Seemingly worse fighters who had a better fighter's number...

[mrpain81]

I don't agree with Chavez vs Taylor, Julio was the better fighter when they first met, he had already won titles in 3 weight divisions and was P4P #1 in boxing...Sure Taylor was faster then Chavez, but speed dosen't make somebody a better fighter....

[Scott9945]

Mancini was 23-24 for those fights against Bramble..I dont think he was past his best, but maybe he was...Tyson started to decline at that same age.

Personally I think that Mancini simply wasn't a better fighter than Bramble.

[TheGreatA]

Those all don't count at all. Because of the age things that you pointed out..

Having somebody's number means that you're just the better fighter between the two in a head-to-head match up. The best possible example is Mosley-Forrest or Forrest-Mayorga.

If Tarver vs Jones counts then those should too.

Mancini was 23-24 for those fights against Bramble..I dont think he was past his best, but maybe he was...Tyson started to decline at that same age.

He was past his best because he never won a fight after he lost to Bramble and soon retired. Mancini had too many wars, kind of like Vargas. The death of Duk-Koo Kim must've been tough for him too.

Personally I think that Mancini simply wasn't a better fighter than Bramble.

It's hard to say that Bramble is better than Mancini because he never really beat another good fighter except Brazier in another upset. He lost 25 times after that fight and became a journeyman.

Mancini had a much better career even if it was short.

[K-Nan]

If Tarver vs Jones counts then those should too.

Tarver vs Jones shouldn't count, neither.

[mrpain81]

He was past his best because he never won a fight after he lost to Bramble and soon retired. Mancini had too many wars, kind of like Vargas. The death of Duk-Koo Kim must've been tough for him too.

Well yeah, he lost those two fights with bramble, came back 4 years later and lost that controversial split decision to Camacho. Then Haugen ko'd him something fierce, I guess you could make the case Mancini had a better title run then Bramble.

But I don't Mancini was a "Worst" fighter by any means.

[BmoreBrawler]

Jermain Taylor vs Bernard Hopkins

[brently1979]

I'm going to throw Pacquiao/Morales out there. Despite being at the tail end of his career Morales was still a superior boxer to Pacquiao at that point in time. It was around the time when Manny was strictly a lefty and a headhunter.

I agree with this as well. Morales has better all round boxing ability than Pac.

[Addison]

This could be fun! Minimum of 2 wins over the other guy is needed. (Can be 2-0 or 2-1). Please refrain from refuting that your favorite fighter is ACTUALLY better than so-and-so, because I am just going off of what the majority of people seem to think. I'll start with a few that I can think of:

Junior Jones vs. Marco Antonio Barrera
Ricardo Mayorga vs. Vernon Forrest
Vernon Forrest vs. Shane Mosley
Antonio Tarver vs. Roy Jones Jr.

Good thread, DW421. ^

[Fox McCloud]

Good thread, DW421. ^

Even though a lot of my "good" topics belong in the history forum, it is nice to get some topics in here that don't involve Mayweather or Margarito.

Plus, I feel like a ****ing idiot when those historians in that forum whip out their wealth of knowledge.

What does everyone think about Junior Jones-Marco Antonio Barrera being on that list? I saw that someone said that Barrera wasn't the better fighter, as long as Jones's chin held up.

I also heard that Barrera was pretty heavily favored, because it was the new blood against the old, slightly faded champion.

Thoughts on that particular matchup?

[JoeyBB]

Saddler - Pep