Best Welterweight Ever?

[Kid Canada]

I dont think that is the case Dogg....we can go on forever about this old school new school stuff on who would beat who and why...thats all we got man. The old school always gets the upper on the new schoolers..these new school fighters are doing **** that old schoolers can old dream about...the boxing skills for one..old school fighters didnt do much boxing..they brawled..not all but most did..these guy today are doing it all..boxing, brawling, kicking, etc. as for the level of comp face..everyone was go back in the day nodoubt, but today a 1-19 guy can beat a 40-0 guy..hell they champs make it evident.

I hate to kee going back and forth on this...but you`re sayinh Sugar Ray Robinson had no boxing skills? Man watch some tape. He was VERY skilled, in any era.

[ROSEWOOD]

I hate to kee going back and forth on this...but you`re sayinh Sugar Ray Robinson had no boxing skills? Man watch some tape. He was VERY skilled, in any era.

in his ERA...sorry man..look at all those old school fighters, as time passed and new talent came about..differents styles and levels of talent came..from Joe Pat to Ali...just look at boxing over its entire history..you'll see

[K-DOGG]

in his ERA...sorry man..look at all those old school fighters, as time passed and new talent came about..differents styles and levels of talent came..from Joe Pat to Ali...just look at boxing over its entire history..you'll see

Bud, hate to break it to you; but "styles" and "skills" ain't changed that much. If anything, most younger fighters don't dedicate half the time to their craft as the old schoolers...and they're not as hungry by and large becaue the old shcoolers were fighting to survive...they never dreamed of a Million dollar paycheck.

Younger, or new-school fighters I'd give a chance against the old schoolers...Hopkins and Toney at 160-175. Both are well schooled. There are more; but I'v got an errand to run.

Check out the old tapes. New guys ain't all that, just because they're new. Like I said, I think it's your passion over observation and study.

Peace.

[Rane-Ex54]

I'll tell ya why. All three have had tougher fights and risen to the occasion. Besides the Vargas fight, Tito has never really been in a war and won....and Vargas doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as those three.

Leonard, Hagler, and Hearns showed their mettle when it counted: Leonard against Duran,Hearns, Hagler, Lalonde, and Hearns again....and to some extend Terry Norris. Hagler was determination personified; "destuction and destroy are on my mind"...and he meant that. He went to "jail" before every fight to prepare himself for the task at hand. Have you ever seen the Mugabi fight? The Beast was landed some ******-hard punches on Hagler after Marvin was on the skids and he just ate 'em up and kept coming. Also, look at Hagler's resume sometime; specificaly the guys he fought on the way to the title. Hagler ducked no one. Tito had a champion's heart; but ultimately would have fallen apart down the stretch against these better schooled fighters who were just as determine to win as any guy who's ever lived. If Hopkins could wear out a prime Tito...Hagler would eat him alive.

Also, Tito has shown vulnerability in the early rounds; he's a slow starter. Hearns is the only one I said would stop Tito early; and that's because Tommy was a guy you couldn't afford to be hit early by. The man had dynamite in that right at 147 & 154...and occasionally at 160. If Campas can knock Tito down, Hearns could have KHTFO.

With Leonard and Hagler, the stoappages would have been more akin to the Hopkins stoppage. Both Leonard and Hagler, in their prime, were faster and more deadly punchers than B-Hopp, who was 36 when he defeated Tito...while Tito was in his prime.

That's why.

What evidence do you have that Tito would "fall apart" down the stretch?? He was always moving foward, every round of his career. He got stronger as the bout goes on. I've never seen him tired. He was a very well-conditioned fighter.

Also, did it ever occur to you that Tito may have just been that good?? That no one could give him a memorable fight when he was a WW, becuase he was too dominant? He would get flash knocked down, then get up and bash peoples head in!! Out of 42 win's he had 35 KO's!! from 99' to 2001 the combined record of his opponents he beat was 206-5, and that was when he was moving up in weight!! And before that, Tito was KO'ing tons of good fighters in there prime & maintaining his belt for a long time, isn't that "rising to the occasion"? Tito held the belt longer then all those guys. It seems ridiculous that one of your negatives for tito was that there were guys that COULDN't beat him up and give him a "war".

