Title-Winning Performance: Ricardo Lopez TKO5 Hideyuki Ohashi

Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • greeh
    Interim Champion
    Gold Champion - 500-1,000 posts
    • Nov 2012
    • 508
    • 24
    • 0
    • 7,133

    #1

    Title-Winning Performance: Ricardo Lopez TKO5 Hideyuki Ohashi



    A fine performance by Lopez against a game, but pretty basic fighter in Ohashi.

    For the two first rounds, Lopez mainly uses his straight-punch arsenal to control the distance and feel Ohashi out, but by the third round, Lopez begins to mix in uppercuts and hooks to his precise combination-punching, which starts to hit the target repeatedly.

    After the first knockdown with one minute left in round four, caused by an excellent left-straight right combination, Lopez stays calm and composed, continuing to pick Ohashi apart methodically with precision instead of starting to over-reach and get reckless.

    In the fifth, the precision punching of Lopez starts to really take a toll on Ohashi, which goes down from another 1-2 combination that finishes off with a left-hook that barely misses.

    Ohashi gets up, but is hurt and ripe for the taking. Lopez backs him up against the ropes and lands several punches before sending him down to the canvas once more, this time with a three punch combination with a left-hook as the finishing punch once again, but this time landing it with perfect accuracy.

    Ohashi is able to get up once more, but is barely capable of standing straight and wobbles around the ring. The referee steps in and stops the fight with one minute remaining in the fifth round.

    Overall, a classy and controlled precision punching-display by a relatively inexperienced Lopez, and the starting point for the most dominating reign that have existed in the minimumweight division history.
  • Rossman
    Interim Champion
    Gold Champion - 500-1,000 posts
    • Aug 2011
    • 551
    • 2,380
    • 1,052
    • 8,100

    #2
    Lopez was an underrated technician.

    Comment

    • greeh
      Interim Champion
      Gold Champion - 500-1,000 posts
      • Nov 2012
      • 508
      • 24
      • 0
      • 7,133

      #3
      Originally posted by Rossman
      Lopez was an underrated technician.
      Just out of curiosity and to be sure that I understand you correctly:

      Do you think Lopez is underrated as a fighter in general or are you only referring to his technical ability?

      Comment

      • NearHypnos
        Undisputed Champion
        Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
        • Dec 2011
        • 6271
        • 369
        • 12
        • 47,632

        #4
        Lopez wasnt underrated at anything, dude had a perfect set of tools. If he was underrated it's only because of his size but he's generally considered an atg (which he is) with some seeing him as the best of Mexico. He's a better JMM and then some. Not underrated at all for those who know him.

        Comment

        • greeh
          Interim Champion
          Gold Champion - 500-1,000 posts
          • Nov 2012
          • 508
          • 24
          • 0
          • 7,133

          #5
          Originally posted by NearHypnos
          Lopez wasnt underrated at anything, dude had a perfect set of tools. If he was underrated it's only because of his size but he's generally considered an atg (which he is) with some seeing him as the best of Mexico. He's a better JMM and then some. Not underrated at all for those who know him.
          May I just ask - if he had such perfect set of tools, why did he lack an inside game?

          Some years ago I think he was a bit underrated by those who hadn’t knowledge about the lower weight classes. But now it is quite the opposite, and a case can certainly be made for him being overrated instead.

          Your post shows a fine example why. You wrote that some has him as the greatest Mexican fighter who has ever set a foot on this planet.

          It is just plain ridiculous to rank him as the greatest Mexican fighter of all-time, and it proves my point of him being overrated. His resume simply doesn’t allow him to receive those honors. There is no way in hell that someone can justify that placement.

          Things would have been vastly different if he had moved up earlier to light flyweight and beat both of Michael Carbajal and Humberto “Chiquita” Gonzalez – but the thing is, he didn’t.

          If he had succeeded with that, his resume would have got a mega boost.

          To reply on your comment about Juan Manuel Marquez; there isn’t really much difference between them at all. Lopez had more power and a slight edge technically – but I would say Marquez was a tad more accurate and fluid. Overall, they are both aesthetically perfect.

          Resume-wise, Lopez hasn't anything to come up with. He is the greatest in the worst division in boxing history, where the field of competition mainly consists of drained light flyweight contenders. Truth is, there isn’t even an argument for him to be ranked over Marquez.

