont be successful in pros.

The ones who will are Oleksandr Usyk, GOAT, Felix Verdejo, Ryota Murata, Gary Salazar, Andrew Selby, maybe Luke Campbell.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I disagree, Judah is not on Zaragoza's level. Mathysse has an argument because he was rising fast and in his physical prime and looked complete and was considered a favorite and looked complete and wsa big puncher, but he wasn't as skilled or accomplished as Zaragoza. But Zaragoza was only the beginning, MAB beating Morales and Hamed and Morales in turn beating MAB solidified him, and when Pac beat MAB, Morales beating Pac further solidified him. If Garcia is Morales in this situation, he'll need to find a Barrera and a Pacquiao.


Well if Matthysse hasn't lost a step he can keep winning and Garcia's win over him will look better and better.

I doubt Garcia will ever have a W as good as Pacquiao or Barrera but how many do, on a single resume? Top 100 ATGs maybe, and there are legitimate greats from yesteryear (Jack, Booker, Marshall, Cerdan, Mosley, Tyson, Flowers, etc) that don't even make that list.

Even if Bradley doesn't top the Marquez W, as long as he keeps winning with his resume in the end he can legitimately make a claim as a clear HOF fighter and maybe an ATG around Mosley/Trinidad/Tszyu - level which is still excellent.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Shiming wont be successful in pros.
> 
> The ones who will are Oleksandr Usyk, GOAT, Felix Verdejo, Ryota Murata, Gary Salazar, Andrew Selby, maybe Luke Campbell.


Verdejo. I swear I saw him fight like a week ago, he looked awesome.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Well if Matthysse hasn't lost a step he can keep winning and Garcia's win over him will look better and better.
> 
> I doubt Garcia will ever have a W as good as Pacquiao or Barrera but how many do, on a single resume? Top 100 ATGs maybe, and there are legitimate greats from yesteryear (Jack, Booker, Marshall, Cerdan, Mosley, Tyson, Flowers, etc) that don't even make that list.
> 
> Even if Bradley doesn't top the Marquez W, as long as he keeps winning with his resume in the end he can legitimately make a claim as a clear HOF fighter and maybe an ATG around Mosley/Trinidad/Tszyu - level which is still excellent.


Mosley does has the win over DLH, which competes with the Barrera win. And I don't think Bradley ever reaches that level. Bradley has a deep resume but it's come to the point where those who claim he's overlooked now make it out to some Monzonesque champion.

Bradley might make HOF, but not ATG. Hard to tell with Garcia but I feel that way about him as well.

I'm not strict on top 100 but if this next generation can't get within the top 100 themselves, the generation after also looks limited, and so on.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Verdejo. I swear I saw him fight like a week ago, he looked awesome.


Yup, a premature prediction would have me think that he will be as good as Canelo Alvarez is right now. But I think there's potential for Felix to be even a HOF...its just far too early to tell and I prefer underrating fighters apart from GOAT.


----------



## allenko1 (Jun 27, 2012)

so this ain't been settled yet? at this point, I don't know what you're asking at this point. @Bogotazo


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

allenko1 said:


> so this ain't been settled yet? at this point, I don't know what you're asking at this point. @Bogotazo


I guess I answered my own question, though the issue is certainly still up for debate.

What I'm asking is whether the inability for young guns to get any wins over current ATG's cuts off their access to ATG lineage. Most think you can become an ATG in other ways, which I agree with, but it's much harder and it becomes much more subjective and hard to rack up against historical ATG wins. They have to define greatness from the ground up with no generational transition bestowing greatness.


----------



## allenko1 (Jun 27, 2012)

you can't control that though. there will always be critics, detractors. you fight who's in your time and do what you do against them...


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

allenko1 said:


> you can't control that though. there will always be critics, detractors. you fight who's in your time and do what you do against them...


True. I don't recall Larry Holmes ever beating genuine all-time greats in his run, outside of Ali who was in the worst shape of his career and completely shot to shit. In fact, all the greats he did fight beat him, yet Larry is constantly rated very highly at heavyweight.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Mosley does has the win over DLH, which competes with the Barrera win. And I don't think Bradley ever reaches that level. Bradley has a deep resume but it's come to the point where those who claim he's overlooked now make it out to some Monzonesque champion.
> 
> Bradley might make HOF, but not ATG. Hard to tell with Garcia but I feel that way about him as well.
> 
> I'm not strict on top 100 but if this next generation can't get within the top 100 themselves, the generation after also looks limited, and so on.


Well we can assume Bradley/Garcia never reach that level all day but no one really knew who Manny was, and he was what, 40 or so fights deep already? Barrera as well.

Maybe a Pacquiao will surface later on, it's too early still to start writing these guys off, especially when all they do is win.

I think these guys have the ability to have longevity so long as they stay at their weight classes and continue to win. Bradley just had a big W over 2 ATGs which seems to be a large part of your criteria, yet youre still not cutting him slack :lol:


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Yup, a premature prediction would have me think that he will be as good as Canelo Alvarez is right now. But I think there's potential for Felix to be even a HOF...its just far too early to tell and I prefer underrating fighters apart from GOAT.


was that on the TR stream right? Yeah he looked really good. Reminded me of Morales a bit :happy :ibutt!!!


----------



## IntentionalButt (Jun 8, 2012)

Well, DLH was the last era's brightest star and passed not one but *two *batons... and both are probably going to be relay dead-ends. Pacquiao lost controversially to Bradley and somewhat redundantly (if satisfactorily) to Marquez, and if he loses to Rios now it's hardly as though Bam Bam will attain that superstar quality himself. It's too late for Pacquiao to bestow his baton upon anyone. Mayweather could, but who the hell is beating the guy? Realistically, not counting middleweights? (who probably wouldn't be eligible to receive the baton anyway, since the size would be an excuse to limit how much credit they were given)


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Well we can assume Bradley/Garcia never reach that level all day but no one really knew who Manny was, and he was what, 40 or so fights deep already? Barrera as well.
> 
> Maybe a Pacquiao will surface later on, it's too early still to start writing these guys off, especially when all they do is win.
> 
> I think these guys have the ability to have longevity so long as they stay at their weight classes and continue to win. Bradley just had a big W over 2 ATGs which seems to be a large part of your criteria, yet youre still not cutting him slack :lol:


Bradley ain't got shit :ibutt



IntentionalButt said:


> Well, DLH was the last era's brightest star and passed not one but *two *batons... and both are probably going to be relay dead-ends. Pacquiao lost controversially to Bradley and somewhat redundantly (if satisfactorily) to Marquez, and if he loses to Rios now it's hardly as though Bam Bam will attain that superstar quality himself. It's too late for Pacquiao to bestow his baton upon anyone. Mayweather could, but who the hell is beating the guy? Realistically, not counting middleweights? (who probably wouldn't be eligible to receive the baton anyway, since the size would be an excuse to limit how much credit they were given)


Right on IB <3


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Bradley ain't got shit :ibutt
> 
> Right on IB <3


:lol: :-(


----------



## IntentionalButt (Jun 8, 2012)

turbotime said:


> Verdejo. I swear I saw him fight like a week ago, he looked awesome.





The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Yup, a premature prediction would have me think that he will be as good as Canelo Alvarez is right now. But I think there's potential for Felix to be even a HOF...its just far too early to tell and I prefer underrating fighters apart from GOAT.





turbotime said:


> was that on the TR stream right? Yeah he looked really good. Reminded me of Morales a bit :happy :ibutt!!!


He looked beastly against Eyer but previously shit against Delgadillo. Don't hang your hopes on Verdejo just yet. Let's see him string together a little consistency as he steps up.


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

IntentionalButt said:


> He looked beastly against Eyer but previously shit against Delgadillo. Don't hang your hopes on Verdejo just yet. Let's see him string together a little consistency as he steps up.


BUTT!!! you're here. will you do the rbr here pls?


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

IntentionalButt said:


> He looked beastly against Eyer but previously shit against Delgadillo. Don't hang your hopes on Verdejo just yet. Let's see him string together a little consistency as he steps up.


You just come here to rain on our parade huh :verysad


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

For there to be "torch passing", there has to be someone that can be the next to carry the sport on their back. There was always someone around who had the combination of ring ability and the mainstream crossover appeal that has kept boxing from complete obsoletion. ODLH was the last one to have the total mainstream appeal to match his ring work. And he's passed it to both MP and FMjr. But as it stands, right now there's no one who really fits the bill to take the torch and run with it once MP and FMjr are gone.


----------



## IntentionalButt (Jun 8, 2012)

sugarshane_24 said:


> BUTT!!!


Hi!!!



sugarshane_24 said:


> you're here.


Yes!!!



sugarshane_24 said:


> will you do the rbr here pls?


No!!!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

allenko1 said:


> you can't control that though. there will always be critics, detractors. you fight who's in your time and do what you do against them...


Right, my point is, the young guys right now can't beat the older greats in their time, and it's harder to just keep winning and hope you resume stacks up historically.



O59 said:


> True. I don't recall Larry Holmes ever beating genuine all-time greats in his run, outside of Ali who was in the worst shape of his career and completely shot to shit. In fact, all the greats he did fight beat him, yet Larry is constantly rated very highly at heavyweight.


He's listed under the "consistent long-reign domination" category of exception.


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

IntentionalButt said:


> Hi!!!
> 
> Yes!!!
> 
> No!!!


:lol:


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Why do we even need ibutt for the rbr here?
We got sweethome_bama for the scorecards, ibutt is good but no Bama.


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

sugarshane_24 said:


> BUTT!!! you're here. will you do the rbr here pls?





IntentionalButt said:


> No!!!


:verysad I love reading Bama's rbr, but we need variety!


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

I often think this about the heavyweight division, there will be little time for the properly established guys, Povetkin, Haye, or maybe pulev to be on top, so Klitschko will get out, and then any of these guys, if any, won't have a long reign. That means the more inexperienced lads have nothing to measure their legacy


----------



## allenko1 (Jun 27, 2012)

I guess. who are the old greats? who's not fighting them? guys got to take advantage when the chance comes. it's hard enough to win without the added questions of elite, pound-for-pound etc. I just want to see the best guys fight...


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

allenko1 said:


> I guess. who are the old greats? who's not fighting them? guys got to take advantage when the chance comes. it's hard enough to win without the added questions of elite, pound-for-pound etc. I just want to see the best guys fight...


Nobody's beating Floyd, Canelo just failed miserably. Pac got beat by JMM, his contemporary rival, and JMM just dropped a decision to Tim who has also been champion for a long time now. Hopkins got beat by Dawson who got knocked out twice since instead of continuing to dominate while BHop is still going strong at LHW. Nobody is beating the Klits and it's likely they retire without losing again.


----------



## allenko1 (Jun 27, 2012)

you blaming mayweather for not losing. bradley for not being old enough? I think you mean though, a "star making" moment. those are hard to come by. at this time, to get in a big big fight, you need to have at least a little bit of a following. who do you want to fight who? if anything, contemporaries competing is what we want, and complain about not getting...


----------



## IntentionalButt (Jun 8, 2012)

turbotime said:


> Verdejo. I swear I saw him fight like a week ago, he looked awesome.





The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Yup, a premature prediction would have me think that he will be as good as Canelo Alvarez is right now. But I think there's potential for Felix to be even a HOF...its just far too early to tell and I prefer underrating fighters apart from GOAT.





dyna said:


> Why do we even need ibutt for the rbr here?
> We got sweethome_bama for the scorecards, ibutt is good but no Bama.


Thank you for the...compliment?


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

IntentionalButt said:


> Thank you for the...compliment?


No, it wasn't a compliment.


----------



## IntentionalButt (Jun 8, 2012)

turbotime said:


> Verdejo. I swear I saw him fight like a week ago, he looked awesome.





The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Yup, a premature prediction would have me think that he will be as good as Canelo Alvarez is right now. But I think there's potential for Felix to be even a HOF...its just far too early to tell and I prefer underrating fighters apart from GOAT.


How do you turn multiquote off here? atsch


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

FFS IB.


----------



## IntentionalButt (Jun 8, 2012)

dyna said:


> No, it wasn't a compliment.


No, whether you read it dry or not. :lol:


----------



## IntentionalButt (Jun 8, 2012)

turbotime said:


> FFS IB.


sup


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

IntentionalButt said:


> sup


Good to see you buddy. Wish people would leave you be about RBRs, you made your bed at the other place and your work there is too great to just leave behind. :good


----------



## KOTF (Jun 3, 2013)

Scanning through a list of under 30-year old "stars" who beat a legend...

Canelo
Tim Bradley
Danny Garcia

are the one's who have a legend on their resume. Not Andre Ward, but Timbo, Canelo, and Danny Garcia. It's a bit puzzling considering Ward had that Super Six trophy on his ledger, but then again who said you needed to beat an ATG to be an ATG?


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

IntentionalButt said:


> How do you turn multiquote off here? atsch


Dunno, click the multiquote thing again I guess?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KOTF said:


> Scanning through a list of under 30-year old "stars" who beat a legend...
> 
> Canelo
> Tim Bradley
> ...


Tim is 30 and he's hit his ceiling in terms of beating greats.

