Ricardo "Finito" Lopez - Where Do You Rank Him?

[Obama]

has become mildly overrated in his retirement (as far as ATG's can be overrated).

Wouldn't go that far, not with Lopez missing the top 6 for the letter "L" on RingTV.com. In no way imaginable could anyone convince me that Jake LaMotta was better than Ricardo Lopez.

[JK1700]

I can't take from Lopez for what he did accomplish but he's a little man du jour in some sense, closer in terms of opp quality to contemporary fighters like the larger Joe Calzaghe than really great, deeply tested little men like Genaro, Canto, LaBarba, and Perez. Carbajal's comp was much stronger and he took L's because of it but his best wins are better wins IMO. Lopez was criminally overlooked in his prime but has become mildly overrated in his retirement (as far as ATG's can be overrated).

I disagree with what you say about Carbajal. He fought some better fighters than Lopez because his division was better but he also lost to these "better fighters, wheras Ricardo never lost. You can't blame Lopez for fighting at his natural weight class. The reason that I rate him so highly was his longevity. Lopez dominated his division for 8 years whilst Carbajal lost twice to Chiquita Gonzalez and to unknowns like Mauricio Pastrana and Jacob Matlala.

And I don't buy the argument that Lopez fought bad opposition. They just looked bad in comparison to him. An example of this is Saman Sorjaturong who he destroyed in 2 rounds in 1993. Just 2 years later Saman moved up to 108lbs and knocked out Humberto "Chiquita" Gonzalez for the WBC/IBF belts. Your saying that Carbajal was better than Lopez but this was the same Gonzalez who beat him twice. Sorjaturong then went on to defend the WBC belt 10 times before losing it. He was a very capable fighter.

[crold1]

Wouldn't go that far, not with Lopez missing the top 6 for the letter "L" on RingTV.com. In no way imaginable could anyone convince me that Jake LaMotta was better than Ricardo Lopez.

Maybe, maybe not. He was certainly greater. Considering who the "L"s were, Rosenthal can't be faulted much there.

I disagree with what you say about Carbajal. He fought some better fighters than Lopez because his division was better but he also lost to these "better fighters, wheras Ricardo never lost. You can't blame Lopez for fighting at his natural weight class. The reason that I rate him so highly was his longevity. Lopez dominated his division for 8 years whilst Carbajal lost twice to Chiquita Gonzalez and to unknowns like Mauricio Pastrana and Jacob Matlala.

And I don't buy the argument that Lopez fought bad opposition. They just looked bad in comparison to him. An example of this is Saman Sorjaturong who he destroyed in 2 rounds in 1993. Just 2 years later Saman moved up to 108lbs and knocked out Humberto "Chiquita" Gonzalez for the WBC/IBF belts. Your saying that Carbajal was better than Lopez but this was the same Gonzalez who beat him twice. Sorjaturong then went on to defend the WBC belt 10 times before losing it. He was a very capable fighter.

I didn't say Carbajal was better; I said his best wins are better. Lopez's full body of work can't be dismissed. I could have been more clear. As to Saman, yes, it's a good win, but it's not as good as it might have been. Saman was a novice when he fought a peak Lopez. That he went on to better things over the years is obvious but he got much better. Lopez was part of a learning curve, much like Glen Johnson's loss to Bernard Hopkins (a win which is better on paper by name than circumstances would dictate).

Not saying Saman beats Lopez ever, but it's a different fight when Saman is developed. It's one reason why Lopez gets more credit for Alvarez even though a case can be made Saman was better than Rosendo for the total of his career.

[BennyST]

His victims include world champions Rosendo Alvarez, Rantapol Vorapin, Alex Sanchez, Hideyuki Ohashi, Will Grigsby, Zolani Petelo, Kyung-Yun-Lee, Kermin Guardia, Manny Melchor and Saman Sorjaturong. You might not have heard of these guys but they were the best fighters of his era and he destroyed all of them. Except for Alvarez who was a very good fighter also. And Ricardo was near the end of his career when he fought him.