Yes Those 3 Guys were some of the greats, but in a ring with Tito they would be done. Leonard, Hearns, and Hagler were all straight up fighters who were very offensive and would stand toe to toe with eachother. No one has ever, still to this day, fought Tito Toe to Toe and won. Winky and Bhop have always been known as defensive fighters. And in any event Hagler, Hopkins, and Winky were all middleweights, I'm just claiming that Tito was the best Welterweight ever.

[wmute]

What evidence do you have that Tito would "fall apart" down the stretch?? He was always moving foward, every round of his career. He got stronger as the bout goes on. I've never seen him tired. He was a very well-conditioned fighter.

Also, did it ever occur to you that Tito may have just been that good?? That no one could give him a memorable fight when he was a WW, becuase he was too dominant? He would get flash knocked down, then get up and bash peoples head in!! Out of 42 win's he had 35 KO's!! from 99' to 2001 the combined record of his opponents he beat was 206-5, and that was when he was moving up in weight!! And before that, Tito was KO'ing tons of good fighters in there prime & maintaining his belt for a long time, isn't that "rising to the occasion"? Tito held the belt longer then all those guys. It seems ridiculous that one of your negatives for tito was that there were guys that COULDN't beat him up and give him a "war".

Yes Those 3 Guys were some of the greats, but in a ring with Tito they would be done. Leonard, Hearns, and Hagler were all straight up fighters who were very offensive and would stand toe to toe with eachother. No one has ever, still to this day, fought Tito Toe to Toe and won. Winky and Bhop have always been known as defensive fighters. And in any event Hagler, Hopkins, and Winky were all middleweights, I'm just claiming that Tito was the best Welterweight ever.

1. You foreget De La Hoya

2. LOL at everything in bold

- hagler could not stand toe to toe with tito? LOL! he shook off hearns' best (and hearns hit stronger than tito) + as you say he was a MW.

- hearns could not stand toe to toe with tito? LOL he would not need to, because he would be able to outbox him and hit him with his right AT WILL. Hearns is a better boxer than De La Hoya, in fact he was outboxing Sugar Ray Leonard.

- leonard could not stand toe to toe with tito? LOL Leonard stood toe to toe with hearns who again hit harder than tito.

- hopkins was not known for being a defensive fighter until he was 40: he was known for roughing people up and destroy them, which he did to tito

- winky is not a middleweight he fought at 154 most of his fights

- Tito held a paper belt more than anyone else until he robbed De La Hoya, who was recognized as the lineal champion

[BrooklynBomber]

1. You foreget De La Hoya

2. LOL at everything in bold

- hagler could not stand toe to toe with tito? LOL! he shook off hearns' best (and hearns hit stronger than tito) + as you say he was a MW.

- hearns could not stand toe to toe with tito? LOL he would not need to, because he would be able to outbox him and hit him with his right AT WILL. Hearns is a better boxer than De La Hoya, in fact he was outboxing Sugar Ray Leonard.

- leonard could not stand toe to toe with tito? LOL Leonard stood toe to toe with hearns who again hit harder than tito.

- hopkins was not known for being a defensive fighter until he was 40: he was known for roughing people up and destroy them, which he did to tito

- winky is not a middleweight he fought at 154 most of his fights

- Tito held a paper belt more than anyone else until he robbed De La Hoya, who was recognized as the lineal champion

LOL at hagler welterweight.
BTW, I might have stated that before but the original Sugar Ray takes any welterweight.

[Run]

I don't ever want to read Hagler, anywhere near this thread.



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

[wmute]

LOL at hagler welterweight.
BTW, I might have stated that before but the original Sugar Ray takes any welterweight.

The thread seemed to imply that hagler could NOT have fought tito toe-to-toe. I liked to point out this "discrepancy with reality"

[wmute]

I don't ever want to read Hagler, anywhere near this thread.

LMAO

[BrooklynBomber]

The thread seemed to imply that hagler could NOT have fought tito toe-to-toe. I liked to point out this "discrepancy with reality"

Poor, poor Hagler...he will have to really cut down on food to make it to welter.