That leaves fucking dire versions of Morales and Mosley for the other two.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> :verysad I love reading Bama's rbr, but we need variety!


hey I be doing rbr's from time to time


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Mayweather and Pac had each other and fucked up.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Mayweather and Pac had each other and fucked up.


not really. they were already pretty much sharing the spotlight and they were both 30+


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> hey I be doing rbr's from time to time


I think I've seen you do one, but didn't know if it was a one time thing or something you're getting into. :think


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> I think I've seen you do one, but didn't know if it was a one time thing or something you're getting into. :think


:lol: naw I'm just making it bigger than it really is. I've only done it twice with the Monday Night Fights


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> :lol: naw I'm just making it bigger than it really is. I've only done it twice with the Monday Night Fights


:lol: I was like shit, have I missed that many fights on here? :lol:


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> :lol: I was like shit, have I missed that many fights on here? :lol:


:yep naw you good. I only can really do it when the fights are on regular TV


----------



## SouthPaw (May 24, 2013)

I hope Mayweather fights Broner or Spence(if he can progress enough in two years). The torch has to be passed to either of them.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

SouthPaw said:


> I hope Mayweather fights Broner or Spence(if he can progress enough in two years). The torch has to be passed to either of them.


Spence won't come up quick enough. Broner's flat footed ass wouldn't beat Floyd at 40.


----------



## KOTF (Jun 3, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Tim is 30 and he's hit his ceiling in terms of beating greats.
> 
> That leaves fucking dire versions of Morales and Mosley for the other two.


Yeah I know, but I counted the Pacquiao "win" when Bradley was 29 :conf


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

@Bogotazo what do you think of Ricardo Lopez' resume?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> @Bogotazo what do you think of Ricardo Lopez' resume?


I haven't researched it in depth but it's a clear case of absolutely dominating a division in style over the course of an entire career.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I haven't researched it in depth but it's a clear case of absolutely dominating a division in style over the course of an entire career.


Take a look and lemme know :good


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

I guess I just never saw any real value in up and coming fighters beating up older versions of formerly great fighters. I guess one could say that Ali passed the torch to Holmes, but was that really a meaningful victory? Did it mean anything when Holmes got the same treatment from Tyson? Holmes and Tyson didn't need those victories to validate them as a) people knew what they seeing and b) you can't hold down what is destined for greatness. 

You don't have to necessarily beat someone to inherit their torch, anyway. When Tyson had the torch, Buster Douglas knocked it out of his hands. According to the discussion here, though, Buster never inherited the torch because he didn't sustain dominance. Holyfield seemed a fit torch-bearer but he, himself, was never a dominant heavyweight. Bowe? Ducked Lewis. Lewis eventually became a dominant heavyweight and torch-bearer after some falls along the way, even delivering a ceremonial ass kicking to a shot Tyson. 

You just have to keep winning and people will notice.


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Take a look and lemme know :good


allow me to offer my take on the great Finito.

looking at the guy, you can say he's a perfect fighting machine. the guy can throw any punch by the book. and for his size he can knock out his opponent with one punch. on a division where everyone relies on speed, he has an innate timing to counter it. he can search and destroy, and he can fight moving backwards. he can take a shot, as rosendo alvarez found out, and even as tactical as lopez is, he won't hesitate to brawl when needed. he is basically one of the most complete fighters to ever grace the ring.

however, his stature in boxing is affected greatly not by his achievements or his abilities. it is his size.

lopez is a man who benefited greatly in a division that suited him perfectly. you might say, a lot of fighter are like that, marvin hagler is a middleweight all his life. yes i understand that, however finito is a different case. he has fought in a division that did not exist until the 80's. had lopez fought 40 years earlier, he would've competed at 112. a division where he has never fought his entire career. you may argue hat he's so good he could've dominated at 112 as well. it's plausible, but still he did not climbed up to 112 or had any fights there. how many brilliant fighters from nearly have a decade ago have come and gone without success simply bacause they never broke 106 lbs and fought men who weigh or are cutting down to 112?

had lopez fought at 112, i would've rest my case.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

@Hands of Iron where the F are you :fire


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

sugarshane_24 said:


> allow me to offer my take on the great Finito.
> 
> looking at the guy, you can say he's a perfect fighting machine. the guy can throw any punch by the book. and for his size he can knock out his opponent with one punch. on a division where everyone relies on speed, he has an innate timing to counter it. he can search and destroy, and he can fight moving backwards. he can take a shot, as rosendo alvarez found out, and even as tactical as lopez is, he won't hesitate to brawl when needed. he is basically one of the most complete fighters to ever grace the ring.
> 
> ...


Good post. Who were his best victims in your opinion?


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> @Hands of Iron where the F are you :fire


:lol:

At the State Fair with my six and three-year-old. Got an email alert when you mentioned me.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> At the State Fair with my six and three-year-old. Got an email alert when you mentioned me.


Oh.

What a nice place to be.

Carry on.


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Good post. Who were his best victims in your opinion?


I have to say these guys:

1. Saman Sorjaturong, the guy was taken out in two rounds, but when Saman moved to 105, he was a destroyer. He even added the scalp of Chiquita Gonzales. 
2. Rosendo Alvarez
3. Zolani Petelo, repectable former 105 champ who dethroned long time champ Sor Vorapin, the guy was much better than how Lopez made him look.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

what is lacking in boxing now is guys like the future Sugar Ray Leonard or Thomas Hearns or Oscar Delahoya, Felix Trinidad, Shane Mosley. Guys like Broner are self appointed superstars, but not legit superstars to anyone else. Thankfully we have guys like Bradley and Adonis.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> what is lacking in boxing now is guys like the future Sugar Ray Leonard or Thomas Hearns or Oscar Delahoya, Felix Trinidad, Shane Mosley. Guys like Broner are self appointed superstars, but not legit superstars to anyone else. Thankfully we have guys like Bradley and Adonis.


I don't see stars in either of those two guys to be honest.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I don't see stars in either of those two guys to be honest.


I was thinking of the implicit benefits of Timmeh getting the robbery decision over emmanuel. It puts him into the designated villain role to the public's untrained eye. He could fill the villain role for a short time, until the next TRUE star w/ ATG skillz comes along, after Floyd exits from the game.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> I was thinking of the implicit benefits of Timmeh getting the robbery decision over emmanuel. It puts him into the designated villain role to the public's untrained eye. He could fill the villain role for a short time, until the next TRUE star w/ ATG skillz comes along, after Floyd exits from the game.


He's got probably just a few more years than Floyd does I think and his fight with JMM probably didn't propel him to stardom. He should fight Pac again.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> He's got probably just a few more years than Floyd does I think and his fight with JMM probably didn't propel him to stardom. *He should fight Pac again.*


would be a good fight for him

he would actually win this time


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> would be a good fight for him
> 
> he would actually win this time


I think he was using similar tactics as he was against JMM but he was making some crucial mistakes.

His game plan on the mitts against Pac looked solid. Jab towards the left to get the lead foot outside, let go of the right hand, and either step out to reset, or duck down under Manny's shots to go to the body.

Problem is, Manny corrected his "following around the ring" habit against JMM in the 3rd fight by just stepping over and reestablishing lead foot positioning. Bradley on the other hand was falling short with his jab (something he also did against a more stationary JMM) and was too far outside to follow up on anything without Pac lining up his left. JMM often turned behind Manny real close to get that angle for the right or stepped in more with his jab.

Morales talks about this habit at 3:4 and more specifically at 3:49:






*Morales: The thing with Pacquiao is that he has this (lead) hand here (out in front), and this other (rear) hand down here, very low. So what he does, what Pacquiao does, is that he attacks you with the jab 2 or 3 times, lunges with his left hand, and steps (MAB steps into left.) It's a very big error. But if you throw the jab this way, and walk in this direction (jabs while stepping leftwards), so what happens? When he tries to step over with the left, I'm right here waiting (leans back and throws counter right-left uppercut-right hand combination) bam-bam-bam! But I never gave him time to let that hand go. I would be here, boom, boom (parries jabs), blocking him, with the (lead) hand held high, crouched, and when he wanted that left to come out, I'd stand straight up and boom (counters over the top with a right straight), because he would throw it here (points to lower point where his head used to be crouched). So distance, movements, knowing how to step....if you watch, all-all-all-all of his fights, his opponents stand in front, and step so lightly to the left (lightly makes leftward steps), not behind him.*

Also Bradley's balance gets all out of whack when he ducks down. His feet aren't set under him (a reason for his less-than-stellar power) and so his head is leaning all sorts of ways when forced to mix it up. JMM exploited this in certain exchanges as did Pac the first time.

I think he has a very solid chance to win the Pac rematch due to their opposite directions but if Pac is in similar shape (which was just "passing" shape the first time around) it looks difficult.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I don't see stars in either of those two guys to be honest.


well there is something lacking in todays boxing like the Hagler/Hearns,Leonard,Duran era, or the Delahoya,Shane,Tito era. There is no way a fighter of Bernard Hopkins age and the fact he has lost some fights would be still fighting or ranked high at any weight back then. JMM fighting at 40 in 1985 would be unheard of. He would have been beaten easily and not fighting anymore then. I think the skill level of boxing has gone down because of the lack of superstars, which then brings everyone's game up.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Sorry, it's not. It's distracting from the thread. This thread is asking whether the inability of up and comers to eliminate the old guard of greats affects their ability to establish an ATG legacy for themselves. BHS takes issue with the fact that Manny is listed as an ATG, but that doesn't answer the question of young guys VS older greats in any capacity, it simply eliminates one example out of many provided to illustrate the point of the thread, and suddenly the thread is an argument about Pacquiao's resume. There's a thread debating Pacquiao's status as an ATG and his ranking, so I moved the posts there. You're free to discuss it.


If they can't eliminate the "old" guard then the old guard isn't old and the new challengers aren't ATGs. The new guys are just contenders and the champions continue to be champions.

I take issue with the fact that Manny is in this discussion because:

A) A young lion already beat him, i.e., Bradley (I will happily accept highlight videos and pics of Bradley lumped up as evidence to the contrary) 
B) Marquez knocked Pac spark out
C) Bradley COMPLETELY outclassed Marquez though yes, Bradley fought safe. Too safe.

So Bradley is a perfect example of a young fighter that not only beat the man, but he beat the man who beat the man! He has proven himself to be the undisputed #2 fighter at 147 and arguably 140 as he completely cleared 140 before moving up.

Every other "old guard" fighter sitting atop a division is a either straight dominating, i.e., NOT an old guard (e.g., Wladimir, FMJ), or selectively choosing opponents (e.g., Martinez, Hopkins*) on a "Masters Money" tour. I put a star next to Hopkins as his next fight is a mandatory and if he wins he is just still dominating. If Martinez faces GGG or Quillin then he would also be a legit champion.

What you are doing is straight censoring discussion.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> If they can't eliminate the "old" guard then the old guard isn't old and the new challengers aren't ATGs. The new guys are just contenders and the champions continue to be champions.
> 
> I take issue with the fact that Manny is in this discussion because:
> 
> ...


You're view is that Manny is not a great. It's not relevant then because he's simply not one of the old guard fighters the young guys need to beat. That doesn't answer the question of what the younger guys need to do then to establish their greatness. It's just one small example off the list.

I'm not censoring anything, I moved posts to a thread with the suitable topic for your discussion.

If you concede that Manny is a great, you'll have to concede that a vast majority had Tim losing the fight.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> what is lacking in boxing now is guys like the future Sugar Ray Leonard or Thomas Hearns or Oscar Delahoya, Felix Trinidad, Shane Mosley. Guys like Broner are self appointed superstars, but not legit superstars to anyone else. Thankfully we have guys like Bradley and Adonis.


Do you feel Ali was loved during his prime? He was hated just like Mayweather or Broner. Ali was far more witty and classy than either, but there was no unanimous love for the man when he was active. The love came later. Pure Boxers are rarely loved.

To your point Boxing is missing high level Boxers who are real finishers. Leonard, Hearns, ODLH, Mosley, etc... were all finishers in their prime. They also were high level Boxers when faced with the right(wrong) circumstances. It seems that is the element that Boxing is lacking now. Finishers who can box at a high level when needed and still finish guys if they find openings.

I doubt Bradley will be loved as he lacks power and the Provodnikov fight has changed him. Keith Thurman may be a great candidate though.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> You're view is that Manny is not a great. It's not relevant then because he's simply not one of the old guard fighters the young guys need to beat. That doesn't answer the question of what the younger guys need to do then to establish their greatness. It's just one small example off the list.
> 
> I'm not censoring anything, I moved posts to a thread with the suitable topic for your discussion.
> 
> If you concede that Manny is a great, you'll have to concede that a vast majority had Tim losing the fight.


Yes that is my view and I support it, but even if I cede the point on his complete body of work, Bradley has done everything it took to show Pac's time as a top level fighter is over.

IMHO, it isn't about what these young guys have to do. In terms of personal life, Bradley is an All American. A good guy family man active in his community and even an entrepreneur. In terms of Boxing, Bradley has done everything a fighter could do and then some. Wiped out 140 in dominating fashion. Fought gallantly at 147 and beat the highest level contenders. This is about what the Boxing fans both casual and hardcore and Boxing media have to do, which is love an support these guys.

I am not conceding that Manny is great, but I will concede that some think he is. I would begrudgingly agree that a title shouldn't change hands in a fight like that, but I challenge any of you to present a highlight reel of the damage Pac meted out to deserve a clear win.






JMM bested Pac. Bradley bested JMM. Bradley has proven himself. If Pac and his fan base disagrees, the rematch should be made. Per my assertions, I believe the fight will further illustrate that Pac can be easily out Boxed by a defensive minded fighter. Except it may look worse as Pac's ring IQ isn't as high as Marquez'. This wasn't the case for ATG offensive minded fighters.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> Yes that is my view and I support it, but even if I cede the point on his complete body of work, Bradley has done everything it took to show Pac's time as a top level fighter is over.
> 
> IMHO, it isn't about what these young guys have to do. In terms of personal life, Bradley is an All American. A good guy family man active in his community and even an entrepreneur. In terms of Boxing, Bradley has done everything a fighter could do and then some. Wiped out 140 in dominating fashion. Fought gallantly at 147 and beat the highest level contenders. This is about what the Boxing fans both casual and hardcore and Boxing media have to do, which is love an support these guys.
> 
> ...