I consider him to be at least in the Top 30 ATG's. What he achieved was pretty amazing. 21 defences of the WBC Minimumweight title and he also won the WBA and WBO titles at this weight. And won the IBF Light-Flyweight title and defended it twice before retiring. People might say his competition wasnt great but that wasnt his fault. All you can do is beat the best in your era and he certainly did that at 105. Perhaps he should have moved up to 108 earlier and took on Carbajal and Gonzalez but Lopez wanted to be considered the greatest ever in his weight class and he proved himself over and over again. I also think that it's a big feather in Lopez's cap that Saman Sorjaturong who he demolished in 2 rounds, went on to defeat the great Humberto "Chiquita" Gonzalez for the WBC/IBF 108lb titles and defended the WBC belt 10 times.

The reason I rank him so highly is because of his skills and longevity. He could box, punch, brawl or counter-punch and do it all brilliantly. Of all the fighter's iv'e seen I don't think ive seen a fighter as complete as Lopez. The reason he doesnt get much recognition is because he fought in thr 105lb division in the era of Tyson, Lewis, Holyfield, Jones Jr, Hopkins, De La Hoya and Trinidad. But I think his reign puts him in the Top 30 of all time. Just imagine if somebody had made 21 defences of the Lightweight or Welterweight title and knocked out 16 people along the way.

Anyway, I want to know what people think. Where does he rank?

I have to say that I always find it really odd when people say that. Yes, of course it wasn't his fault, but that doesn't mean you can rank a fighter higher because it wasn't his fault.

You can never tell just how good a fighter is unless he has truly beaten the great opp. Now, don't get me wrong here because I think Lopez is most definitely one of the greats and I do think some underrate his opp. somewhat. He has some amazing wins and they what he could have been if there were better fighters to do it against.

There wasn't though, and it is not his fault, but we still can't just put him higher because of it. For what it's worth I think he would have creamed both Carbajal (didn't have the skill to beat Lopez on the outside or inside and got hit too much) and Gonzalez. The wins he does have a similar to what a Sal Sanchez does: It's a 'what if' scenario. He destroyed some really damn good fighters in guys like Saman, Hideyuki, Rosendo (great in his case at the time) Sorapin etc etc etc. While Lopez finished his career and Sancheaz didn't (and beat better fighters too) it still leaves that little opening of wonderment because he was that good against the guys he did fight. He dominated with ease, precision, skill, grace and power some really fine champions and it makes us, still today, want to have seen those same skills tested on the very best. That's the problem.

With some, we know because we saw. Duran destroyed his opp. at lightweight and before for a decade (HOF greats among them) but there was more which made us see what he was truly capable of. He went on to beat a more prime, bigger, faster, younger top ATG. That's the type of thing we needed to see Lopez do.

Jofre is similar, though he lost which is the only difference. He was eventually forced out of his division by Harada and by his weight. But, he moved up and beat more greats.

I think Lopez might possibly be the most beautiful fighter of all to watch. Maybe. There is more though to boxing. But, for pure poetry in violent motion there is no one greater.

[lightsmac]

give someone like donald curry lopez's opposition and he looks far more impressive. in fact he looked far more against someone like starling who is technically better than anyone lopez fought by a mile

[Smokin'J]

When I think of Lopez I think of JMM

[Heavy Bag]

In my opinion the best textbook boxer of all time. He threw everything with such precision, timing & accuracy. He had every punch in the book. He also had KO power.

His longativity, skills & dominace are amazing, although his resume lacks, that still dosen't hide the fact that he's a All Time Great.

Amazing little fighter and great to watch & study.

[JK1700]

Maybe, maybe not. He was certainly greater. Considering who the "L"s were, Rosenthal can't be faulted much there.



I didn't say Carbajal was better; I said his best wins are better. Lopez's full body of work can't be dismissed. I could have been more clear. As to Saman, yes, it's a good win, but it's not as good as it might have been. Saman was a novice when he fought a peak Lopez. That he went on to better things over the years is obvious but he got much better. Lopez was part of a learning curve, much like Glen Johnson's loss to Bernard Hopkins (a win which is better on paper by name than circumstances would dictate).

Not saying Saman beats Lopez ever, but it's a different fight when Saman is developed. It's one reason why Lopez gets more credit for Alvarez even though a case can be made Saman was better than Rosendo for the total of his career.

