He was great. His determination and steady body attack were amazing. Underrated boxer as well. Perhaps the Whitaker fight takes away from his legacy but before that and even after he had some great wins. I don't think theres any question about the quality of his opposition as superweight, lightweight and light welterweight champion.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Was Julio Cesar Chavez overrated?
Collapse
-
Originally posted by DWiens421 View PostI totally get what you are saying. I'm wildly embarrassed by things I said here three years ago when I started following the sport.
I will say that Meldrick Taylor was Taylor-made (LOL) to beat Chavez, and Chavez found a way to take him out.
I like you a lot, but you are a bit too defensive though... the first paragraph concedes that you were wrong back then, which is totally respectable. I will always respect those who change their opinion based on what they learn. But the last paragraph is a giant **** off, because someone questioned you. The big knock on you around these boards is that you are too pretentious, and have a wild desire to always be right. It's cool to let go and tell people that you were wrong at one point, learned things about the sport and have gotten a more educated opinion.
Some people think it is bad to be proven wrong... I find it worse to have studied something for 5 years and have learned nothing.
There are two things you can not doubt Chavez, his chin and his heart. But I definitely think he's overrated.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mr. Ryan View PostJulio Cesar Chavez was a guy who showed up, won titles at 130, 135, and 140 destroying everyone he fought. But the level of competition he fought wasn't all that strong, and he got gift decisions against Whitaker and Randall. When he quit against De La Hoya, everybody was shocked. But my thinking is that maybe he was a product of media and the fans making him into this superhuman fighter who had no fear, when in reality he was just as human as the guys he fought. I feel that he was lucky to get the stoppage against Taylor, and was certainly beatable if the right guy was in front of him. But I think his march to 100 wins thing was a little exxagerated given the level of competition he did it against. I think Azumah Nelson would've beaten him if they had fought. While I think Chavez was great, I think he was overrated by history as being indestructable.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by TheGreatA View PostMaybe he was but he isn't now. A record like 89-0 will make anyone look better than they are, not that Chavez wasn't great.
Sometimes he gets unjustly classified as a face-first brawler which he was far from. Before anyone says I'm exaggerating, watch ESPN's recent top 20 greatest fighters list. They ranked Chavez #19 yet said he was basically just a tough guy.
I gather he's much lighter after the big Tube crackdown a few years back.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Science View PostChavez fanatics always make claim at how washed up Chavez was when he got destroyed by De La Hoya when Chavez was only 31 at the time.
OK then, time to change U BigBoy trainers!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anthony342 View PostWas also fighting everyone and pretty battle tested by then.
He was clearly in decline. A peak Chavez never would have lost to Frankie Randall and that happened two years before the first Oscar fight.
Comment
-
Comment
Comment