I just don't consider Bradley to be of the new generation and I don't consider either Pac or JMM passing a torch to him. Taking just the JMM decision win, he didn't dominate and he's likely hit his ceiling. He's not likely to beat Pac or Floyd or outdo JMM's historic accomplishments.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I just don't consider Bradley to be of the new generation and I don't consider either Pac or JMM passing a torch to him. Taking just the JMM decision win, he didn't dominate and he's likely hit his ceiling. He's not likely to beat Pac or Floyd or outdo JMM's historic accomplishments.


Huh? Why not? The guy is YOUNGER than Lucas Matthysse and started Boxing at the same time. Bradley, Alexander, Peterson, Khan, etc... are all in the same generation.

The torch is snatched. If the Mexican and Filipino fan bases choose not to accept defeat of their champion that is understandable. What isn't understandable is the horrible way that Boxing media is treating Bradley. He doesn't have the torch because Boxing wanted guys like Matthysse and Marquez to have it.

Holy hell, you don't feel Bradley dominated JMM?!?! What fight did you watch?

How is he unlikely to beat Pac when he went 12 rounds with Pac unscathed already? Pac obviously doesn't get better in rematches per the JMM fiasco. Bradley shows every indicator of schooling Pac.

Bradley won't beat Mayweather. He can't out Box him in space. He fights too wide to win in close.

I don't see a reason for him to need to out do those men to become an ATG.

Man you make me wonder about you... The stuff you say is just... I don't know. :conf


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> Huh? Why not? The guy is YOUNGER than Lucas Matthysse and started Boxing a full 3 years later.
> 
> The torch is snatched. If the Mexican and Filipino fan bases choose not to accept defeat of their champion that is understandable. What isn't understandable is the horrible way that Boxing media is treating Bradley. He doesn't have the torch because Boxing wanted guys like Matthysse and Marquez to have it.
> 
> ...


Clearly actual age is not as relevant as in-ring age.

Bradley wasn't unscathed, he was never seriously hurt but he got touched up. And that was Manny fighting a lazy fight.

Bradley-JMM was a close competitive fight.

Bradley might belong in the HOF but I don't see him being an ATG. He benefits from a weak era. I like him and he's very well rounded and has great heart and skill and a good family man and his resume has depth, but it doesn't have much historical umph. That's just how I see it.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Clearly actual age is not as relevant as in-ring age.
> 
> Bradley wasn't unscathed, he was never seriously hurt but he got touched up. And that was Manny fighting a lazy fight.
> 
> ...


Huh? If guys are the same generation they are the same generation. You don't get to exclude them arbitrarily. Bradley is the new generation.

Bradley wasn't unscathed? If you say so.


















Come on man stop it. I was hoping for JMM to win, but I knew Bradley would beat him due to speed, size, and movement. It went exactly like I expected with Bradley dominating. There was nothing competitive about it. Was it a stinker? Yes. Was it Bradley's fault? Yes. Do I still like JMM's skill set better? Yes. Still, the kid was dominating.

Bradley is in a weak era? Are you kidding? Bradley has not only beaten class fighters, he has beaten all styles. To his detriment, Bradley doesn't have pop. To your point this kind of shuts down his ability to leave a lasting impression. No matter what though, a real Boxing fan has to admit the kid can fight. He hasn't done much to deserve ATG status yet, but he is tracking pretty darned well.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Keith Thurman is going to surprise all of you! :deal


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> Huh? If guys are the same generation they are the same generation. You don't get to exclude them arbitrarily. Bradley is the new generation.
> 
> Bradley wasn't unscathed? If you say so.
> 
> ...


You seem really high on Bradley so I'm just gonna let you be that way. I think a majority would agree he falls below ATG status. Witter, Holt, Peterson, Alexander via headbutt, Provodnikov, and a 40 year old Marquez by SD in a slow-paced fight that is commonly described as close and competitive. Very good, no doubt, but great? I don't think so. It's not hard to imagine 100 better fighters.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> You seem really high on Bradley so I'm just gonna let you be that way. I think a majority would agree he falls below ATG status. Witter, Holt, Peterson, Alexander via headbutt, Provodnikov, and a 40 year old Marquez by SD in a slow-paced fight that is commonly described as close and competitive. Very good, no doubt, but great? I don't think so. It's not hard to imagine 100 better fighters.


Not really. I am just honest. I am high on Thurman.

Actually I don't even like the guy. On a personal level, I think he is kind of forced and corny. On a Boxing level, I don't like him aesthetically. He is horrid to me. Wide punches. Horrible accuracy. Random senseless "footwork". Doesn't fight well inside IMHO. Makes defensive fighting look horrible. Leads/Fouls with his head. I hate seemingly skilled "good guys" who foul in the ring (Abner Mares! :fire). I just don't like the guy, but damn... You have no choice but to respect the guys hustle. The guy has made me a "fan".

I never said he was an ATG. I said he is tracking to do so and has already grabbed the torch from the old guard. He has easily emerged as the top guy at 140-147 on his side of the HBO/SHO/TR/GBP "firewall". He may be exiting his TR contract soon so he may have his shot at the top.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> Do you feel Ali was loved during his prime? He was hated just like Mayweather or Broner. Ali was far more witty and classy than either, but there was no unanimous love for the man when he was active. The love came later. Pure Boxers are rarely loved.
> 
> To your point Boxing is missing high level Boxers who are real finishers. Leonard, Hearns, ODLH, Mosley, etc... were all finishers in their prime. They also were high level Boxers when faced with the right(wrong) circumstances. It seems that is the element that Boxing is lacking now. Finishers who can box at a high level when needed and still finish guys if they find openings.
> 
> I doubt Bradley will be loved as he lacks power and the Provodnikov fight has changed him. Keith Thurman may be a great candidate though.[/QUOTEWEll not about being loved but being looked on as a superstar who might win many titles and have high expectations on them and win the titles with such impressive fights, that we put expectations on them and they live up to them. Curry had those expectations but failed to live up to them but Hearns,Leonard,Duran, Hagler lived up to them once they impressed.. I think Mayweather is that high level. but Broner is just hype at this point, and honestly does not have the foot movement to be a great fighter unless he punches like Mugabi with speed, which he cannot. But like I said, I don't think it is about being loved but rather being respected and viewed with expectation. I mention that level of fighter like Leonard,Hearns,Delahoya, Shane, Floyd or Jones Jr. because they are/were so good they can move up and win titles at any weights and still look impressive.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

sugarshane_24 said:


> I have to say these guys:
> 
> 1. Saman Sorjaturong, the guy was taken out in two rounds, but when Saman moved to 105, he was a destroyer. He even added the scalp of Chiquita Gonzales.
> 2. Rosendo Alvarez
> 3. Zolani Petelo, repectable former 105 champ who dethroned long time champ Sor Vorapin, the guy was much better than how Lopez made him look.


Yeah, good enough contenders. Far from anything ATG.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> bald_head_slick said:
> 
> 
> > Do you feel Ali was loved during his prime? He was hated just like Mayweather or Broner. Ali was far more witty and classy than either, but there was no unanimous love for the man when he was active. The love came later. Pure Boxers are rarely loved.
> ...


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> MAG1965 said:
> 
> 
> > It seems there is a insidious double standard being applied here. Bradley is easily as successful as a fighter can be in his era. If it is not about being loved and about winning many titles and high expectations, the fact that you don't rate Bradley speaks more about the quality of fans than anything else. Exactly what expectations do fans have for a fighter that Bradley isn't meeting? For a guy of his size, Bradley has been impressively dominant and more importantly CONSISTENT in every division he has been in.
> ...


----------



## Drew101 (Jun 30, 2012)

Personally, I'm less concerned about torch-passing (since that wasn't necessarily as common in previous times as one might think); and more concerned about this generation's apparently inability to produce long-term champs who can carve out lengthy, successful reigns in a single division. 

A quick list of long-term champions and titleholders from today's era.

Heavyweight: Wlad
Middleweight: Sergio
Welterweight/ JMW: Floyd
Featherweight: Chris John (who has never really been considered the top guy in the class at any one point in his reign)

That;s about it. There are some other quality titleholders, but by and large, there aren't that many titleholders these days who establish dominion over a single weight class in the same manner that fighters did in previous times. Therefore, there's less opportunity to have the torch passed because increasingly fighters seem more focused upon gaining (dimmer) torches at higher weights.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Drew101 said:


> Personally, I'm less concerned about torch-passing (since that wasn't necessarily as common in previous times as one might think); and more concerned about this generation's apparently inability to produce long-term champs who can carve out lengthy, successful reigns in a single division.
> 
> A quick list of long-term champions and titleholders from today's era.
> 
> ...


ffs, there goes the second criteria, and by extension, the third atsch


----------



## DavidHaye (Oct 22, 2013)

I passed the torch to Wladimir Klitschko after he beat me via UD though. Wladimir was not the true champion until that night he fought and beat David Haye.


----------



## KOTF (Jun 3, 2013)

Fucking hell I forgot Khan has a win over Barrera so that leaves him, Crispy Garcia, and the Ginger as the fighters under-30 who have a win over a legend


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KOTF said:


> Fucking hell I forgot Khan has a win over Barrera so that leaves him, Crispy Garcia, and the Ginger as the fighters under-30 who have a win over a legend


Torches far from lit at that point my friend.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> MAG1965 said:
> 
> 
> > It seems there is a insidious double standard being applied here. Bradley is easily as successful as a fighter can be in his era. If it is not about being loved and about winning many titles and high expectations, the fact that you don't rate Bradley speaks more about the quality of fans than anything else. Exactly what expectations do fans have for a fighter that Bradley isn't meeting? For a guy of his size, Bradley has been impressively dominant and more importantly CONSISTENT in every division he has been in.
> ...


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> bald_head_slick said:
> 
> 
> > You seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth here, Slick.
> ...


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> I don't recall me saying Bradley was horrid to watch. I used another word to describe him, but not horrid and I think he is a very good fighter. Maybe I said that about Broner, but not Bradley. Bradley is good. Broner is fast but overrated because of his faults in foot positioning.


Don't think he's talking to you MAG, he's talking to Slick who was responding to you, and the quoting messed up.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Don't think he's talking to you MAG, he's talking to Slick who was responding to you, and the quoting messed up.


You are right. looking back at the quote and his response. I should have read it better. I am sorry. He was responding to Slick. My age is getting to me.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> You are right. looking back at the quote and his response. I should have read it better. I am sorry. He was responding to Slick. My age is getting to me.


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


>


:lol:


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


>


thanks for the sympathy.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> steviebruno said:
> 
> 
> > I don't recall me saying Bradley was horrid to watch. I used another word to describe him, but not horrid and I think he is a very good fighter. Maybe I said that about Broner, but not Bradley. Bradley is good. Broner is fast but overrated because of his faults in foot positioning.
> ...


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

steviebruno said:


> bald_head_slick said:
> 
> 
> > You seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth here, Slick.
> ...


----------



## Thanatos (Oct 14, 2013)

There are so many young and exciting fighters out there at the moment, we don't need any torch passing.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

bald_head_slick said:


> MAG1965 said:
> 
> 
> > A little confusion there... Your quoting is messed up.
> ...


----------



## Jack Presscot (Oct 1, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> good thread, i think about this alot..
> 
> today's youngsters aren't cut from the same cloth, wich is why gys like Mayweather, Marquez, Pac, BHop, Cotto, the Klit bros, etc are over their 30's and for the most part are still considered top P4P caliber fighters and can beat the majority of the young guys around their weight classes..
> 
> ...


B-Flop is TERRIFIED of Ward, he would rather defend his little organizational belt against no hope #1 contenders for the IBF. Once this crop of fighters retires, boxing will be badly crippled if not dead.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Jack Presscot said:


> B-Flop is TERRIFIED of Ward, he would rather defend his little organizational belt against no hope #1 contenders for the IBF. Once this crop of fighters retires, boxing will be badly crippled if not dead.


Stop trolling, you make terrible posts.


----------



## ~Cellzki~ (Jun 3, 2013)

Aint no torches being passed tonight..

#TheAlien


----------



## Jack Presscot (Oct 1, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Stop trolling, you make terrible posts.


Uh oh! I've done it. I pissed off the B-Flop fanbase!!!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

~Cellzki~ said:


> Aint no torches being passed tonight..
> 
> #TheAlien


:ibutt


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

whether you agree with it or not..

but JMM passed it to Timothy Bradley..

Timothy has the Matrix


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Stop trolling, you make terrible posts.


Bogat..

Meet. Mr. Jack Presscot. He's the best cooler in town


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

DobyZhee said:


> whether you agree with it or not..
> 
> but JMM passed it to Timothy Bradley..
> 
> Timothy has the Matrix


My whole thing is Tim didn't dominate and he's likely hit his ceiling. He can beat other very good fighters but not a Pacquiao or Barrera level. Plus I almost consider him old guard, he's been at the elite level for so long.


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> My whole thing is Tim didn't dominate and he's likely hit his ceiling. He can beat other very good fighters but not a Pacquiao or Barrera level. Plus I almost consider him old guard, he's been at the elite level for so long.


I see what you are saying but the JMM fight was Tim's coming out party. JMM does NOT have another performance like he did against Pac. No f'n way. That was the HIGHEST of highest training and peak that you will see from any boxer. Its downhill after that. Your body just doesn't have room for 1 more at the older age...unless you are on that farmacia..

