Well????????????????

Well????????????????

Jose napoles
Joe Fraizer

Jose napoles
Joe Fraizer

Wow, pretty shocked, there Joey.

Reasons for not feeling that Frazier and Napoles are ATG Fighters?

I real feel the two were.........

Jose napoles

Absolutely ridiculous.

Napoles dominated the welterweight division for 6 years and beat HOF's in Emile Griffith and Curtis Cokes.

Napoles' win over Griffith is a lot better than Monzon's (who you have at a ridiculous #9 on your ATG list in your sig) win over Griffith.

Napoles was also schooling Monzon in the early part of their fight, up until he ran out of stamina because of moving up a division.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Napoles dominated the welterweight division for 6 years and beat HOF's in Emile Griffith and Curtis Cokes.

Napoles' win over Griffith is a lot better than Monzon's (who you have at a ridiculous #9 on your ATG list in your sig) win over Griffith.

Napoles was also schooling Monzon in the early part of their fight, up until he ran out of stamina because of moving up a division.

Nah. As much as I like Napoles, he wasn't greater than Monzon.

And Napoles was hardly ''schooling'' Monzon in the early going. In the early going Monzon was just finding his rythem, Monzon was never a fast starter.

Wow, pretty shocked, there Joey.

Reasons for not feeling that Frazier and Napoles are ATG Fighters?

I real feel the two were.........


Both were great fighters, but when someone say's ATG fighters i think of the 2 sugar rays, , armstrong, ali, pep, duran, monzon, marciano, joe lois, harry greb and sam langford. Also besides the win over ali who had only 1 fight in nearly 4 years, joe's resume is a bit week. Also i rate butter high but i dont think he was in the same league as the fighters above. But hey thats just my thoughts, you asked a question i gave you my answers, i konw alot of frazier fans are not gonna like it!

Nah. As much as I like Napoles, he wasn't greater than Monzon.

And Napoles was hardly ''schooling'' Monzon in the early going. In the early going Monzon was just finding his rythem, Monzon was never a fast starter.

If Napoles' stamina didn't wear out, due to fighting at middleweight, he would've schooled Monzon for the rest of the fight.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Napoles dominated the welterweight division for 6 years and beat HOF's in Emile Griffith and Curtis Cokes.

Napoles' win over Griffith is a lot better than Monzon's (who you have at a ridiculous #9 on your ATG list in your sig) win over Griffith.

Napoles was also schooling Monzon in the early part of their fight, up until he ran out of stamina because of moving up a division.

lol napoles was schooling monzon as soon as monzon found his range he used napoles head as a speed ball he could not miss him with the right hand, napoles was a 15 round fighter he did not run out of gas! he just got beat down! Monzon stopped griffith in there first fight something napoles didnt do! so i dont know about his win over emile being better than monzon's. i rate butter hight but napoles was great! but he was not a atg!

Joe Frazier is an unquestionable ATG. I cannot see how anyone can dispute that.

lol napoles was schooling monzon as soon as monzon found his range he used napoles head as a speed ball he could not miss him with the right hand, napoles was a 15 round fighter he did not run out of gas! he just got beat down! Monzon stopped griffith in there first fight something napoles didnt do! so i dont know about his win over emile being better than monzon's. i rate butter hight but napoles was great! but he was not a atg!

Griffith won his first world title at welterweight and Napoles beat him at welterweight. Not to mention that he fought a younger version of Griffith than Monzon did.

Griffith won his first world title at welterweight and Napoles beat him at welterweight. Not to mention that he fought a younger version of Griffith than Monzon did.

Griifith was drained at the weight against butter he never boxed as a welterweight again! monzon stopped emile something jose couldnt do

Jose napoles
Joe Fraizer
ey yo giardello, spell my name right

Griifith was drained at the weight against butter he never boxed as a welterweight again! monzon stopped emile something jose couldnt do

Rubin (Hurricane) Carter stopped Griffith in the first round. Are you trying to say that he's greater than Napoles, as well?

And he wasn't weight-drained. That's just a made-up excuse you're using to try and prove a point that you can't.

If Monzon's claims to fame are beating Napoles and Griffith then that says just about all. His wins over Valdez and Benvenuti were more impressive due to them being more suited to fight at middleweight. Napoles started at 135 and only moved up to 147 because he couldn't get a title shot at either 135 or 140. He was a legend whose only losses close to his prime were to fluke cuts and to a huge middleweight in Carlos Monzon.

Everyone post 1980s. The best fighters all learned their trade between 1925 and 1950. There more more fighters then, less weight classes, less belts, fighters fought more often and competition was much more intense. The overall level of skill has been in decline ever since. Once the alphabet governing bodies took over it all just went to rat ****. Now there are fighters without a proper defence, and in-fighting and feigning are both lost & forgotten arts.

Someone put the old man out of his misery.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Napoles dominated the welterweight division for 6 years and beat HOF's in Emile Griffith and Curtis Cokes.

Napoles' win over Griffith is a lot better than Monzon's (who you have at a ridiculous #9 on your ATG list in your sig) win over Griffith.

Napoles was also schooling Monzon in the early part of their fight, up until he ran out of stamina because of moving up a division.

First and foremost I'm a huge fan of Jose Napoles and I rate him very highly on my top welterweights list but in all truth his win over Griffith is not one of his best wins. When he fought Griffith it was the first time in four years I believe that Griffith had fought at welterweight and it really showed in the fight, Griffith's legs even locked up after the fight because of the weight drain. Griffith put on a much better showing against Monzon as opposed to his fight with Napoles. Against Monzon I never got the feeling he was in control an it was obvious that he wasn't doing damage with his punches and like it was said once Monzon started opening up it was only a matter of time, in all fairness though Napoles fought a very uncharacteristic fight using a more straight ahead aggressive style instead of his usual blend of slick defense and devestating offense so it would be interesting to see how he would of done against Monzon had he fought more to character.

Griffith was awful against Napoles, he did seem weight-drained. Credit to Napoles for beating him like a drum though. I still can't give Monzon much credit for beating Griffith, and the second fight was closer than it should have been for Monzon against a spent former welterweight. Although in his defense, Monzon was weight-drained and had recently been shot.

I wonder how Jose Napoles vs Luis Manuel Rodriguez would have gone in the late 60's. Cokes beat Rodriguez, Napoles beat Cokes, but triangle theories rarely prove anything.