Originally Posted by liraj
Come on man........you're gonna have to pay me to read all that shyt.
Thats why you guys are called mexicants, cause you cant do anything without asking for money.
Im calling you out brah! You want americants to call you lazy?
I read the the whole thing and unlike jtcs I think at least 60% of what he wrote was basically telling us about history.
I agree that talking about losses to Camacho when he was 40+ should not be counted. Lets not forget Duran fought till he was like 50 years years old and fought tough competition sooner than Chavez did.
I tell you what though, I dont like calling Duran the best latinamerican fighter ever when he got KTFO by Hearns in only two rounds.
I can see why would you think Chavez is a greater fighter than Duran using the "well he fought more titlists" move, but in that case Calderon could be better than Finito Lopez because he fought and beat more titlists than Lopez did.
The reason Im reluctant to call Chavez the best ever is because he struggled against an ex-featherweight champ named Juan Laporte, who is arguably the best iron chinned puerto rican in history. Still, struggling against a fighter that was four weights up from the only division where he won a belt makes me think the greats where in the lower weights (Gomez, Sanchez, etc.)
TBH Id rather call a latino who could actually box The Goat, Chavez Sr., Duran, and Monzón where more fighters than boxers.