Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hector Camacho

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by Ben Bolt View Post

    I’m aware of that I’m writing this in the wrong forum, however …

    I’ve followed up a lot of the boxers I fancied in the 70s-80s, and getting so fed up reading about how they got defeated by alzheimer here, dementia there, CTE … and so on, so on.


    Some friends of mine have been heroin addicts, but were rehabilitated and are now back to a normal life.
    Though, some of the guys I knew in the 80s, and who were quite successful boxers – and we’re talking amateur boxing – didn’t age well. Too many blows to the head.
    Still, I follow the sport now and then. My brain has probably been damaged too, just by watching …

    Luring young, healthy teens into boxing can be added to the list of crime against humanity.
    Nobody should be lured into anything. And there are definitely risks to this great sport.

    But there's a lot of good that boxing can do for young men. It teaches discipline, focus, the value of hard work. For many it also keeps them out of trouble in the streets and can lift them out of poverty.

    I don't see much good in being a druggie.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by ShoulderRoll View Post
      there's a lot of good that boxing can do for young men. It teaches discipline, focus, the value of hard work. For many it also keeps them out of trouble in the streets and can lift them out of poverty.
      Yes. It's a tough world, for some the alternative to boxing would be worse.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by ShoulderRoll View Post

        Nobody should be lured into anything. And there are definitely risks to this great sport.

        But there's a lot of good that boxing can do for young men. It teaches discipline, focus, the value of hard work. For many it also keeps them out of trouble in the streets and can lift them out of poverty.

        I don't see much good in being a druggie.
        For sure.......

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Ben Bolt View Post

          Yes. It's a tough world, for some the alternative to boxing would be worse.
          Very much so.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by TonyGe View Post
            I remember Leonard commentating one of Camacho's fights. He said something along the lines of "and I thought I was fast". Camacho was blessed with hand and foot speed that was off the charts.
            Real talk. Though he caught Howard Davis Jr. at the right time.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by RossRoss View Post
              Just got done watching the Showtime documentary on Camacho and been on a bit of a binge watching his fights. Love his style but seemed a bit like an underachiever considering his natural ability. Just wondering what people’s options were on the Macho man?
              Roy Jones level natural ability. And he had power when he settled down on his shots. Just had a complicated life and boxing was not always the priority.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Willie Pep 229 View Post
                Don't blame the drugs, they were just the rash of a deeper failing. In a different time it would have been booze or something else. He never had the self-discipline necessary to make him a dominate decade-long ruling LW champion like Duran. He had the talent to be that guy, great natural skills, lighting hand speed, great movement, but he never grew into a "Duran" level fighter.

                Make a list of wasted potential and I suspect he is high on that list.
                Camachos cowardice was the biggest problem.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by Super Laszlo View Post

                  Camachos cowardice was the biggest problem.
                  Na, a reluctance to get hit no doubt - but when his character was tested he stood up to it. Rosario being a prime example. He took big shots that night - as I said above he was out muscled by Trinidad and Chavez but he took big punches those nights as well. I think coward is a harsh judgment.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Willie Pep 229 View Post

                    Na, a reluctance to get hit no doubt - but when his character was tested he stood up to it. Rosario being a prime example. He took big shots that night - as I said above he was out muscled by Trinidad and Chavez but he took big punches those nights as well. I think coward is a harsh judgment.
                    Camacho didn't even try to win those fights.
                    Not even in round one. screw that guy.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Super Laszlo View Post

                      Camacho didn't even try to win those fights.
                      Not even in round one. screw that guy.
                      I disagree (on the first round part) - he gave up in the middle rounds and chose to just go the distance. I agree with you but in mid fight.

                      But even Dempsey admitted once that in Tunney I, ('26) when the 8th round ended he decided all that was left was to go the distance and he fought the last two rounds accordingly.

                      Now Camacho on the other hand quit much earlier, yes, and at times came close to acting shameless, e.g. at one point he was grabbing Trindad around the waist so often that he slipped down to his legs.

                      But a fighter quiting midway in a fight, protecting himself to go the distance, is not uncommon. It's just a reality of prize fighting. I suspect always has.



                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP