Can we all agree Finito Lopez owns the record?

A draw can say a lot.. it could say the champion couldn't defend the belt decisively.

Jesus look at the horrible opposition he faced.... You need to read up on the early history of this sport. Boxing was illegal in many (make that most) jurisdictions. And in many of those it was legal only as an exhibition. What does this mean? Fighters fought under assumed names; fighters fought with no recorded account of their fight (they were underground - think of the jean claude van damme movies like "Lionheart" or Michael Jai White in "Blood and Bone." These fighters had a reputation in the fight scene but there was no newspaper record of their fights. Why? Because the fight scene was illegal. People paid to go to a fight, both to watch and to bet, that's how the fighters got paid - no TV rights, no PPV. They wouldn't go to watch (and bet) on a fight that was a crazy mis-match. You may see that a fighter has no-record - that doesn't mean he hasn't been fighting for years and considered to be very good. Some of these 0-0 fighters might be a well-known fighter but is fighting under an assumed name. Why? Because the sport is illegal in many jurisdictions. Truly illegal. Going to jail illegal. Serious fines illegal. Hunted by State Police under the Governor's direct command illegal. Jimmy Barry killed a man in the ring and was prosecuted for manslaughter. The same as you would be if you killed a man fighting in a bar. See a newspaper account below. http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9902E2DA1039E433A2575BC0A9649D94669ED7CF&oref=slogin You need to take good care looking at the records of men who fought in the 1890s to 1920s. A lot of the people with 0-0 records were much, much better than the records indicate.

He doesn't tho Jimmy Barry was 58-0-10 http://boxrec.com/boxer/46200 But it's "perfect record" not "undefeated record" basically Jesus look at the horrible opposition he faced....

I agree 52 tried and 52 failed 51-0-1 baby.

He fought a guy with 28 losses in his 33rd fight as a pro and fought several guys with a handful of fights after that lol. You're correct that his first 40 fights or so were against inferior competition. What you failed to bring up was that JCC turned pro at 17 and he fought this guy when he was 20. (Boxrec is a good source but records should be looked at in context.) His first 3-4 years he fought basically 10x a year. When JCC wins the Super-Featherweight crown (at age 22) he, of course, drops from 10x a year to 3-5/year.

http://s4.postimg.org/4ey8brebh/hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.jpg How many of those first 87 opponents were good? ANSWER: Not many. He fought a TON of stiffs in those early fights. Floyd won his first title in 98 and fought pretty much nothing but other champs and top 10 guys since then. Floyd could have went to 500-0 if he kept on fighting guys like JCC fought in his early career.

There has never been anything ever that everybody on here all agreed on.

That's Nacho for you eh? I think Finito would've done just fine at 108. Too bad his promotional company and trainer didn't. He did fine there as an old man. Grigsby was nothing special but he beat him lopsided and at least settled Sor Vorapin (the only guy he missed at 105). The fight I would have loved is Lopez-Mark Johnson in an era where Flyweight isn't stratified into three classes. I like Johnson a lot in that fight but would have been something.

Carbajal VS Finito would have been the Fight Of The Century. They should've met at 106.5 . Damn shame, damn shame. Catch wasn't necessary. By some accounts I've been given over the years, it was there for Lopez at 108 when both were with King. Carbajal was down but Nacho, allegedly, didn't want to move him up. It's all hearsay but it plays to Nacho as oddball negotiator. Carbajal fought everyone else so not hard to imagine him with Lopez.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHGv5V3YLc0 I remember seeing this fight. I was young though, like 12 yrs old. Don't remember ever seeing the final outcome though.

Good job bro, nice work!! I was just about to look up the "draw" myself and make a better assessment because I wasn't aware of how it all played out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHGv5V3YLc0

Im a fan of Lopez, but that 'draw' should of been a TKO L. His corner basically thought Lopez was ahead on the scorecards and said "no more" after Lopez was accidently cut. The doctor didnt really take a look and decide to stop the fight. His corner pulled him out. Lopez was up and ready to continue. But Nacho stopped it. Good job bro, nice work!! I was just about to look up the "draw" myself and make a better assessment because I wasn't aware of how it all played out.

