Which Diaz has plummetted farther from the top of LW in your mind?

i wasnt questioning the manner of the loss... what i was trying to point is who do u lost to? sir, what version of tyson do u think looks better in retrospect... the one KOed by lennox lewis in 8? or the one KOed by kevin fvckin mcbride in 6? thats my point isbj... Well now your asking a different question. This question is asking about one fighter at 2 different points in his career. The other question is about 2 fighters losing to 2 different fighters. Not the same question. If your asking who I would rather lose to if I were a boxer of course it would be Manny! Does that help you out?

If Hatton doesn't last as long as David Diaz did against Pacquiao. What does that say about david diaz then? :wave: Probably that pacquiao has improved even more, or David Diaz gets unnecessary hate. no1 hates the guy.im sure we wont be comparing him 2 hatton after the pacquiao fight u can trust me on that one

Even before their defeats, i had David ahead of Julio. At least David won by KO over Santa Cruz. Julio beat J. Chavez when JC hurt his knee and no punches were thrown.

I knew what you were asking. Just can't answer that. I don't think anyone looks good losing. It's not like either of the two fights were premature stoppages or robberies. If you asked who was more competitive in their loss it would be Julio. Sure David loss to a "better" fighter but you do not know how Reyes would do against Pac or David if they fought him. All fighters are unranked at one point. For example JMM beat Juan Diaz by KO and Nate got a decision. Does that mean JMM is better than Nate or looked better against Diaz? I don't think so. JMM just had a style that that fit Diaz better to manufacture that TKO. i wasnt questioning the manner of the loss... what i was trying to point is who do u lost to? sir, what version of tyson do u think looks better in retrospect... the one KOed by lennox lewis in 8? or the one KOed by kevin fvckin mcbride in 6? thats my point isbj...

i was comparing the defeats of the 2 diazes my man... does julio's KO loss in 5 to an unranked contender look better to u than losing out in 9 to the P4P number 1? I knew what you were asking. Just can't answer that. I don't think anyone looks good losing. It's not like either of the two fights were premature stoppages or robberies. If you asked who was more competitive in their loss it would be Julio. Sure David loss to a "better" fighter but you do not know how Reyes would do against Pac or David if they fought him. All fighters are unranked at one point. For example JMM beat Juan Diaz by KO and Nate got a decision. Does that mean JMM is better than Nate or looked better against Diaz? I don't think so. JMM just had a style that that fit Diaz better to manufacture that TKO.

How does not being competitive for 9 rounds look good in anyone's eyes? I think the ref could have stopped that fight after 4 rnds. Anyways I will take Julio to defeat David if they fought. Julio is a better boxer. i was comparing the defeats of the 2 diazes my man... does julio's KO loss in 5 to an unranked contender look better to u than losing out in 9 to the P4P number 1?

How does not being competitive for 9 rounds look good in anyone's eyes? I think the ref could have stopped that fight after 4 rnds. Anyways I will take Julio to defeat David if they fought. Julio is a better boxer. He's also a bit chinless, and David showed he can take a chinless fighter out in the Santa Cruz fight.

its not so much the chin of david sir... or his ability to absorb punishment... its about the one who was dishing out that punishment... whats ur argument for julio diaz? a jab here or there on rolando reyes' profile that proved nothing... rolando friggin' reyes... honestly now sir... u believe julio diaz's KO loss in 5 to rolando reyes looks better than david diaz's KO loss in 9 to possibly the best fighter of this decade? if u are going to answer me yes... i will stop posting & leave this thread... How does not being competitive for 9 rounds look good in anyone's eyes? I think the ref could have stopped that fight after 4 rnds. Anyways I will take Julio to defeat David if they fought. Julio is a better boxer.

I honestly don't know... I didn't see a single bit of positive offensive output from David against Pacquiao, so idk why that loss is seen as anything good for him. David's ability to take punishment is out of control. The nuclear bombs that Holt hit him with consecutively before the stoppage were just out of control, and David was fine. But in reality, he didn't show anything other than a chin in that fight, so I am hesitant to give him a lot of credit for that performance, and I'm honestly not sure who has fallen more, so that is why I made the thread. sorry if i made further confusion... : )

its not so much the chin of david sir... or his ability to absorb punishment... its about the one who was dishing out that punishment... whats ur argument for julio diaz? a jab here or there on rolando reyes' profile that proved nothing... rolando friggin' reyes... honestly now sir... u believe julio diaz's KO loss in 5 to rolando reyes looks better than david diaz's KO loss in 9 to possibly the best fighter of this decade? if u are going to answer me yes... i will stop posting & leave this thread... I honestly don't know... I didn't see a single bit of positive offensive output from David against Pacquiao, so idk why that loss is seen as anything good for him. David's ability to take punishment is out of control. The nuclear bombs that Holt hit him with consecutively before the stoppage were just out of control, and David was fine. But in reality, he didn't show anything other than a chin in that fight, so I am hesitant to give him a lot of credit for that performance, and I'm honestly not sure who has fallen more, so that is why I made the thread.