Look, usually pass the torch fighters will fight a new cat and they know when they're number is up..

only dudes that I can say are torchbearers are Pac, JMM (used to be) Floyd, Nard (somebodybeat this dude's ass already) Klit bros and Arce

the rest are cigarette lighters
The ones that I can see taking a cigarette lighters is Rigondeaux from Chris John or Salido,. Andre Ward from Nard, Canelo from Martinez or Cotto.

does that kinda make sense?

c


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

DobyZhee said:


> I see what you are saying but the JMM fight was Tim's coming out party. JMM does NOT have another performance like he did against Pac. No f'n way. That was the HIGHEST of highest training and peak that you will see from any boxer. Its downhill after that. Your body just doesn't have room for 1 more at the older age...unless you are on that farmacia..
> 
> Look, usually pass the torch fighters will fight a new cat and they know when they're number is up..
> 
> ...


I don't see torch passing fights necessarily as simply losing to a younger guy, that younger guy has to go on and continue dominating in that fighter's place. It was an underwhelming coming out party. Impressive, but who's raving about it aside from Bradley fans? The Media hasn't said anything even close to "A New Era", "New Star in the Making", "New Threat to Pound for Pound Kings", none of that.

I feel you on the lighters though.


----------



## Jack Presscot (Oct 1, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I don't see torch passing fights necessarily as simply losing to a younger guy, that younger guy has to go on and continue dominating in that fighter's place. It was an underwhelming coming out party. Impressive, but who's raving about it aside from Bradley fans? The Media hasn't said anything even close to "A New Era", "New Star in the Making", "New Threat to Pound for Pound Kings", none of that.
> 
> I feel you on the lighters though.


No torches were passed tonite. If that laughable bum was able to score against the Old Grey Mare AND make it to the 12th bell, I am praying to Baby Jesus that B-Flop lands Froch!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Bump. 

Adrien Broner has bit the dust. Many did not believe in him, but some did. Canelo is now highly doubted as the future of the sport. Eyes are on both Garcias.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

@Flea Man, don't think I've seen you post here, would really appreciate your thoughts on the issue.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Donaire to Rigo? Donaire was on his way to the Hall.


----------



## allenko1 (Jun 27, 2012)

who is passing the torch and who should the torch be passed too?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Donaire to Rigo? Donaire was on his way to the Hall.


Is Donaire an ATG? I thought he was definitely on his way to the Hall based on his accomplishments, he may be ATG in a divisional sense, but not in a top 100 pound for pound sense, IMO. So Rigo got HOF lineage. If he keeps racking up the wins, that win helps him a lot when it comes to arguments for standing.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Is Donaire an ATG? I thought he was definitely on his way to the Hall based on his accomplishments, he may be ATG in a divisional sense, but not in a top 100 pound for pound sense, IMO. So Rigo got HOF lineage. If he keeps racking up the wins, that win helps him a lot when it comes to arguments for standing.


We'll be dust in the wind by the time another top 100 makes it.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> We'll be dust in the wind by the time another top 100 makes it.


:err


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> :err


I know man, I know.


----------



## bailey (Jun 9, 2013)

It can seem that way for a while until the new fighter proves themselves time and again like L Lewis did. the same thing will happen now the Klitschkos are looking to be at the end of their career.
Look at how Calzaghe has left SMW and LHW empty of top true champs with the current fighters still campaigning or beaten fighters Calzaghe had already beaten. Hes been retired for a long time now, but his legacy is still dominating those divisions.
Same thing will likely happen when Mayweather retires


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Bump.
> 
> Adrien Broner has bit the dust. Many did not believe in him, but some did. Canelo is now highly doubted as the future of the sport. Eyes are on both Garcias.


Canelo not quite done yet, Garcia losing a bit of stock.


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

Its gonna be Canelo, Danny Garcia and one of the Charlo bros. Wont take it from pac or mayweather, although i see provo possibly taking it from pac

sent from my mom's landline using tapatalk


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Well Bradley has the best case coz he can take Pac and jmm again.

Ward could feasibly clean up at lhw.

Floyd will retire one day and then it's a case of Canelo, Garcia dominating in his absence. Before Pea lost he had notably declined, the same hasn't happened to Floyd. He isn't the fighter he was at sfw but he's seemingly a level above his closest peers.

There is noone you would pick to beat him but that is always the case. He will either slip or bow out on top. If he does the next generation will give rise to a new champ, if he slips a new heir will be crowned king.

Passing of the torch can also work the other way. Lets say Floyd beats Garcia. Then retires. Canelo and Garcia can go onto to rule their divisions and despite failing their test at the elite, they gain the experience required to begin their own reign of p4p supremacy.

Beating the last great champ isn't a requisite to greatness, more of a shortcut imo.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Luf said:


> Well Bradley has the best case coz he can take Pac and jmm again.
> 
> Ward could feasibly clean up at lhw.
> 
> ...


The way I see it, there are 3 ways you can be come an ATG. Beat another ATG in his prime and then face top contenders; beat a lot of HOFers and/or some ATG's that still have something left; or dominate a division or a couple of divisions for a long time with utter dominance.

Ultimately I agree that it's more of a shortcut, but I don't really see any of these new guys being great enough to dominate for long stretches of time. That's more rare when it comes to achieving ATGhood.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> The way I see it, there are 3 ways you can be come an ATG. Beat another ATG in his prime and then face top contenders; beat a lot of HOFers and/or some ATG's that still have something left; or dominate a division or a couple of divisions for a long time with utter dominance.
> 
> Ultimately I agree that it's more of a shortcut, but I don't really see any of these new guys being great enough to dominate for long stretches of time. That's more rare when it comes to achieving ATGhood.


If Canelo was to beat Lara, you'd be hard pressed finding a fighter not named Floyd to favour over him imo.

It's all subjective but things like dominating, quality of resume and in ring skills are always used to compare fighters.

Floyd has until the end of 2015. I think Ward takes over from then. That puts us about 4 years in the future. it's very difficult predicting that far in the future. Could be a 3-0 prospect today and a future atg tomorrow.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Luf said:


> If Canelo was to beat Lara, you'd be hard pressed finding a fighter not named Floyd to favour over him imo.


Unless he moved to 160, which seems inevitable.



Luf said:


> It's all subjective but things like dominating, quality of resume and in ring skills are always used to compare fighters.
> 
> Floyd has until the end of 2015. I think Ward takes over from then. That puts us about 4 years in the future. it's very difficult predicting that far in the future. Could be a 3-0 prospect today and a future atg tomorrow.


Boxing is very unpredictable, you never know who's going to falter and who's going to rise up. But my point is, the ability to be considered an ATG becomes much harder if nobody from the younger group takes the torch from a still active and still competent ATG.


----------



## Primadonna Kool (Jun 14, 2012)

Nope.

The new generations are most very poor in ability and personality.

You don't wait until the torch is past, you take it!


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Unless he moved to 160, which seems inevitable.
> 
> Boxing is very unpredictable, you never know who's going to falter and who's going to rise up. But my point is, the ability to be considered an ATG becomes much harder if nobody from the younger group takes the torch from a still active and still competent ATG.


certainly is my man.

Floyd just doesn't seem to be slipping right now. Then again he could lose in May. Anything can happen.and that's why I love this sport.


----------



## SouthPaw (May 24, 2013)

There's going to be at least a top P4P fighter from every US Olympic Class

Demetrius Andrade and/or Errol Spence. I'm betting on Spence. Already the best prospect since Mayweather.


----------



## elterrible (May 20, 2013)

Depends. 

For someone like PBF, there arent any young guns who can beat him unless they weigh 20+ pounds more. 

For some like Ward.... I dont think anyone doubts he would beat hopkins/tarver/jones at this point. Only really hopkins would mean something cause hes still active. Think Ward is staying at 168 hoping for more money fights there. 


Who is that new up and coming american heavyweight? I forget his name, anyways, he would lose to wlad at this point and they know it so avoiding that fight for now.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Luf said:


> certainly is my man.
> 
> Floyd just doesn't seem to be slipping right now. Then again he could lose in May. Anything can happen.and that's why I love this sport.


:yep


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

there is a lack of a group of great fighters right now. Like Hagler/Hearns/Duran/Leonard/Benitez Delahoya/Mosley/Tito/Whitaker And the top guys are sort of handpicking a little not looking for the big fights, like Oscar Delahoya, always signed to fight everyone quickly in the most recent times. As much as people respect Floyd's skills, they don't feel he really is a guy who wants to fight the best. There is something about him which is more about saying he is great by timing and picking fights, rather than fighting the best like Chavez or Delahoya did. And the fact that Pacman and Floyd have not fought and probably will not is a shame.


----------



## FloydPatterson (Jun 4, 2013)

Deontay is going to just punch the torch out of Wlad's hand


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

FloydPatterson said:


> Deontay is going to just punch the torch out of Wlad's hand


That would be awesome.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> there is a lack of a group of great fighters right now. Like Hagler/Hearns/Duran/Leonard/Benitez Delahoya/Mosley/Tito/Whitaker And the top guys are sort of handpicking a little not looking for the big fights, like Oscar Delahoya, always signed to fight everyone quickly in the most recent times. As much as people respect Floyd's skills, they don't feel he really is a guy who wants to fight the best. There is something about him which is more about saying he is great by timing and picking fights, rather than fighting the best like Chavez or Delahoya did. And the fact that Pacman and Floyd have not fought and probably will not is a shame.


Mayweather/Pacquaio/Bradley/Marquez. 3 top 100 ATG's and a potential ATG right there. It's not the lack of a great group it's lack of that groups ability to fight each other or rather the ability of Floyd to fight Pacquiao or Bradley due to promotional schisms.

Those four guys are the torch holders right now in the premier division and there are no young guys out there who look like beating them.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> Mayweather/Pacquaio/Bradley/Marquez. 3 top 100 ATG's and a potential ATG right there. It's not the lack of a great group it's lack of that groups ability to fight each other or rather the ability of Floyd to fight Pacquiao or Bradley due to promotional schisms.
> 
> Those four guys are the torch holders right now in the premier division and there are no young guys out there who look like beating them.


Not fighting each as you said means the group is not solidified in an era. The fights have to have some great fights (Duran/Leonard, Hearns/Leonard, Hagler/Hearns) great knockouts (Hearns/Duran, Hagler/Hearns, Hearns/Cuevas, Controversy (Hagler/Leonard, Duran/Leonard 1 and 2), and then you add in Benitez, who was the only one who did not fight Hagler. And the fab 4 fought I think about 10 fights 13 or so if you count Benitez in a 10 year period, so one superfight a year with the original fab 4. And yes, Mayweather has not fought Pacman and Bradley, and probably never will unless Pacman looks beatable, and by that time the accomplishment will be less of an accomplishment, as it would not be as much now. And Bradley being an ATG-if he continues he will be, but he is sort of outside those other guys era. And some will say Duran was older, but Duran fought Leonard as the first fight of the fab 4 fights in June of 1980 and the last of the fab 4 fights. Bradley has done well. but to be ATG takes more than a disputed win over and older Pacman, and a win over JMM. And JMM is not really an ATG, but he is a solid HOF fighter, but those fighters did not have exciting round robins like Hagler/Hearns/Leonard/Duran which really solidified them. They all had some legendary accomplishments outside of the rivalry and then each fight then was special. Ido believe this handpicking and catchweights have hurt the era in an unconscious way. It might not be talked about, but people know that Floyd (who is probably seen now as the best of all of them) has not looked for the hard opponents to really prove he was great. When the top guy in an era has not really fought the best when they were prime, it says something about that era. You cannot say the same for Leonard,Hearns,Duran, Hagler. Which is why their era stays so special, and Delahoya and Shane and Tito and Whitaker, did fight when it was time and never backed down. Oscar fought everyone. Those fights were not as exciting as the fab 4, but those guys still fought who they could.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

and one thing I think lacking now is a great fight by Floyd in his career. I would call fighters back in the 1980s and 1990s during a big fight weekend. I would say I was a reporter and interview them, since if I asked them question as a fan they would just get off the phone quickly. So I would say I am a reporter and having questions ready. And one question I asked Ray was "Does a great fighter have to have great fights? His answer was very fast and very sure "Yes!". He said great fights define eras.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> Mayweather/Pacquaio/Bradley/Marquez. 3 top 100 ATG's and a potential ATG right there. It's not the lack of a great group it's lack of that groups ability to fight each other or rather the ability of Floyd to fight Pacquiao or Bradley due to promotional schisms.
> 
> Those four guys are the torch holders right now in the premier division and there are no young guys out there who look like beating them.


I knew when I saw him posting in this thread that he'd be discrediting Marquez or Mayweather


----------



## chibelle (Jun 5, 2013)

Nobody took the torch from SRR.
Or Ali.
Or Duran.
Or SRL.
Or Hagler.
Or Hearns.

The closest you have is Chavez Sr to ODLH to Pac/Floyd. And that is arguable.
Maybe Tyson to Holyfield to Lewis to the Klits?