          To sum it up: Juan Manuel Marquez is a Ricardo Lopez with balls.

          Comment

          • ShoulderRoll
            Join The Great Resist
            Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
            • Oct 2009
            • 55875
            • 10,014
            • 5,013
            • 763,445

            #6
            Lopez was Nacho Beristain's master work in my opinion. I disagree about him not having an inside game, he had beautiful left hooks to the body and short uppercuts.

            He just didn't happen to be a dirty fighter or much of a wrestler on the inside.

            Comment

            • NearHypnos
              Undisputed Champion
              Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
              • Dec 2011
              • 6271
              • 369
              • 12
              • 47,632

              #7
              Originally posted by ShoulderRoll
              Lopez was Nacho Beristain's master work in my opinion. I disagree about him not having an inside game, he had beautiful left hooks to the body and short uppercuts.

              He just didn't happen to be a dirty fighter or much of a wrestler on the inside.
              This is pretty much how I feel. It's easy to call a division the worst in history when you have one single guy dominating it. You take that one guy out and the division opens up. It happens in every era. Take out the main guy and all of a sudden people start looking better. Could his resume be better? Obviously, especially at that class but I'm not the type to discount a guy for being ao dominant. When one man is the common demonintor every time maybe its not them but its him. Maybe the opposition isnt bad..maybe he's that good. Maybe the k bros are actually really good, etc etc.

              It's not outrageous for someone to think Lopez among the greatest or as the greatest mexican to step in the ring. P4p, what did the others have that he didnt besides the opportunity to fight great opponents? Did Salvador Sanchez do it for as long as Lopez or how do you envision a p4p fantasy match? Do you think Chavez Sr beats Lopez p4p? I couldnt picture a scenario where any of Mexico's "best" bets him handily without taking into consideration what lope himself brought and what he never had to show. His inside game was fine, clearly it was good enough. Did he have more to it? We dont know nobody truly threatened him enough to make you think he lacked it all together.

              It's a moot point regardless as there's plenty out there who "lack" in a certain area but are so good in others it doesnt matter. When your strength clearly outshines a perceived weakness you're not doing too bad. I also think he was more fluid than JMM.

              Comment

              • greeh
                Interim Champion
                Gold Champion - 500-1,000 posts
                • Nov 2012
                • 508
                • 24
                • 0
                • 7,133

                #8
                Originally posted by ShoulderRoll
                Lopez was Nacho Beristain's master work in my opinion. I disagree about him not having an inside game, he had beautiful left hooks to the body and short uppercuts.

                He just didn't happen to be a dirty fighter or much of a wrestler on the inside.
                First of all, I would say that Lopez was Arturo “Cuyo” Hernandez master work. Not Ignacio’s, who only took over training him before the Hideyuki Ohashi bout because Hernandez was ill and eventually, died.

                Secondly, I am not dis*****g Ignacio Beristain being a great trainer, which he is. He maybe polished Ricardo a bit, but even Lopez himself credits Hernandez for everything he knows, not Beristain.

                I consider Juan Manuel Marquez or Gilberto Roman as Nacho’s master work, not Lopez.

                And by the way, you don’t have to be a dirty fighter that wrestles to be a good inside fighter. An excellent example which showcases clean infighting of the highest order is the second Curry-Starling fight.

                It is a magnificent fight.

                Originally posted by NearHypnos
                It's easy to call a division the worst in history when you have one single guy dominating it.
                It is both easy and legitimate to call a division the worst in history when you don't need to use all fingers on one hand when counting how many fighters that can be considered to be good-very good.

                It is Lopez and Rosendo Alvarez, who had potential but throwed it away because he was a fat and lazy bastard, and he really wasn't that special. He is the only one that can be considered to be very good on Lopez’s resume.

                In a division where fighters like Chana Porpaoin and others can be longtime titlists tells loads about the lack of quality. There have been several longtime titlists; all of them were mediocre, well, except for Lopez.

                In addition to that, when Chana Porpaoin can be considered to be one of the better ones the quality is quite horrible. Don't you agree?

                Originally posted by NearHypnos
                When one man is the common demonintor every time maybe its not them but its him. Maybe the opposition isnt bad..maybe he's that good. Maybe the k bros are actually really good, etc etc.
                Stop implying that his opposition was better than it was. It was a bunch of drained fringe light flyweight contenders who use the division as a refuge to avoid fighting in their “real” division. You are in really deep waters if you think otherwise.