Fraud fought guys that were old, injured and weight drained, with pillow gloves, hand picked judges with scorecards already filled o out before the fight started, and had the NSAC in his back pocket. Not to mention that he was on PEDs for who knows how long. And to top it all off he fought with his defensive first style that he bored people and that's how he would get his wins. Speaking of wins, he has 45 of them Castillo - Loss Judah - DQ loss De la Hoya - Loss Maidana - Loss I scored Castillo I for Castillo. By a point. Final scores were too wide. Close either way would have been fair. If you think he lost to Oscar, well, he didn't. Didn't lose to Maidana either (though I'd have been fine with a draw). Heard the Judah case. Didn't happen. Nothing in the ring suggested a loss. By the same token, Lopez probably loses Alvarez I anywhere but Mexico on the Chavez-Gonzalez undercard. The cuts were much worse in the rematch and the fight went on. Dislike Floyd all you want (and there are plenty of fighters to rate ahead of him all time). But you don't do anything to make a case FOR Lopez. That's just blind loathing.

Not always true. In Cali a fight stopped before 4 rds for headbutt, cut by accident etc gets turned into a draw. That's why Saul Rodriguez had a draw Yeah, I think they call it a "technical draw" in California. But to me the word draw implies even and shouldn't be used instead of no contest.

A draw is different than a no contest. A draw means that scorecards were read and that the fight was even. A no contest could mean almost anything. Not always true. In Cali a fight stopped before 4 rds for headbutt, cut by accident etc gets turned into a draw. That's why Saul Rodriguez had a draw

I agree with this. Finito is undefeated technically, but a draw is still a disputed result. And Floyd's 49 is eons better than Lopez's 51. Look at who beat who and who accomplished what. People criticize Floyd's opp but while Lopez was settling old matters with former Straws at 108, Floyd was beating Canelo. Imagine if Floyd had that many title defenses against guys with 10-15 pro fights? Lopez was a great fighter but it's not even close in favor of Floyd.

Marciano was undefeated AND untied. That's the slight but legit difference between he and others who finished with no losses but a draw or draws. Like the difference between a perfect game and a no hitter. I agree with this. Finito is undefeated technically, but a draw is still a disputed result. Not a perfect record like Marciano or Floyd's.

I don't know why having a draw disqualifies him from having the record. It's called an "undefeated record", "undefeated streak", "retiring undefeated", ect. To me a draw is like a No Contest - it doesn't count, it's a write-off, it's not a win or a loss, it basically didn't happen. Can we all agree that it's Finito Lopez, not Mayweather or Marciano, who holds the record for a champion retiring undefeated. Here's to the Mexican legend, 51-0 baby. Mayweather needs 2 more wins to tie and 3 more to take the lead, which apparently is not going to happen. All hail Ricardo Finito Lopez! http://izquierdazo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/finito-lopez.jpg Marciano was undefeated AND untied. That's the slight but legit difference between he and others who finished with no losses but a draw or draws. Like the difference between a perfect game and a no hitter.

I don't know why having a draw disqualifies him from having the record. It's called an "undefeated record", "undefeated streak", "retiring undefeated", ect. To me a draw is like a No Contest - it doesn't count, it's a write-off, it's not a win or a loss, it basically didn't happen. Can we all agree that it's Finito Lopez, not Mayweather or Marciano, who holds the record for a champion retiring undefeated. Here's to the Mexican legend, 51-0 baby. Mayweather needs 2 more wins to tie and 3 more to take the lead, which apparently is not going to happen. All hail Ricardo Finito Lopez! http://izquierdazo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/finito-lopez.jpg totally agree 10000000% ricardo is the best there ever was :boxing: :boxing:

Im a fan of Lopez, but that 'draw' should of been a TKO L. His corner basically thought Lopez was ahead on the scorecards and said "no more" after Lopez was accidently cut. The doctor didnt really take a look and decide to stop the fight. His corner pulled him out. Lopez was up and ready to continue. But Nacho stopped it.