Having a chin doesn't do it for me if that is all you have going for you... I mean, some people went 12 with Julian Jackson... does that make them one of the best ever, since Jackson is like, the hardest puncher ever? its not so much the chin of david sir... or his ability to absorb punishment... its about the one who was dishing out that punishment... whats ur argument for julio diaz? a jab here or there on rolando reyes' profile that proved nothing... rolando friggin' reyes... honestly now sir... u believe julio diaz's KO loss in 5 to rolando reyes looks better than david diaz's KO loss in 9 to possibly the best fighter of this decade? if u are going to answer me yes... i will stop posting & leave this thread...

cmon sir... lasting round 9 against one of the greatest ever in this decade... against someone who collected KDs & fell in 5 against a an unranked contender? i agree with ur points...but the only thing diaz really has going for him is an above average chin...other than that he is like a human punching bag....and some think his fight against manny should have gotten stopped earlier

cmon sir... lasting round 9 against one of the greatest ever in this decade... against someone who collected KDs & fell in 5 against a an unranked contender? Having a chin doesn't do it for me if that is all you have going for you... I mean, some people went 12 with Julian Jackson... does that make them one of the best ever, since Jackson is like, the hardest puncher ever?

One way to refute that is that Julio was ahead when he got stopped and David had 0 positive moments before the bout was called. cmon sir... lasting round 9 against one of the greatest ever in this decade... against someone who collected KDs & fell in 5 against a an unranked contender?

losing to manny pacquiao in 9 looks better to me than losing to rolando reyes in 5... anyone who disagrees? One way to refute that is that Julio was ahead when he got stopped and David had 0 positive moments before the bout was called.

Julio and David have had a freefall from the greatness they held when they each held an ABC belt in 2007. Who is farther down in the division? losing to manny pacquiao in 9 looks better to me than losing to rolando reyes in 5... anyone who disagrees?

I think that's why I find it hard to forget about him a bit. Morales would have won a world title in 4 different weight divisions. Something that his career was worthy of. You know how much I love Erik Morales, but I'm not sure his career did deserve a title at lightweight. I mean, truly... the type of fighter Morales was at lightweight is a disgrace to the fighter he was at 122 and 126. Can you argue with that?

I had Morales winning too. I think that's why I find it hard to forget about him a bit. Morales would have won a world title in 4 different weight divisions. Something that his career was worthy of.

I wasn't trying to say they were great... greatness was a figure of speech used there... anyone who tries to claim these guys as actually great are out of their minds. I'm just saying, they have really fallen from where they were 2 years ago... I mean, really, outside of Casamayor, Juan Diaz and those two... not a lot was going on at lightweight. There would be a resounding LOL if Julio Diaz was still in the top 10 of The Ring's lightweight rankings at this point. David Diaz got a down home, Mississippi ass-whipping from Pacquiao too... that asshole from Mortal Kombat felt the need to yell about a flawless victory when it was over... true story. I know what youre saying and if your asking a black & white question then its an ok question but my point is that its a little bit of a meaningless question considering who the guys are. Its not really a fall if they never belonged there anyway. Its like if the WW division had no one good but Quintana & Collazo. Then Floyd, Margarito, Cotto, Clottey, Williams, and all these guys suddenly join the division. You cant say those guys fell just because they were the Champs when no big dogs were in the division. They just lost to guys who everyone knows are clearly better then them. Thats all Im saying. Infact, Collazo is in a similar position. He was a Champ and now has a few losses but no one makes a big deal out of it because they know he's not better then Mayweather, Mosley, or Cotto anyways. For the record, I do think that Collazo is way better then the Diaz boys. I know what youre saying and in black & white terms I may say that Julio fell father but he took a massive beating against Castillo so its not like you couldnt see it coming. There is no way he could be the same after that and he followed it up by getting another beating by Juan.

They werent champions, they were belt holders, espicaly David. Alot of people in different divisions have belts that werent that special of fighters. Its not like they beat an elite guy to get the belt. Thats my point. Someone like Ishe Smith could have a belt right now but that doesnt make him a great fighter. He just had an easier route in a divison that didnt have all elite champs at the time. Im not dissin either guy. I really like Julio. Im just saying that to me they havent fallen because they were never awesome to begin with, espicaly David. They were just belt holders. If it happened to Pac, JMM, or even guys like Juan Diaz then I would say they have fallen but not those 2 I wasn't trying to say they were great... greatness was a figure of speech used there... anyone who tries to claim these guys as actually great are out of their minds. I'm just saying, they have really fallen from where they were 2 years ago... I mean, really, outside of Casamayor, Juan Diaz and those two... not a lot was going on at lightweight. There would be a resounding LOL if Julio Diaz was still in the top 10 of The Ring's lightweight rankings at this point. David Diaz got a down home, Mississippi ass-whipping from Pacquiao too... that asshole from Mortal Kombat felt the need to yell about a flawless victory when it was over... true story.