Can you call this fight?

[billeau2]

Middleweight, not Light HEavyweight.

Also, Olson was DOA. He was far from Moore's best win at 175.


No offense, but that's ridiculous. He was clearly a better Light Heavyweight. Again, I fully concede that we don't have film footage to validate any of this. But this is a guy who lost to an OLD yarosz and booker. Marshall a Mugabi of sorts.

That's not the same as the guy who'd beat Valdez or Pastrano.



Duran >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Moore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Toney.

Olson was one of many fighters mentioned. You say he was a better light heavy? Well remember though...He fought up down and all around. To me he was more like a middle, light heavy weight who fought heavyweight because he was good enough to get away with it. I won't dispute that he was better at light heavy, just that he was a kind of fighter that did not fit into a division.

you mind if I ask you a pointed question? Why with you does it have to be always a matter of someone who was better? have you ever sat down for example and watched Eddie Chambers fight... without the need to exclaim that there are better heavy weights?

Read an article by joe Rein on why Toney is so endearing, here...


Theres more to boxing than a matter of better and best. Archie Moore's moves inspired many. That does not subtract from Duran by any means. I happen to think the world of Duran as well.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Olson was one of many fighters mentioned. You say he was a better light heavy? Well remember though...He fought up down and all around. To me he was more like a middle, light heavy weight who fought heavyweight because he was good enough to get away with it. I won't dispute that he was better at light heavy, just that he was a kind of fighter that did not fit into a division.

you mind if I ask you a pointed question? Why with you does it have to be always a matter of someone who was better? have you ever sat down for example and watched Eddie Chambers fight... without the need to exclaim that there are better heavy weights?

Read an article by joe Rein on why Toney is so endearing, here...


Theres more to boxing than a matter of better and best. Archie Moore's moves inspired many. That does not subtract from Duran by any means. I happen to think the world of Duran as well.

That's actually a great question. I don't have an answer presently. But you definitely gave me cause for reflection.

what I do know: no way does the guy who lost to Burley smash Johnson. no way does the guy who smashedjohnson lose to burley.

that is the point that started all of this. There's a distinction between the guy who lost to bivins and beat bivins.

He was also clearly getting better as he approached Marciano.

Yeah Duran was a blend of the best of Moore and Walker. Damn near perfect.

[billeau2]

That's actually a great question. I don't have an answer presently. But you definitely gave me cause for reflection.

what I do know: no way does the guy who lost to Burley smash Johnson. no way does the guy who smashedjohnson lose to burley.

that is the point that started all of this. There's a distinction between the guy who lost to bivins and beat bivins.

He was also clearly getting better as he approached Marciano.

Yeah Duran was a blend of the best of Moore and Walker. Damn near perfect.

Read that article...Rein left us some time ago for the great square circle in the sky but he was a great writer. I used to send him stuff I was having published, he was a great guy. This is one of my favorite pieces he wrote.

Regarding Duran: Just remember that Latin America, including Puerto Rico Cuba and Mexico have their own style, perspective and way of boxing. Puerto Rico and Cuba impress me more than Mexico. They are a small land mass with a big impact on boxing. I think Duran was influenced by this tradition.

Even today when you look at most Puerto Rican fighters...Guys like Cotto, they are well rounded fighters who can do many things. When I look at Duran, I see elements of the Mexican game, the ability to lead without a jab, the nice use of hooking, etc, but even more I see a guy who was taught in a manner where you learned to do everything, and then used your specialties. Cuban fighters do so well because regardless of whether one fights professionally, or amateur, if you learn to do it all, you are prepared!

So we have Duran the boxer puncher, who can box your ear off, fight defensively, counter well, etc. I see Duran as having been influenced in that manner.

[Rusty Tromboni]

[/B]

Read that article...Rein left us some time ago for the great square circle in the sky but he was a great writer. I used to send him stuff I was having published, he was a great guy. This is one of my favorite pieces he wrote.

It's definitely well-written. He does sound a lot like a music critic though, who blames the fans for not getting it when the act he's lauding isn't as popular as the author wishes. Sometimes you're just not that good: Toney wasn't atheltic or disciplined enough to be the best of his era, although he did his thing the best.

[/B]


Regarding Duran: Just remember that Latin America, including Puerto Rico Cuba and Mexico have their own style, perspective and way of boxing. Puerto Rico and Cuba impress me more than Mexico. They are a small land mass with a big impact on boxing. I think Duran was influenced by this tradition.

Duran didn't fight like a "latin american" fighter, he fought like someone out of New York. Ray Arcel was one of the best trainers ever, he helped Duran to polish into a complete fighter. He raged forward like Walker, but he had all the guile of a prime Archie Moore. You see elements of that in guys like LaMotta. Billy Graham was very cagey, but he would pour the offense on heavy as his opponent faded. Ortiz is Puerto Rican and Griffith from the Carribean, but they trained in NYC, very complete fighters and very strong pressure fighters.