Boxing is not a sport of torch passing because of weight classes, scheduling and it is the most corrupt of the major sports in American sport entertainment.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I knew when I saw him posting in this thread that he'd be discrediting Marquez or Mayweather


it isn't discrediting. Floyd has handpicked opponents for years and fought them on right timing. Maybe I was just used to the fab 4 era, and I have to get used to the new way of boxing where guys sort of wait and use catchweights for advantages. I am not used to this way of doing things. Greatness is not something you plan. I give Pacman credit because he really does sign to fight everyone, and I give Oscar and Shane credit also. Shane never had to fight Vernon Forrest and he did, knowing it would be a tough fight. The fact Floyd never fought Pacman speaks for itself, and no matter what Floyd fans say, he is the reason that fight didn't happen. And to be honest, I thought Floyd would outbox Pacman and win a UD. Floyd saw something in Pacman that he didn't want to deal with. What that is, I am not sure. Heart,speed, skills, southpaw. Something.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I knew when I saw him posting in this thread that he'd be discrediting Marquez or Mayweather


It's what he does :conf

MAG's comments made simple: Duran, Marquez, and Mayweather are overrated handpickers. Leonard, Hearns, and Pacquiao are "true" ATG's.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> it isn't discrediting. Floyd has handpicked opponents for years and fought them on right timing. Maybe I was just used to the fab 4 era, and I have to get used to the new way of boxing where guys sort of wait and use catchweights for advantages. I am not used to this way of doing things. Greatness is not something you plan. I give Pacman credit because he really does sign to fight everyone, and I give Oscar and Shane credit also. Shane never had to fight Vernon Forrest and he did, knowing it would be a tough fight. The fact Floyd never fought Pacman speaks for itself, and no matter what Floyd fans say, he is the reason that fight didn't happen. And to be honest, I thought Floyd would outbox Pacman and win a UD. Floyd saw something in Pacman that he didn't want to deal with. What that is, I am not sure. Heart,speed, skills, southpaw. Something.


Floyd fought Shane, Victor, Cotto, Marquez, Oscar, alvarez, Maidana, ect coming off their biggest wins or best performances.

In 5 sentences tell me how Floyd fought them at the right time


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Floyd fought Shane, Victor, Cotto, Marquez, Oscar, Maidana, ect coming off their biggest wins or best performances.
> 
> In 5 sentences tell me how Floyd fought them at the right time


Shane was older and slower and easy to beat, I like how Floyd had the heart to take the right hand, but to say this was a big win over a legend? Victor limited, Cotto worn out and had something like 3 stoppage losses,Marquez small with no footspeed to compete with Floyd's movement and handspeed . Oscar older, Maidana limited fighter who is coming of a big win-look at the Ortiz fight and the Guerrero fight for similar reference. I would have been more impressed with one Pacman fight than the Maidana,Guerrero,Cotto fights. Regardless of anything else, without a Pacman fight, Floyd's legacy will not look that great. And he lacks a defining fight.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> It's what he does :conf
> 
> MAG's comments made simple: Duran, Marquez, and Mayweather are overrated handpickers. Leonard, Hearns, and Pacquiao are "true" ATG's.


I never said Duran was an overrated handpicker. I said if he is rated 1-5 or 1-10 all time great, his wins against great fighters (which is how I rate greats) does not warrant that, then what does?
I have a criteria when I look after fighters and legacies. No fighter is bigger than boxing. If he loses, then he loses, and it had to do with his opponent. And I do not accept excuses of judge fixing or things like that. If a fighter wants to win and prove he is great, then he has to win big and prove how great he is. That is why being great has to be earned, it is such a hard thing to attain over some of the greatest fighters ever who put thier all in to boxing. And I don't think Floyd has fought the kinds of guys past greats fought and the kinds of fights they did, to give him that high a ranking. Not fighting the guys he has fought. 
I never excused Hearns loses to any of the guys he lost to. Tommy was careless with Barkley, fought with his ego against Hagler and paid for it, and with Ray, his stamina could not hold up. I could say Tommy lacked experience at that time to go the extra few rounds, but he lost and lost to a legend. What criteria do I think makes a fighter great? It is that guy who has a varied style. I think a varied style to beat all styles is needed to be ATG. Foot and handspeed, and puncher and boxer and beating greats and a willingness to go for broke and fight any fighter who comes up. If he cannot catch up to a fast guy who has footspeed, then excusing it with he was out of shape or not motivated cannot change his foot positioning.
What I do not accept is when people say. Well this fighter beat prime Leonard so he is the best ever, yet he lost and he has an excuse for that loss, as he does with Benitez and Hearns and Hagler and anyone else who was great, yet he fought Hearns when he was champion, and Benitez hardly a year after Ray. And I always said, I don't think Ray was prime in June of 1980. Duran is great because of his dominant lightweight reign and his 4 titles and he did fight everyone he could, and he has a win over Ray. I just don't rate that win as high as others might. All I meant about Duran is, he is not 1-10 ATG.. And people get upset when I say he is top 25. I never thought that was an insult. He was still great, but to make excuses for his losses makes him bigger than boxing-no fighter is bigger that boxing. Great sport. And I rarely talk about Hearns as far as where I rank him. I am too subjective about Tommy, I do mention his fights and aspect of them. Thing which Hearns and Duran and Leonard have which Floyd probably will never has , is that defining career fight. Which means they will not be forgotten, which does help thier ATG ranking.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> Shane was older and slower and easy to beat, I like how Floyd had the heart to take the right hand, but to say this was a big win over a legend? Victor limited, Cotto worn out and had something like 3 stoppage losses,Marquez small with no footspeed to compete with Floyd's movement and handspeed . Oscar older, Maidana limited fighter who is coming of a big win-look at the Ortiz fight and the Guerrero fight for similar reference. I would have been more impressed with one Pacman fight than the Maidana,Guerrero,Cotto fights. Regardless of anything else, without a Pacman fight, Floyd's legacy will not look that great. And he lacks a defining fight.


So explain in 5 sentences or less why Margarito was a great victory for Pacquiao when he was destroyed by Shane, looked like crap against a journeyman and it was at a catchweight


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> I never said Duran was an overrated handpicker. I said if he is rated 1-5 or 1-10 all time great, his wins against great fighters (which is how I rate greats) does not warrant that, then what does?
> I have a criteria when I look after fighters and legacies. No fighter is bigger than boxing. If he loses, then he loses, and it had to do with his opponent. And I do not accept excuses of judge fixing or things like that. If a fighter wants to win and prove he is great, then he has to win big and prove how great he is. That is why being great has to be earned, it is such a hard thing to attain over some of the greatest fighters ever who put thier all in to boxing. And I don't think Floyd has fought the kinds of guys past greats fought and the kinds of fights they did, to give him that high a ranking. Not fighting the guys he has fought.
> I never excused Hearns loses to any of the guys he lost to. Tommy was careless with Barkley, fought with his ego against Hagler and paid for it, and with Ray, his stamina could not hold up. I could say Tommy lacked experience at that time to go the extra few rounds, but he lost and lost to a legend. What criteria do I think makes a fighter great? It is that guy who has a varied style. I think a varied style to beat all styles is needed to be ATG. Foot and handspeed, and puncher and boxer and beating greats and a willingness to go for broke and fight any fighter who comes up. If he cannot catch up to a fast guy who has footspeed, then excusing it with he was out of shape or not motivated cannot change his foot positioning.
> What I do not accept is when people say. Well this fighter beat prime Leonard so he is the best ever, yet he lost and he has an excuse for that loss, as he does with Benitez and Hearns and Hagler and anyone else who was great, yet he fought Hearns when he was champion, and Benitez hardly a year after Ray. And I always said, I don't think Ray was prime in June of 1980. Duran is great because of his dominant lightweight reign and his 4 titles and he did fight everyone he could, and he has a win over Ray. I just don't rate that win as high as others might. All I meant about Duran is, he is not 1-10 ATG.. And people get upset when I say he is top 25. I never thought that was an insult. He was still great, but to make excuses for his losses makes him bigger than boxing-no fighter is bigger that boxing. Great sport. And I rarely talk about Hearns as far as where I rank him. I am too subjective about Tommy, I do mention his fights and aspect of them. Thing which Hearns and Duran and Leonard have which Floyd probably will never has , is that defining career fight. Which means they will not be forgotten, which does help thier ATG ranking.


Fair enough MAG, but you are indeed very selective with your criticisms and very repetitive regardless of context.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Fair enough MAG, but you are indeed very selective with your criticisms and very repetitive regardless of context.


That is true. I have a certain way I have thought for years, and the foundation is the 1980s era. I guess I am getting older, and cannot get out of my era to see this era more objectively.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> So explain in 5 sentences or less why Margarito was a great victory for Pacquiao when he was destroyed by Shane, looked like crap against a journeyman and it was at a catchweight


you know what that fight showed me. Pacman has guts to fight anyone, regardless of anything, Margarito was a big guy compared to Pacman. Yeah Margarito had lost to Shane, but at that point Pacman had not fought Shane yet, and didn't know how to rate the power which stopped Margarito in that fight. Either way, Margarito was a big guy and he could have come in shape and have been the strong dominating Margarito he was before, and Pacman still fought him and had the guts to take a chance. And Pacman was hit a few times and stunned in that fight, so he took a chance. He has a championship heart and he is not afraid to fight anyone. And the catchweight? Margarito could handle a 151 pound weight, although yes the catchweight to me doesn't make sense since it was for the junior middleweight title, but Pacman showed guts that I don't think Floyd would have showed. That was obvious and always has been, yet I still think Floyd outboxes Pacman and wins a UD. I think it is obvious that Pacman would have signed to fight Hearns/Duran/Leonard, and Floyd might not have. Just on how they signed fights. and fighting everyone with confidence is a sign of greatness.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> you know what that fight showed me. Pacman has guts to fight anyone, regardless of anything, Margarito was a big guy compared to Pacman. Yeah Margarito had lost to Shane, but at that point Pacman had not fought Shane yet, and didn't know how to rate the power which stopped Margarito in that fight. Either way, Margarito was a big guy and he could have come in shape and have been the strong dominating Margarito he was before, and Pacman still fought him and had the guts to take a chance. And Pacman was hit a few times and stunned in that fight, so he took a chance. He has a championship heart and he is not afraid to fight anyone. And the catchweight? Margarito could handle a 151 pound weight, although yes the catchweight to me doesn't make sense since it was for the junior middleweight title, but Pacman showed guts that I don't think Floyd would have showed. That was obvious and always has been, yet I still think Floyd outboxes Pacman and wins a UD. I think it is obvious that Pacman would have signed to fight Hearns/Duran/Leonard, and Floyd might not have. Just on how they signed fights. and fighting everyone with confidence is a sign of greatness.


So fighting a past it beat up punching bag at a catchweight shows you Pacquiao has heart a fight everyone knew he would win just like he won it?

But Floyd fighting Mosley a guy Roach said was "too good" isnt. A fight where Floyd shook off a series of rights to dominate a fighter who defeated Margarito easily

Sorry but this is boxing, just because Margarito was "big" doesnt mean he was a great fighter

What do you think of Alvarez a fighter that may very well establish himself as an elite? Do you think the margarito Pac fought brats him?


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> So fighting a past it beat up punching bag at a catchweight shows you Pacquiao has heart a fight everyone knew he would win just like he won it?
> 
> But Floyd fighting Mosley a guy Roach said was "too good" isnt. A fight where Floyd shook off a series of rights to dominate a fighter who defeated Margarito easily
> 
> ...


I do think Pacman would have fought Canelo also, but I think he would have done the same thing Mayweather did and do a catchweight and he would have probably outboxed Canelo and both he and Canelo would be more banged up than Floyd and Canelo were after their fight in Sept. I don't like the catchweights at all in title fighters for a certain weight belt. No, Margarito was not a great fighter, but he was strong and dominating and his style against Pacman who came from many divisions below could have been terrible for Manny, who at times liked to mix it up, and he did get hit. It just showed what a warrior he is. I don't know if this was an easy fight for Manny to win, although I do remember the odds being in his favor.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> I do think Pacman would have fought Canelo also, but I think he would have done the same thing Mayweather did and do a catchweight and he would have probably outboxed Canelo and both he and Canelo would be more banged up than Floyd and Canelo were after their fight in Sept. I don't like the catchweights at all in title fighters for a certain weight belt. No, Margarito was not a great fighter, but he was strong and dominating and his style against Pacman who came from many divisions below could have been terrible for Manny, who at times liked to mix it up, and he did get hit. It just showed what a warrior he is. I don't know if this was an easy fight for Manny to win, although I do remember the odds being in his favor.


Please explain what Margarito was dominating. Even before Margarito fought Mosley he had a loss to Williams and barely beat an injured Clottey.

Pacquiao doesnt like to mix it up. He likes to use his ability to get in and land his shots faster than his opponent can react

Margarito was coming off a drumming by mosley and a poor performabce against a journeymen

Nobody was picking him to win


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Please explain what Margarito was dominating. Even before Margarito fought Mosley he had a loss to Williams and barely beat an injured Clottey.
> 
> Pacquiao doesnt like to mix it up. He likes to use his ability to get in and land his shots faster than his opponent can react
> 
> ...


No. Pacman mixes it up at times, he just is not hit as clean as the guy he is fighting. Someone busted him up when he fought Cotto. Let me explain or mention a fight which is a similar situation. Mike Tyson, lost to Douglas in 1990. In 1991 -I think March, and then he fought a rematch in June, he fought Razor Ruddock in a nontitle fight. That showed me Mike was fearless in a way- and taking the rematch. I thought, this guy Ruddock is dangerous. His punches destoyed guys. That Dokes knockout was something else. I mean many guys would say Bruno was tougher than Ruddock, but in my mind Ruddock could turn out to be nightmare stylelistically. Ruddock had an nice uppercut/hook, which could work in between Mike's guard and head movement (or lack of it since the early days), so he signed to fight him I thought-Mike proves he thinks he can beat anyone.

Margarito was beating who was in front of him, and stopping them and had a good list of wins. Cintron,Cotto.Clottey- I never understood his problem fighting Paul. The Mosley fight was a great win for Shane, but not to make excuses, since I said in an earlier post I don't buy them, but after they found plaster or whatever they found, that must have affected him in the fight mentally. How could he go out and do what he normally did, but Shane won and I give him credit.