I think Carbajal was a great fighter but the difference, even if his opposition was better he lost twice to the best guy he fought in Gonzalez. And his best wins came from the jaws of defeat. Wheras Lopez dominated virtually everyone he fought other than Alvarez, who I felt was a very good fighter at that time. Another thing is that Lopez and Carbajal proberbly would have fought had Michael not lost to Pastrana (Pastrana was stripped of the belt and Will Grigsby won it in a vacant title fight against Ratanapol Vorapin).

I honestly don't think Saman Sorjaturong improved that much during the Lopez and Gonzalez fights. Bare in mind when Lopez fought him Saman was 15-1-1 and had avenged his only loss. In the fights after Lopez he was fighting journeymen. Which can't have improved him that much, although it would have helped his confidence. I read a story not long ago that said Saman actually broke a bone in Lopez arm when they fought and Lopez said that he hits really hard. I don't think Lopez was as suprised as the casual fan to see Sorjaturong beat Gonzalez. But I do think once he became champion, he got alot better.

The reason I rate Lopez so highly was his consistency. He beat 10 world champions, numerous young contenders,dominated almost everyone and retired undefeated. Which is very hard to do over the course of a long career.

[Kid McCoy]

I think Carbajal was a great fighter but the difference, even if his opposition was better he lost twice to the best guy he fought in Gonzalez. And his best wins came from the jaws of defeat. Wheras Lopez dominated virtually everyone he fought other than Alvarez, who I felt was a very good fighter at that time. Another thing is that Lopez and Carbajal proberbly would have fought had Michael not lost to Pastrana (Pastrana was stripped of the belt and Will Grigsby won it in a vacant title fight against Ratanapol Vorapin).

But why should Carbajal be marked down for losing to better opposition than Lopez was facing? There are exceptions, but generally if a fighter faces hard competition he'll lose more fights. That doesn't necessarily make him a lesser fighter, it just means he fought better opposition and nobody can beat everyone. Someone like Glen Johnson has fought a who's who of his era and his win-loss record suffers for it, but I give him more credit for that than if he'd stayed unbeaten defending an ABC belt against journeymen for years.

There were big legacy-making fights for Lopez just a few pounds north of his division against Carbajal, Johnson, Arce and Arbachakov etc, but he was content to stay unbeaten and makes loads of defences against mostly ordinary opposition. Even if he'd lost to the above I'd give him credit for at least being willing to test himself. If he'd won he'd have a much stronger case for a high rating.

[JK1700]

But why should Carbajal be marked down for losing to better opposition than Lopez was facing? There are exceptions, but generally if a fighter faces hard competition he'll lose more fights. That doesn't necessarily make him a lesser fighter, it just means he fought better opposition and nobody can beat everyone. Someone like Glen Johnson has fought a who's who of his era and his win-loss record suffers for it, but I give him more credit for that than if he'd stayed unbeaten defending an ABC belt against journeymen for years.

There were big legacy-making fights for Lopez just a few pounds north of his division against Carbajal, Johnson, Arce and Arbachakov etc, but he was content to stay unbeaten and makes loads of defences against mostly ordinary opposition. Even if he'd lost to the above I'd give him credit for at least being willing to test himself. If he'd won he'd have a much stronger case for a high rating.

So your saying that the guys who Carbajal lost to are better than anyone Lopez fought? Disagree totally. Lopez fought plenty of guys better than Pastrana and Matlala. Rosendo Alvarez, Saman and Ohashi were all better. The other guy who beat Carbajal (Gonzalez) was retired by Saman. I'm not saying Chiquita wasnt great, he was, but his loss to Saman proves that Lopez opposition wasnt weak, just looked weak compared to him.

Funnily enough. Despite all these claims that he didnt test himself. Lopez actually fought and beat more world champions than Carbajal. Lopez fighting and beating 10, Carbajal fighting 9 and losing to 2 of them. So that rids us of the myth that Ricardo fought ordinary opposition. And Lopez was actually ready to fight Carbajal, but then he lost to Pastrana. That loss, coupled with Chiquita being retired by Saman, killed the interest in a potential Lopez-Gonzalez or Lopez-Carbajal fight.