[/B]


Even today when you look at most Puerto Rican fighters...Guys like Cotto, they are well rounded fighters who can do many things. When I look at Duran, I see elements of the Mexican game, the ability to lead without a jab, the nice use of hooking, etc, but even more I see a guy who was taught in a manner where you learned to do everything, and then used your specialties. Cuban fighters do so well because regardless of whether one fights professionally, or amateur, if you learn to do it all, you are prepared!
.

Yeah, I dunno how we can type-cast Cubans: they've had so many diverse fighters. Maybe post-Communist these guys with decades of amateur experience have a complete style. Rigo is pretty much a perfect fighter. Just way too boring.

I also agree that Puerto Rico has put forward more complete fighters than Mexico. Mexico is a HUGE country that shares most of its border with the U.S. Mexicans really aren't athletic enough to compete in other sports, and they're small enough to compete in the divisions which Whites and Blacks have had to abandon. As a result, they have had lots of top name guys in Boxing, but the return for the investment has been comparatively low. I would say that they tend to be "tougher" than Puerto Rican fighters, though. Puerto Rico has put forward several promising fighters who never quite achieved what was expected of them.

[billeau2]

It's definitely well-written. He does sound a lot like a music critic though, who blames the fans for not getting it when the act he's lauding isn't as popular as the author wishes. Sometimes you're just not that good: Toney wasn't atheltic or disciplined enough to be the best of his era, although he did his thing the best.




Duran didn't fight like a "latin american" fighter, he fought like someone out of New York. Ray Arcel was one of the best trainers ever, he helped Duran to polish into a complete fighter. He raged forward like Walker, but he had all the guile of a prime Archie Moore. You see elements of that in guys like LaMotta. Billy Graham was very cagey, but he would pour the offense on heavy as his opponent faded. Ortiz is Puerto Rican and Griffith from the Carribean, but they trained in NYC, very complete fighters and very strong pressure fighters.






Yeah, I dunno how we can type-cast Cubans: they've had so many diverse fighters. Maybe post-Communist these guys with decades of amateur experience have a complete style. Rigo is pretty much a perfect fighter. Just way too boring.

I also agree that Puerto Rico has put forward more complete fighters than Mexico. Mexico is a HUGE country that shares most of its border with the U.S. Mexicans really aren't athletic enough to compete in other sports, and they're small enough to compete in the divisions which Whites and Blacks have had to abandon. As a result, they have had lots of top name guys in Boxing, but the return for the investment has been comparatively low. I would say that they tend to be "tougher" than Puerto Rican fighters, though. Puerto Rico has put forward several promising fighters who never quite achieved what was expected of them.

Great fighters always exceed the foundations of their tendencies. Was Sanchez a Mexican fighter? Well...In some way but he was much more than that. Im going to go out on a limb here and perhaps piss some people off...Lets compare Chavez to Sanchez. Chavez: Still very much a Mexican styled fighter through and through, a great one but not on the level of A fighter who took it to the next level. Sanchez: An evolved boxing icon who took and made the elements of his training into something technically much stronger than any style.



The same can be said for Duran. In fact one interesting thesis is that American boxing and Jazz both were special in how they encouraged one to make technical applications their own... Both stressed improvisation, playing with convention, pulling apart and putting systems back together...As far back as the 1890's British boxing trainers were lauding the Americans (the Yanks!) for not holding the power hand in the back at all times, so they could use it more frequently than the ponderous jab, jab, cross... Yet it took the 1960's and Bruce Lee to exclaim that this principle from a common sense/Street fight notion, made no sense, and we still have the majority of fighters unwilling to either square up, or shift sides to use the power hand...

Its in the DNA, the Archetype of greatness to not get beat on style. Took me years to accept that a great fighter could resign oneself to not being able to beat certain styles. And here is the difference: I don't care what bee was in Chavez' bonnet when he fought Whitaker. He was outclassed because his Mexican style was too ponderous for Whitaker. And he was limited to that situation.

Duran, or Sanchez would not be limited by any style. Either man could KO you, outbox you, counter punch you, fight you inside, etc because they were great fighters able to adjust to the competition.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Great fighters always exceed the foundations of their tendencies. Was Sanchez a Mexican fighter? Well...In some way but he was much more than that. Im going to go out on a limb here and perhaps piss some people off...Lets compare Chavez to Sanchez. Chavez: Still very much a Mexican styled fighter through and through, a great one but not on the level of A fighter who took it to the next level. Sanchez: An evolved boxing icon who took and made the elements of his training into something technically much stronger than any style.



The same can be said for Duran. In fact one interesting thesis is that American boxing and Jazz both were special in how they encouraged one to make technical applications their own... Both stressed improvisation, playing with convention, pulling apart and putting systems back together...As far back as the 1890's British boxing trainers were lauding the Americans (the Yanks!) for not holding the power hand in the back at all times, so they could use it more frequently than the ponderous jab, jab, cross... Yet it took the 1960's and Bruce Lee to exclaim that this principle from a common sense/Street fight notion, made no sense, and we still have the majority of fighters unwilling to either square up, or shift sides to use the power hand...

Its in the DNA, the Archetype of greatness to not get beat on style. Took me years to accept that a great fighter could resign oneself to not being able to beat certain styles. And here is the difference: I don't care what bee was in Chavez' bonnet when he fought Whitaker. He was outclassed because his Mexican style was too ponderous for Whitaker. And he was limited to that situation.