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

Hindsight being 20/20,
Victor had no business being in the ring with floyd

sent from my mom's landline using tapatalk


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Please stay on topic people.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Sounds like you have a hard on for Margarito. He was a decent fighter. Nothing special just a big guy who used his size to overwhelm smaller fighters

Williams, Mosley and Ramos beat him without much issue and an injured Clottey i scored a draw.

I dont see how you saw stylistically Margarito giving Pacquiao problems givin Pacquiaos foot speed


A nothing win really


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Sounds like you have a hard on for Margarito. He was a decent fighter. Nothing special just a big guy who used his size to overwhelm smaller fighters
> 
> Williams, Mosley and Ramos beat him without much issue and an injured Clottey i scored a draw.
> 
> ...


Orbital bone..look it up


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

DobyZhee said:


> Orbital bone..look it up


Ncaa tournament look it up


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Ncaa tournament look it up


2013 NCAA final, look it up? Sorry, couldn't resist. :conf


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> Not fighting each as you said means the group is not solidified in an era. The fights have to have some great fights (Duran/Leonard, Hearns/Leonard, Hagler/Hearns) great knockouts (Hearns/Duran, Hagler/Hearns, Hearns/Cuevas, Controversy (Hagler/Leonard, Duran/Leonard 1 and 2), and then you add in Benitez, who was the only one who did not fight Hagler. And the fab 4 fought I think about 10 fights 13 or so if you count Benitez in a 10 year period, so one superfight a year with the original fab 4. And yes, Mayweather has not fought Pacman and Bradley, and probably never will unless Pacman looks beatable, and by that time the accomplishment will be less of an accomplishment, as it would not be as much now. And Bradley being an ATG-if he continues he will be, but he is sort of outside those other guys era. And some will say Duran was older, but Duran fought Leonard as the first fight of the fab 4 fights in June of 1980 and the last of the fab 4 fights. Bradley has done well. but to be ATG takes more than a disputed win over and older Pacman, and a win over JMM. *And JMM is not really an ATG*, but he is a solid HOF fighter, but those fighters did not have exciting round robins like Hagler/Hearns/Leonard/Duran which really solidified them. They all had some legendary accomplishments outside of the rivalry and then each fight then was special. Ido believe this handpicking and catchweights have hurt the era in an unconscious way. It might not be talked about, but people know that Floyd (who is probably seen now as the best of all of them) has not looked for the hard opponents to really prove he was great. When the top guy in an era has not really fought the best when they were prime, it says something about that era. You cannot say the same for Leonard,Hearns,Duran, Hagler. Which is why their era stays so special, and Delahoya and Shane and Tito and Whitaker, did fight when it was time and never backed down. Oscar fought everyone. Those fights were not as exciting as the fab 4, but those guys still fought who they could.


Not having that.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I knew when I saw him posting in this thread that he'd be discrediting Marquez or Mayweather


Or both.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> Not having that.


No sir! You tell em.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> No sir! You tell em.


If he wasn't an ATG he wouldn't have gotten out of that first round vs Pacquiao. Marquez is made of tougher stuff.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> If he wasn't an ATG he wouldn't have gotten out of that first round vs Pacquiao. Marquez is made of tougher stuff.


:ibutt


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

I hate that expression. 'Passing the torch' Passing?! If the youngster wants it, they have to go and take it.


----------



## Juiceboxbiotch (May 16, 2013)

For some "torch-passers" of this generation... it's just not time yet.

Mayweather vs. Canelo was one of those fights where I thought it would be "passed" but Mayweather is just still too damn good. I believe Canelo will achieve greatness some day soon, but he lost his "torch-passing" fight. Does that mean he isn't skilled or capable of lighting and passing his own torch of greatness? I don't know man.

It's a good question to ask.


----------



## techks (Jun 4, 2013)

Floyd wont fight anybody good enough to beat him. Pacquiao will in Bradley but doesn't have the power to wipe him out. Leaves you with Wlad you I'm sure will be gone before Deontay shows his best. Sergio may never face GGG but very possible. Not much "old guard" to go around. That and not enough talents that standout. You can say Ward but thats really it atm though he'll never get his praise during the fact.

I didn't even get to the promotional bullshit which is only a coverup to not test yourself. Also, its natural for older fighters to take on lighter fights especially in these times. Only older guys that'll truly test themselves are Sergio and maybe Hopkins. Lets not act like its only youngbloods faults those "torch passing" fights dont happen and this pussified era started from somewhere. Bunch of fighters rather talk about how nice their purses and belts(pun intended) look than fight solid fights.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

techks said:


> Nobodies good enough to beat Floyd.. Pacquiao will fight Bradley 5 times but doesn't have the power to wipe him out. Leaves you with Wlad you I'm sure will be gone before Deontay shows his best. Sergio may never face GGG but very possible. Not much "old guard" to go around. That and not enough talents that standout. You can say Ward but thats really it atm though he'll never get his praise during the fact.
> 
> I didn't even get to the promotional bullshit which is only a coverup to not test yourself. Also, its natural for older fighters to take on lighter fights especially in these times. Only older guys that'll truly test themselves are Sergio and maybe Hopkins. Lets not act like its only youngbloods faults those "torch passing" fights dont happen and this pussified era started from somewhere. Bunch of fighters rather talk about how nice their purses and belts(pun intended) look than fight solid fights.


Fixed


----------



## techks (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Fixed


He doesn't, period. Why he fights so few times and is fighting Maidana of all people next. Think about it, in 13 he fights twice since 07 against Guerrero and Canelo(good win)? Should've went straight for Canelo or took a harder fight like Bradley(fuck promotions, if Floyd wanted it he would've got it). Like how the Floyd part is what you mainly saw though like I didnt say young fighters are to blame too. If my posts offend you so much dont reply to them nuthugger.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

techks said:


> He doesn't, period. Why he fights so few times and is fighting Maidana of all people next. Think about it, in 13 he fights twice since 07 against Guerrero and Canelo(good win)? Should've went straight for Canelo or took a harder fight like Bradley(fuck promotions, if Floyd wanted it he would've got it). Like how the Floyd part is what you mainly saw though like I didnt say young fighters are to blame too. If my posts offend you so much dont reply to them nuthugger.


I dont rate Bradley that much higher than the guys Floyd has been beating. You do probably because you know there is promotional issues that way you can say Floyds ducking without reprocussions.

Lara bandwagons still open though, though that fight might actually happen and you stand the chance of lookig foolish


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

techks said:


> Floyd wont fight anybody good enough to beat him. Pacquiao will in Bradley but doesn't have the power to wipe him out. Leaves you with Wlad you I'm sure will be gone before Deontay shows his best. Sergio may never face GGG but very possible. Not much "old guard" to go around. That and not enough talents that standout. You can say Ward but thats really it atm though he'll never get his praise during the fact.
> 
> I didn't even get to the promotional bullshit which is only a coverup to not test yourself. Also, its natural for older fighters to take on lighter fights especially in these times. Only older guys that'll truly test themselves are Sergio and maybe Hopkins. Lets not act like its only youngbloods faults those "torch passing" fights dont happen and this pussified era started from somewhere. Bunch of fighters rather talk about how nice their purses and belts(pun intended) look than fight solid fights.


:lol: Does this sound like a team that wants to fight Floyd?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3RcIun4LK8#t=1m10s


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> Not having that.


you guys are right. What am I thinking. Duran,Mayweather,Marquez top 3 ATG, the order does not matter.


----------



## techks (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> I dont rate Bradley that much higher than the guys Floyd has been beating. You do probably because you know there is promotional issues that way you can say Floyds ducking without reprocussions.
> 
> Lara bandwagons still open though, though that fight might actually happen and you stand the chance of lookig foolish


Still Bradley is far better than anyone Floyd has faced in years. And he's black, like you aren't, so Floyd wont fight him. When Zab is the best black fight you've fought when P Will was out there thats a problem. Yep he retired Floyd.

When did I mention Lara in that post? Regardless Floyd is not fighting him. Give him props for beating Canelo but the CW wasn't needed since past prime Cotto & past prime DLH didn't need one(yeah Hoya ran negotiations but Floyd could've said catchweight or no fight cancelling it). Enjoy him fighting people less than Bradley while he fucks you nuthuggers in the ass. Maidana? Hahahah!



turbotime said:


> :lol: Does this sound like a team that wants to fight Floyd?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3RcIun4LK8#t=1m10s


I wasn't talking about mayweather-pacquiao, but if you insist.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

MAG1965 said:


> you guys are right. What am I thinking. Duran,Mayweather,Marquez top 3 ATG, the order does not matter.


Less ludicrous than you're last statement.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> Less ludicrous than you're last statement.


someone asked me about Duran, so I answered regarding the list they gave. The comment you are responding to was a joke.


----------



## Lexius Bane (Jan 15, 2014)

I agree but the young guns have to do it. The competition seems watered down, and makes you look at fights like why does this matter ? Why does this fight for this title matter ? There's great talent around, it's just not showcased enough or developed properly in the likes of Andre Ward. The guys that are built up get hack-sawed. That feeling of being on the cusp of super-stardom seems to consume them and they forget they need to keep working hard. They just freeze against the old guard. Maybe this past generation isn't as bad as we thought it was. Boxing feels like it's lost that magic luster. You feel it sometimes when you get a Berto-Ortiz but I think its shunned for MMA now. It seems easier to get the casual fan to view MMA. I hate it. I can't speak to anyone around me about boxing. Its all about Tyson,Ali, ODLH, when are Floyd and PAC going to fight. No other past great fighters, great fights on under cards, upcoming fighters, different techniques fighters use, etc. We need a boom of highly matched talent that want to fight and prove that they're the best. We have interesting fights on the horizon but we as hardcore fans trash a lot of them with our casual viewers listening. We could have an effect if we stopped that as well.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

:bump


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Let's get some clarification up in here. Let's try to identify the last torch that was past.

When you first started this interesting thread I put forward an example or two of a torch being passed or an example of where a torch might be passed. You clarified your question by explaining that for a torch to be legitimately passed the fighter needs to go on to achieve great things themselves. This means that simply beating a torch holding fighter (Algieri beating Pac, for example) doesn't, in itself, qualify as a torch passing. Consequently this means that the question simply can't be answered in one fight or even in one or two years of the torch supposedly being passed. So I ask you Bogo, when was the last time a torch was past? Forgive me if you've already answered this question (I ain't trawling through 20 pages tonight).


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Torches aren't passed, they're taken.

If the new generation can't take it from the past one, then they aren't ready to run with it.


----------



## Kush (May 24, 2013)

All these old mother fukcers keep beating everyone's ass


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Torches aren't passed, they're taken.
> 
> If the new generation can't take it from the past one, then they aren't ready to run with it.


Fuck, I like this.


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

SJS20 said:


> Torches aren't passed, they're taken.
> 
> If the new generation can't take it from the past one, then they aren't ready to run with it.


This is it right here. That simple.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Canelo didn't take one from Floyd, so he is making his own goddamn torch.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Canelo didn't take one from Floyd, so he is making his own goddamn torch.


qft


----------



## GlassJaw (Jun 8, 2013)

Mayweather fan boys were saying that stupid ****** Broner was going to take over and we all see where that went.


----------



## Rooster (Jul 14, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Torches aren't passed, they're taken.
> 
> If the new generation can't take it from the past one, then they aren't ready to run with it.


SJS20 KO20 thread.


----------



## elterrible (May 20, 2013)

Yeah they were usually very young too when they beat the champions, if you look at guys like Morales, Ali, Foreman, Tyson, Mayweather ect, they were all early 20s when they dethroned the previous aging champion. 

If you look at the young guys now, like Canelo, he just got schooled by a 37 year old which used to be shot territory. The young 20 somethings have been repeatedly loosing to guys over 35 like JMM, Mayweather and both Klit brothers.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

elterrible said:


> Yeah they were usually very young too when they beat the champions, if you look at guys like Morales, Ali, Foreman, Tyson, Mayweather ect, they were all early 20s when they dethroned the previous aging champion.
> 
> If you look at the young guys now, like Canelo, he just got schooled by a 37 year old which used to be shot territory. The young 20 somethings have been repeatedly loosing to guys over 35 like JMM, Mayweather and both Klit brothers.


Could errol spence beat pac or floyd?


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Torches aren't passed in Boxing, they are snatched. So if there is no snatching going on you can't blame the old generation.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Canelo still got a little bit of that torch as seen in his number VS angulo a healthy 350K and being very popular in USA.

Although he didn't beat Mayweather.. he helped make the fight one of the biggest selling fights ever... and the torch rubbed off on him.

of course a KO would have been swweeter mayweather wasn't ripe for the taking like chavez SR was against ODLH... and Maywetaher will not be fighting when he has reached prime ripeness for someone to take the torch..


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Torches aren't passed, they're taken.
> 
> If the new generation can't take it from the past one, then they aren't ready to run with it.


Right, I think we all agree there. Problem is, what if they're never ready?



Kurushi said:


> Let's get some clarification up in here. Let's try to identify the last torch that was past.
> 
> When you first started this interesting thread I put forward an example or two of a torch being passed or an example of where a torch might be passed. You clarified your question by explaining that for a torch to be legitimately passed the fighter naeeds to go on to achieve great things themselves. This means that simply beating a torch holding fighter (Algieri beating Pac, for example) doesn't, in itself, qualify as a torch passing. Consequently this means that the question simply can't be answered in one fight or even in one or two years of the torch supposedly being passed. So I ask you Bogo, when was the last time a torch was past? Forgive me if you've already answered this question (I ain't trawling through 20 pages tonight).