                Not that it have anything to do with the subject really, but I still want to respond on your comment regarding the Klitschko's: I don’t like heavyweights at all, I have never done it and I will never do (Joe Louis is the exception), but you can’t convince me that the Klitschko's opposition is something other than ****.

                It might not be the smartest thing to say and there will certainly be some butthurt fanboys in this heavyweight centric section. But who really cares...

                Originally posted by NearHypnos
                You take that one guy out and the division opens up. It happens in every era. Take out the main
                guy and all of a sudden people start looking better.
                The flyweight division has never been the worst division but to give you an example; when Miguel Canto's reign was over contenders crawled up like worms to get their piece of the title. The title changed hands frequently before Sot Chitalada took the crown and gave some stability with his long reign.

                The difference between Canto's and Lopez long reigns are that first of all Canto dominated in a very good era against quality opposition in a historically deep division. When the division opened up it wasn’t some great fighters that fought for the title but Koji Kobayashi, Gabriel Bernal and Eleoncio Mercedes was better than every single name on Lopez resume with a rather large distance.

                They are also better than every friggin’ one who has participated in the 105 lbs. division with the exception being Lopez and possibly Rosendo Alvarez.

                Alvarez is the only wise choice when discussing who can be considered to be as good as or better than those three mentioned.

                One thing that bothers me is that Lopez gets judged differently than other fighters with long reigns in the lighter weight classes. That is just unfair. Lopez resume is equally, if not even more, poor as Khaosai Galaxy’s in my opinion. What’s the reason for Yoko Gushiken and Jiro Watanabe not receiving near as much praise as Lopez and Galaxy? Both of them has a better resumes (not by much) and were two quality operators.

                It seems like there is one rule for Lopez and a different one for the others.

                It wasn’t exactly like he fought in a golden age for the division either; it was plain ****, exactly as it is today. The biggest feat as the 105 lbs. division has accomplished is to dilute the depth of the flyweight division.

                The minimumweight division is just a barren wasteland filled with mediocrity. Being the greatest fighter ever in the worst division in boxing history means nothing to me, absolutely nothing.

                That leaves us with the question; do you really think that his poor resume and domination in the weakest weight class of all-time is enough to warrant him to even be in the discussion to be called the greatest Mexican fighter of all-time?

                I don't, and I have a hard time seeing any sensible person find it reasonable.

                Originally posted by NearHypnos
                Did Salvador Sanchez do it for as long as Lopez? Do you think Chavez Sr beats Lopez p4p? I couldnt picture a scenario where any of Mexico's "best" bets him handily without taking into consideration what lope himself brought and what he never had to show. His inside game was fine, clearly it was good enough. Did he have more to it? We dont know nobody truly threatened him enough to make you think he lacked it all together.
                I hope you are joking? I thought most people here knew that Sanchez died in a car crash when he was only 23 years old.

                He still has a better case than Lopez for being called the greatest Mexican ever.

                And what do you mean with Lopez never had to show? So he wouldn't have benefitted to showing a good inside game against Rosendo Alvarez?

                That’s a bull**** argument!

                That is like saying that Ayub Kalule was in fact a murderous puncher, but didn’t have to show it for anyone.

                Lopez so called inside game was his usage of his huge physical advantages and constantly tied up his opponent like friggin' Wladimir Klitschko. That isn't a fine inside game.

                He would have needed a good inside game against Rosendo Alvarez, but he didn't show it because he lacked one. It is as simple as that. He was threatened and had major problems with him, but still didn't show his supposed fine inside ability.

                I mean that is weird, because after all, he is said to have been good on the inside.

                Before I finish this post off I want to give some credit to Lopez.

                He was a great fighter in terms of technical skills, a picture perfect puncher and was absolutely flawless when he was boxing at his best range.
                He was also very dedicated and consistent performer; it is just that other fighters did more to establish their greatness.

                About who of Marquez or Lopez being more fluid, I was referring on his punching, not his footwork or movement because in those aspects I would agree on Lopez being more fluid.

                I just wanted to get that straightened out.
                Last edited by greeh; 01-08-2014, 02:30 PM.

                Comment

                Working...
                TOP