Duran, or Sanchez would not be limited by any style. Either man could KO you, outbox you, counter punch you, fight you inside, etc because they were great fighters able to adjust to the competition.

Yes, Sancez was able to burst free from the more rigid Mexican cocoon thanks to his superior athelticism. Because he was a White guy, he fought like a White guy. Same with Napoles: way too fluid for his adoptive land.

But Duran definitely fought like a continuation of the fighters we were seeing in American cities up until about the War, and even slightly after. If Mickey Walker came of age 40-50 years later, he would have fought at least as well as Duran. Leonard probably showed up only a decade too early. Some guys, like Corbett 3, could only do the Boxing. Aposotoli, another Italian out of California, could only do the pressure fighting. But the precedent to Duran can be seen in ethnic White Boxers produced by American cities a generation before.

I really don't know how you can associate Duran with any other style. He was the exemplar of that style. And he appeared unique in his own era because he definitely went against the grain of his contemporaries: the flashy, explosive, fighters (who often lacked heart and refinement) common in America at the time. But he was every bit a product of Ray Arcel's craft.

[QueensburyRules]

- -Those of Mexican descent have made a fair showing in MLB over the years, but I believe on both sides of the border that soccer has supplanted baseball, so I suspect we see many more there than baseball.

Andy Ruiz a Tank at 245 a rock solid, one off physique with some modern wt training would suit out in the nfl at 300 lbs of wrecking ball muscle.

[Rusty Tromboni]

- -Those of Mexican descent have made a fair showing in MLB over the years, but I believe on both sides of the border that soccer has supplanted baseball, so I suspect we see many more there than baseball.

Andy Ruiz a Tank at 245 a rock solid, one off physique with some modern wt training would suit out in the nfl at 300 lbs of wrecking ball muscle.

even in soccer, they don't have any stars. Soccer is like the antithesis of basketball, beingbig is actually a detriment. Did you see Lukaku? He was in the running for the Golden Boot when Belgium was steamrolling rubbish teams. But once they were on even terms, the dude's size and clumsiness became a liability.

So you'd think Mexico would be running away with all the titles and championshops. But they don't. Even where a smaller frame is advantageous, Mexico doesn't do that great. Sure, like the MLB they don't do horrible: thanks to their outrageous population, they will produce notable players. But much smaller countries with less money and resources, can produce more/better players.


I agree Ruiz needs to improve his diet and training. But it suits Ruiz not to be too cut. Look at MMA. The dudes look like super heros. Even at Heavyweight, guys enter shredded. But Derrick Lewis and Roy Nelson (a guy who could probably make Middleweight) starch their opponents. The human body needs oxygen. Period. Muscles are needed on a case by case basis.

[QueensburyRules]

- -I don't watch soccer and stopped watching other sports 15 yrs ago, but soccer is the most international sport in world history.

[billeau2]

Yes, Sancez was able to burst free from the more rigid Mexican cocoon thanks to his superior athelticism. Because he was a White guy, he fought like a White guy. Same with Napoles: way too fluid for his adoptive land.

But Duran definitely fought like a continuation of the fighters we were seeing in American cities up until about the War, and even slightly after. If Mickey Walker came of age 40-50 years later, he would have fought at least as well as Duran. Leonard probably showed up only a decade too early. Some guys, like Corbett 3, could only do the Boxing. Aposotoli, another Italian out of California, could only do the pressure fighting. But the precedent to Duran can be seen in ethnic White Boxers produced by American cities a generation before.

I really don't know how you can associate Duran with any other style. He was the exemplar of that style. And he appeared unique in his own era because he definitely went against the grain of his contemporaries: the flashy, explosive, fighters (who often lacked heart and refinement) common in America at the time. But he was every bit a product of Ray Arcel's craft.

Im not really associating Duran with any other style...The caveats loom large when stating that Duran came of age in a boxing culture where there was a way to develop as a fighter...Would you accuse me of saying Pele was Brazilian styled in that he grew of age in that country, where kids played Soccar in the streets as compared to the Bronx at that time where the New York Cosmos team was located?

With all due respect lets not create a false dichotomy here. If I misspoke (have not looked at that post) then I apologize in advance...At any rate, Duran came of age in a place where there was raw material to express oneself as a boxer. His achievements, his development was an expression of that desire, a Hegalian dialect between his roots and the improvisational, sensational boxing mecca that was part of Arcel and what he stood for. But I do believe I said that he (Duran) eclipsed any style.

Rusty I don't buy into the racial component. But I respect that you feel this is relevant...Its all good. And yes indeed, the Mexican style is not an athletic one and we can see how much more Sanchez could do when he, like Duran, developed. I also am not going to not see that big elephant in the room: Sanchez and any great fighter would be intimately connected to the progress in the fight game made in the United States at that time and in the past.

Heres the thing: Like Jazz...How do you define a style that has so much improvisation as a feature? In Jazz people talk of the scales... In America we have regions where certain styles develop, certain preferences. Another subject for another time.