Right so, as far as I can tell, Pacquiao-Barrera was probably the last one. Or Marquez-Barrera rather. They beat their man, then went on to have similar or greater success.


----------



## ChicoTheBoy (Jun 5, 2013)

I would say Mayweather gives the opportunity pass the torch twice a year, I mean he fought Canelo for goodness sakes that was as good a set up as you could ask for. The Klits didnt fight as often but there were several opportunities given during their reign, Pac cant give up the torch due to no longer being in possession of it because of the wars and KO's against marquez. Ward cant do it because of a lack of fan base and inactivity...Its just the landscape right now


----------



## PetetheKing (Aug 5, 2012)

Uncle Rico said:


> I agree, Bogotazo. The worrying drop in skill level and competitiveness is the main reason.


Yep, this.


----------



## megavolt (Jun 5, 2013)

You wanna know the sad truth? There is little structure in the sport. That's why people like Bob Arum can get away with what he does, and it does little to foster real talent.

Here are a few problems I can detect just by skimming the surface and comparing to other sports, and they all fall under the umbrella of structure:

-# of Organizations: Thought 5 organizations each with a belt wasn't enough? How about each organization having 2-3+ belts per DIVISION plus double the divisions of the olden days, further isolating talent?

-Emphasis on promotion/no set schedule: Elite fighters have 2 bouts MAX these days. I credit this shit to Don King popularizing it, but this practice is as old as the dinosaurs... fact is, fighters can fight (or "retire" lol) whenever they want

-Roughly half of all wins in the sport are determined by subjective criteria (judges)

-Tournament format: Fighters are allowed to pad their records before fighting anyone with a semblance of talent, whereas most sports have an actual SEASON where it's not just the "best fight the best" but practically a round robin format in some cases. This also brings into discussion the lack of _progression_ to the public eye. To the layman, "oh now this guy has a chance to fight Floyd, lets see what he does" the lack of a proper format loses that source of hype, like the NBA or World Cup finals. Instead, it's up to the fighter/promoter to reign in public interest

-Pay scheme is extremely top heavy. Sure, Klitschko, Pac, Floyd, Alvarez, Cotto make oodles of $$$... the average pro actually has to work a second job in order to even sustain his living expenses. Compare this to other sports. It's not as appealing to the average joe looking in because of how high you have to climb to reach sustainability

-Bargaining power of promoters: Promoters have WAY too much say in the game. Worst an organization can do to a fighter not fighting his mandatory is strip the belt. Whoop de doo, you seen how that goes. This is a symptom of how devalued the belts are due to the lack of a centralized body

Now how does this relate to torch passing? Fighters don't fight each other enough, and when they do, too much straight-up bullshit gets in the way. Promoters, egos, bargaining power, and not strong enough enforcement. I believe if the top fighters had 150+ fights at their respective ages, they would have racked up some losses.

TL;DR - you need a proper foundation in order to foster talent.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Good post @megavolt. So you think by the time the young guns get their shot, they're not properly developed due to protections and promotional obstacles and whatnot?


----------



## megavolt (Jun 5, 2013)

By the time young guns get to fight the elite they are underprepped but also they get to fight the elite too seldomly. I think of it as a spilling cup scenario. The potential is there but I feel like we're not reaching it because people do things like hold onto their pride by padding records, overvaluing the 0, fighters satisfied with their own belt and dont look to unify, etc. Look at Ward: wins the super 6, drops off the face of the earth. I was a big Gamboa fan but extremely disappointed with how his career panned out. It's like we spend all this time building up these fighters and then they fight so seldomly so the younger talent never gets to feel what it's like to fight against the elite.

And we're missing out on potential athletes who went to other sports because boxing simply isn't lucrative/appealing enough to enter, because of lack of said structure.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Bump.

Hopkins explicitly said Kovalev took the torch. Can he go on to be an ATG if he cleans LHW out? Hopkins was old, but to be frank, he still looked good and I can't hold that against Kovalev, because he's not your average 49.

Hopkins
Pascal
Stevenson
Beterbiev

Those are the best names he could add to his resume...


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Did Crawford take the torch from Gamboa?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Did Crawford take the torch from Gamboa?


Yuri ain't no great, as much as I love him.

He might have doused a growing flame though :lol::-(


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Great thread Bogo


----------



## KO KIDD (ESB EX-Patriot) (Jun 3, 2013)

Wladimir Klitschko did a lot for himself despite not getting to face Lewis and nearly being derailed himself

If Canelo and Bradley who did multiple PPV fights and fought one the two greats pan out from here maybe you got something especially with how young Canelo is

Bradley who I am a big fan of looks like he is in some trouble though


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Teeto said:


> Great thread Bogo





Bogotazo said:


> De La Hoya beat Chavez. Roy Jones beat a fading HOFer in McCallum. Please share your thoughts.


Nausea. Disgust. A fair share of Contempt.

:rofl

McCallum was *well faded*, brother. He was 'fading' circa the Kalambay rematch and two fights with Toney at 160, nevermind fighting at LHW (!) in the mid-90s. Those fights were in 1991-92. He won two out of those three anyway IMO though I know he doesn't get full credit for Kalambay post-Nunn KO, but I give him massive props for going to avenge it in spite of Sumbu being a stylistic nightmare -- and one of the more talented defensive fighters, err, possibly ever. People were even sceptical prior to the Michael Watson fight and he just completely took him apart. For all of Toney's youth and mind boggling great skill, he was 'stationary slick' as you so eloquently put it to me once :lol: In other words, McCallum could deal with that even at a deteriorating stage because he had a guy who would stand with him in James.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Nausea. Disgust. A fair share of Contempt.
> 
> :rofl
> 
> McCallum was *well faded*, brother. He was 'fading' circa the Kalambay rematch and two fights with Toney at 160, nevermind fighting at LHW (!) in the mid-90s. Those fights were in 1991-92. He won two out of those three anyway IMO though I know he doesn't get full credit for Kalambay post-Nunn KO, but I give him massive props for going to avenge it in spite of Sumbu being a stylistic nightmare -- and one of the more talented defensive fighters, err, possibly ever. People were even sceptical prior to the Michael Watson fight and he just completely took him apart. For all of Toney's youth and mind boggling great skill, he was 'stationary slick' as you so eloquently put it to me once :lol: In other words, McCallum could deal with that even at a deteriorating stage because he had a guy who would stand with him in James.


They're almost always well-faded brah.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> They're almost always well-faded brah.


I can't give him credit for that one bro, sorry. McCallum is the greatest 154 lber of all-time to me, and an elite middleweight. At 175, at 40-years-old? Practically shot. And I wouldn't even call Chavez shot in '96, well-worn as he was.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> I can't give him credit for that one bro, sorry. McCallum is the greatest 154 lber of all-time to me, and an elite middleweight. At 175, at 40-years-old? Practically shot. And I wouldn't even call Chavez shot in '96, well-worn as he was.


Fair, torches have different levels of flame and whatnot.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Fair, torches have different levels of flame and whatnot.


:rofl


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> :rofl


You've given me a dangerous idea, Hands.

Up first, Heavyweight torch-passing marathon:










































There's some torch-passing that spans 40 years, with each new generation taking out the top contenders and ATG champions of the previous generation in impressive fashion. Continuous linkage that legitimized each new ruler of the division, constantly building on the feats of warriors past.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Bump.
> 
> Adrien Broner has bit the dust. Many did not believe in him, but some did. Canelo is now highly doubted as the future of the sport. Eyes are on both Garcias.





Bogotazo said:


> Canelo not quite done yet, Garcia losing a bit of stock.


Well, since I posted this, Canelo got his razor close win against Lara, Mikey Garcia has disappeared, and Danny's future's stock continues to drop. It's unlikely his campaign at 147 will yield great success.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Crawford could of took something from Pacquaio.


----------



## Mushin (Dec 12, 2013)

I don't think torch passing is necessary to achieve greatness, the Fabulous Four created their own legacy and achieved greatness by fighting each other. You just need to have the best fight the best, champion vs champion, top P4Per vs top P4Per, and those who are left standing after the smoke clears will be truly great.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Crawford could of took something from Pacquaio.


that is an excellent fight down the road if Pacquiao decides to fight on after Mayweather, it's certainly winnable for Crawford too in about a year.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Mushin said:


> I don't think torch passing is necessary to achieve greatness, the Fabulous Four created their own legacy and achieved greatness by fighting each other. You just need to have the best fight the best, champion vs champion, top P4Per vs top P4Per, and those who are left standing after the smoke clears will be truly great.


I don't think it's necessary, but it certainly helps. In its absence you have to beat lots of hall of famers over a few weightclasses, or dominate a division for a long time.

Plus, the Fab 4 have claims as ATG's outside of each other. Not as strong obviously, but by the time they met, they were already accomplished champions beating up top contenders with great skill that included hall of famers.

Let me give you an example. Let's say Golovkin beats Cotto, Canelo, Chavez Jr. and moves up and beats Ward. Is that enough to get him into the top 100 of all time? I don't think he quite makes it. Yet he'd be fighting the best available in and around his weight-class.

Look at Ward himself. Cleared out the super six, yet he's no all time great. Granted he missed out on taking on the light heavyweights. But there's another opportunity lost for a future opponent to dethrone Ward.

The threshold for ATG is high. And most ATG's have beaten other ATG's from a previous or semi-contemporary/contemporary generation. Kovalev isn't young but if he stays undefeated and beats Stevenson, Beterbiev, and maybe takes on the top guys at Cruiserweight, he's got a shot.


----------



## JamieC (Jun 2, 2012)

@Bogotazo, if GGG does that he definitely makes it. In fact if he stays at middle and beats Cotto, Canelo, N'Dam, Lee, Lemieux, Khytrov, Murata then he makes it imo. Add Stevens, Macklin, Geale and Murray (along with good contenders like Ishida and Rosado) and that really is a quality list


----------



## Mushin (Dec 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Let's say Golovkin beats Cotto, Canelo, Chavez Jr. and moves up and beats Ward. Is that enough to get him into the top 100 of all time? I don't think he quite makes it. Yet he'd be fighting the best available in and around his weight-class.


If he's fighting the best then does it really matter where he ends up on an all time list? Personally I think he has the ability to win titles up to LHW but even if he doesn't, I'd be more than happy to see him fight all those guys you mentioned.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Mushin said:


> If he's fighting the best then does it really matter where he ends up on an all time list? Personally I think he has the ability to win titles up to LHW but even if he doesn't, I'd be more than happy to see him fight all those guys you mentioned.


It would be great, but, the topic of the thread is ATGness. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Most all time greats snatch the torch from previous greats, or the conquerors of previous greats. And that isn't happening here, with the exception of Hopkins.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

JamieC said:


> @Bogotazo, if GGG does that he definitely makes it. In fact if he stays at middle and beats Cotto, Canelo, N'Dam, Lee, Lemieux, Khytrov, Murata then he makes it imo. Add Stevens, Macklin, Geale and Murray (along with good contenders like Ishida and Rosado) and that really is a quality list


Really? So who do you think he'd be above that's already an ATG?


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Yo, @*Bogotazo*, is Cotto vs Canelo a relevant fight for this thread?


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> Yo, @*Bogotazo*, is Cotto vs Canelo a relevant fight for this thread?


Not really canelo already at young age is as big a name as cotto is and will keep growing. Ppv they have done similar numbers and that's while canelo didn't have as much time in the sport.

The only real torch to gain was from mayweather and didn't succeed, but canelo has practically created his own image and isn't getting any torch passing from a big name like mayweather, the exposure was beneficial but beating him would have been greater.

Now if they go with the paxauiao fight and canelo retires pacauio then that could qualify. I only.mention this because arum and dlh both have said they would love to make.this fight

Canelo beating cotto would give him great exposure.. But a torch passing I doubt, cotto doesnt carry any torch but a loyal pr following and recognition because of .his years getting whooped on by the best like paxquiao, mayweather..and the time in the sport as prs only good fighter

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> Yo, @*Bogotazo*, is Cotto vs Canelo a relevant fight for this thread?


I think so. Cotto is an aging veteran, future Hall of Famer. Canelo is a young rising star who has good wins but lacks a special one. So a torch passing could happen, if Canelo decisively beats Cotto (retires him even) and goes on to keep racking up good wins for years. Canelo has youth on his side but I think there's a possibility he burns out quicker; people act like fighting a this level means he'll only get better until he's 35ish but it's no guarantee.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Doc said:


> Not really canelo already at young age is as big a name as cotto is and will keep growing. Ppv they have done similar numbers and that's while canelo didn't have as much time in the sport.
> 
> The only real torch to gain was from mayweather and didn't succeed, but canelo has practically created his own image and isn't getting any torch passing from a big name like mayweather, the exposure was beneficial but beating him would have been greater.
> 
> ...


That's a lot of Canelo fluffing you've done there but you've reduced Cotto to what exactly in this scenario? Canelo's marketability counts for little in terms of 'torch passing'. Canelo is of the new generation and Cotto is in the same generational stable as Mayweather and Paquiao. In terms of the best chance Canelo has of obtaining a torch, it would have to be Cotto right? Sure, Canelo can, and probably will, carve his own legacy out but at this point in time is beating Cotto not the closest Canelo can come to laying down the 'old guard'?


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> That's a lot of Canelo fluffing you've done there but you've reduced Cotto to what exactly in this scenario? Canelo's marketability counts for little in terms of 'torch passing'. Canelo is of the new generation and Cotto is in the same generational stable as Mayweather and Paquiao. In terms of the best chance Canelo has of obtaining a torch, it would have to be Cotto right? Sure, Canelo can, and probably will, carve his own legacy out but at this point in time is beating Cotto not the closest Canelo can come to laying down the 'old guard'?


If no pacquiao, then this would be the next best thing.. Specially if he retires him like Pac did to dlh..

Cotto is reduced to experienced veteran how bogotazo says.. I don't rate his fake title or his wins against compromised opponents.. So you got me there... I can't fluff cotto to be as big as the mayweather fight was to canelo... Because its not even close.

This is what happens in boxing older fighters fave younger ones.. Mosley is greater then cotto and Canelo already beat him.. I rate this cotto win on par with that.. Even though.it makes sense for me to fluff cotto.. It wouldn't be legit. Cotto is a product of careful matchmaking and he's still the same dude who got manhandled by trout.

The only.reason its a big fight is because its pr vs Mexico.. And people eating up his recent success as something huge... I remember post trout everyone had Canelo whooping cotto easy.. The fight lost its luster... Since then people have spun cotto.into.some monster which Canelo should easily dismantle..

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I think so. Cotto is an aging veteran, future Hall of Famer. Canelo is a young rising star who has good wins but lacks a special one. So a torch passing could happen, if Canelo decisively beats Cotto (retires him even) and goes on to keep racking up good wins for years. Canelo has youth on his side but I think there's a possibility he burns out quicker; people act like fighting a this level means he'll only get better until he's 35ish but it's no guarantee.


Canelo will burn out quickly I think, his build and style confirms this for me. The fortunate thing is that he's ambitious. With his attitude and ability he can prove a lot in a small amount of time.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> Canelo will burn out quickly I think, his build and style confirms this for me. The fortunate thing is that he's ambitious. With his attitude and ability he can prove a lot in a small amount of time.


As canelo ages he'll resort more to counter punching and never going above 160.. I feel management will not put him against.movers...

Good thing is the best of.160 love to.come.forward which play into canelos style..

He doesn't have a style that will quickly burn out like.pacquiao if anything his style.is better for.longevity.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

How did Pacquiao quickly burn out? Lol.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> Canelo will burn out quickly I think, his build and style confirms this for me. The fortunate thing is that he's ambitious. With his attitude and ability he can prove a lot in a small amount of time.


Yeah he always wants to fight the best. But are there many fights for him after Cotto and GGG? Lee, Quillin, Andrade. No truly great stuff.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> How did Pacquiao quickly burn out? Lol.


A style.like his is more.likely to burn out pacquaio is an exception but that's the style that doesn't last and didn't last for his most important.fight.. Watch him against mayweayher both same ages roughly.. Same time in sport except.one.style.has been through countless wars and didn't resemble his best only in spurts.. That no longer was the 1000+ punching machine with no fear..

Now mayweqther.. Same guy same style.. Just a bit slower..

Canelo doesn't rely on speed, movement, volume things that go away as time.progresses... He relies on timing, boxing ability, countering, accuracy... And punching power.. Things like jmm who don't have the best footeork.. But.make.up for it.with boxing ability brains and.timing..

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Excuse my.typing this.piece of shit note 5 keyboard sucks ass 

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

Kurushi said:


> Canelo will burn out quickly I think, his build and style confirms this for me. The fortunate thing is that he's ambitious. With his attitude and ability he can prove a lot in a small amount of time.


I disagree. Canelo has highly underrated skills and he *IS* getting better. Sure moving forward remains a weakness, but he does a LOT of things very well. There's only 2-3 fighters @ 160 that I could see beating Canelo atm and they aren't guaranteed losses by any means.

A major strength Canelo has going for him is that *HE* wants to fight. CANELO wants to fight the best and be the best. He's not being pressure like Floydina was against Pacman. Canelo chose Trout. Canelo chose Floyd. Canelo chose Lara. Canelo did what the fuck he wanted and each time out took the toughest fights available. He may not win every fight, but the guy is irrefutably entertaining and a *FUCKIN BOSS*


----------



## mike_bngs (Jun 4, 2013)

Uncle Rico said:


> I agree, Bogotazo. The worrying drop in skill level and competitiveness is the main reason.


There's to much money to be made early on. Audley Harrison (yeah I know) made a ten fight Â£10 million deal on turning pro and obviously didn't have to try after that. The fractured state of affairs with the sanctioning bodies doesn't help, but tv PvP has been a fighters best friend financially and worst enemy in as much as growing as a fighter and competing at the highest level. Mayweather will make a fortune fighting Berto and who is that benefiting other than those two guys?


----------



## Uncle Rico (May 24, 2013)

mike_bngs said:


> There's to much money to be made early on. Audley Harrison (yeah I know) made a ten fight Â£10 million deal on turning pro and obviously didn't have to try after that. The fractured state of affairs with the sanctioning bodies doesn't help, but tv PvP has been a fighters best friend financially and worst enemy in as much as growing as a fighter and competing at the highest level. Mayweather will make a fortune fighting Berto and who is that benefiting other than those two guys?


Yep, spot on. Boxing is a business first and foremost.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Well, some new links have been established. Canelo beating Cotto and Fury beating Klitschko are in their own way markers for younger fighters establishing new eras and linking themselves and their future opponents to the long line of elite level competition.

What's next?

Crawford-Pacquiao?


----------



## LeapingHook (Jan 2, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> Well, some new links have been established. Canelo beating Cotto and Fury beating Klitschko are in their own way markers for younger fighters establishing new eras and linking themselves and their future opponents to the long line of elite level competition.
> 
> What's next?
> 
> Crawford-Pacquiao?


Huck-Glow


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Just came across another potential torch-passing: Verdejo-Salido

http://www.boxingscene.com/verdejo-not-chase-any-titles-held-by-puerto-ricans--99719

Salido's whole career speaks for itself, but one of his greatest conquests was Juan Manuel Lopez, who was in a passing of the torch type fight with an aging Rafa Marquez, who gave him all he could handle. I'd favor youth in this one, if Felix is given a little more time.


----------



## Mushin (Dec 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Just came across another potential torch-passing: Verdejo-Salido
> 
> http://www.boxingscene.com/verdejo-not-chase-any-titles-held-by-puerto-ricans--99719
> 
> Salido's whole career speaks for itself, but one of his greatest conquests was Juan Manuel Lopez, who was in a passing of the torch type fight with an aging Rafa Marquez, who gave him all he could handle. I'd favor youth in this one, if Felix is given a little more time.


Verdejo should win, the question is : will he look good? It's hard to look good against Salido.


----------



## hamas (Jun 5, 2013)

Mushin said:


> Verdejo should win, the question is : will he look good? It's hard to look good against Salido.


I thought mikey smashed him up pretty good


----------



## Mushin (Dec 12, 2013)

hamas said:


> I thought mikey smashed him up pretty good


He did but the headbutt robbed us of a conclusive ending. Salido could have mounted a come back as he's done before.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Mushin said:


> Verdejo should win, the question is : will he look good? It's hard to look good against Salido.


I don't think he'll look good or is even guaranteed to win given that in his last fight he looked unpolished on the inside. Verdejo has the standout advantages but we're all familiar with Orlando Salido's resilience and ability to force a fight in his favor.

Also rewatching the end of the Mikey fight, Salido was doing better than I remembered. Mikey wasn't in any real danger but the pressure was something only a seasoned fighter could handle. We'll see if Verdejo takes care of the problem early enough that he doesn't have to worry about that.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Seriously Verdejo vs salido? That's a good fight but last I heard he was negotiating his direct rematch with Martinez 

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Just came across another potential torch-passing: Verdejo-Salido
> 
> http://www.boxingscene.com/verdejo-not-chase-any-titles-held-by-puerto-ricans--99719
> 
> Salido's whole career speaks for itself, but one of his greatest conquests was Juan Manuel Lopez, who was in a passing of the torch type fight with an aging Rafa Marquez, who gave him all he could handle. I'd favor youth in this one, if Felix is given a little more time.


Marquez was virtually shot by that point. I felt Lopez won nearly every round and made it fairly easy tbh.

Lomachenko is apparently looking for a rematch with Salido in 2016 as well.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Marquez was virtually shot by that point. I felt Lopez won nearly every round and made it fairly easy tbh.
> 
> Lomachenko is apparently looking for a rematch with Salido in 2016 as well.


On the way out but not shot IMO. I remember that being a great fight.

I think most would have Loma in a rematch.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Also rewatching the end of the Mikey fight, Salido was doing better than I remembered. Mikey wasn't in any real danger but the pressure was something only a seasoned fighter could handle.


It's a fight that should've been repeated.
And it's a fight that left some unanswered questions about Mikey.

Fighters like Salido, Aslan, Briscoe, etc, they are not sophisticated, they are easy to figure out.
The problem is they don't give a shit about your skill level, your feints, your fancy moves.
They just ask you one simple question: "Are you man enough?"
For 12 rounds.
Non-stop.
The same question over and over again.

And most can't answer it.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> It's a fight that should've been repeated.
> And it's a fight that left some unanswered questions about Mikey.
> 
> Fighters like Salido, Aslan, Briscoe, etc, they are not sophisticated, they are easy to figure out.
> ...


Exactly. Well said lest. Once Salido got into his rhythm there, for example, he was timing Garcia's punches better, but his blocks and slips were like afterthoughts, mosquitos he was shaking off before resuming the endless march forward.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> It's a fight that should've been repeated.
> And it's a fight that left some unanswered questions about Mikey.
> 
> Fighters like Salido, Aslan, Briscoe, etc, they are not sophisticated, they are easy to figure out.
> ...


Very nice post.. props

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Exactly. Well said lest. Once Salido got into his rhythm there, for example, he was timing Garcia's punches better, but his blocks and slips were like afterthoughts, mosquitos he was shaking off before resuming the endless march forward.


I don't know if you read "The Cruiserweight Express" thread or follow cruiserweights _(you should be doing both)_ but here's Grigory Drozd's (rated by many, Ring including, as the #1 in this talent-filled division) quote on Arslan who gave him his lone loss:



Drozd said:


> Arslan looks so basic, so beatable but it's an entirely different matter when you're in the ring with him - he's right in front of you all the time, he doesn't react to any feints, to any moves, to anything - all you can see is his unpenetratable high guard, all you can feel is his immense concentration and desire to win - it does drain you mentally and it does drain you physically.


----------



## Mushin (Dec 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I don't think he'll look good or is even guaranteed to win given that in his last fight he looked unpolished on the inside. Verdejo has the standout advantages but we're all familiar with Orlando Salido's resilience and ability to force a fight in his favor.
> 
> Also rewatching the end of the Mikey fight, Salido was doing better than I remembered. Mikey wasn't in any real danger but the pressure was something only a seasoned fighter could handle. We'll see if Verdejo takes care of the problem early enough that he doesn't have to worry about that.


Yeah it's gonna be a real test. Looking forward to it.



Lester1583 said:


> Fighters like Salido, Aslan, Briscoe, etc, they are not sophisticated, they are easy to figure out.


Salido is more sophisticated than he seems at first glance.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> I don't know if you read "The Cruiserweight Express" thread or follow cruiserweights _(you should be doing both)_ but here's Grigory Drozd's (rated by many, Ring including, as the #1 in this talent-filled division) quote on Arslan who gave him his lone loss:


Reminds me of a quote (can't remember who by), saying that a dumb fighter is the hardest fighter to fight. You'll throw him a feint and he won't know what it is. These relentless pressure fighters simply don't care. They're ignoring what you have to offer and looking for their spots exclusively.


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

Yes.

Super Champions with no mandatory requirements are killing the game.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Vysotsky said:


> Somebody else also pointed out that Glowacki has now taken out the two marquee Champions of the previous era and is making a decent resume for himself, era wasn't all that strong but quite true.


Yup, you're following wrong divisions, @Bogotazo


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> Yup, you're following wrong divisions, @Bogotazo


Nice one.

There's a whole world of boxing out there I don't watch because of time difference or channel obscurity.


----------



## Thomas Crewz (Jul 23, 2013)

His torch was barely even lit by the time he passed it on, but it was good to see Abraham relieved of his recently by Ramirez.

Not that I dont like Abe, but his time has been up for a while now.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Abraham doesn't really have a greatness torch.


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Consider this.
> 
> The way that I've always understood generational transitions of greatness is for the incoming crop of great fighters to beat the veterans on their way out, and for those fighters to then contend with each other. We all know the ceremonial torch-passing bouts, which often include a hungry underdog or tentative favorite who fights an all time great who still has something left, and makes a claim by dominating and then having great success and competition thereafter.
> 
> ...


Many of those fighters legacies and standing aren't down to the 'torch being passed'. Jones beating McCallum wasn't really a great win as McCallum was 39 by then. Barkley certainly wasn't passing any type of torch to Toney, Toney's signature wins being Nunn and McCallum. The significance of Toney-McCallum could be seen as 'torch passing' but more of was a unification after each fighter had won an elimination contest. Morales legacy wasn't anything special when he beat Zaragoza, because Zaragoza was old, never great and really lost to McColough. Chavez was no longer P4P top10 when he faced DLH after the Randall loss and BS technical decision. Whitaker was arguably no1 though but that in turn is a controversial decision that doesn't do DLHs legacy too many favours. BTW Whitaker's 'loss' to Ramires in a massive robbery.

Greatness is subjective but beating your best contemporaries usually qualifies, especially if you dominate them. The problem today is the best rarely are fighting the best but then again that's a problem in more eras than people recognise. Sugar Ray didn't face Burley or Holman Williams, Hagler and Hearns didn't face McCallum and Henry Armstrong ducked most of the WW division.


----------

