If They'd Walked Away Would History Have Been Kinder?

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 9:41 am

Fighters managing to retire from the sport at the right time and on their own terms is as rare as hen's teeth. Often, they linger on, no longer the same men they were a few years and a few pounds ago.

What if, though, the following fighters had walked away on a winning note -- how much higher would they rate all time?

Roberto Duran 72-1

Duran retires a national hero after upsetting Ray Leonard in Montreal.

Roy Jones Jr. 48-1

Having dominated John Ruiz, Jones hangs them up -- his "superman" tag still intact.

Willie Pep 134-1-1

After his miraculous recovery from a plane crash in which he suffered a broken leg, cracked vertebrae and a chest injury, Pep wins a further 26 bouts in two years before bowing out with a win over Johnny LaRusso.

Ray Robinson 128-1-2

After flattening Cyrille Delannoit in Italy, Robinson escapes the clutches of Jim Norris to live out his days on the continent.

Julio Cesar Chavez 89-0-1

After mauling Liverpudlian Andy Holligan, Chavez, struggling with motivation, walks off into the sunset.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 9:52 am

It's a question with no answer really..........

Duran won 154 and 160 titles but got shamed in New Orleans and humiliated against Hearns.......

The Leonard win was contentious and back home talk was of Leonard fighting the wrong fight and Duran fighting his best.........

But it's a great win none the less..........Leonard was a superstar..

Whether he would have been regarded as quitting because he knew he couldn't win a rematch who knows........Doubt it....

I don't think Duran would be ranked any different.......People can still look at his record and pick out the good stuff from the bad..

It's the same with Ali............Holmes/Berbick don't matter

Don't think it makes a jot of difference........

Why I don't think Holy and Jones jr will suffer........Because people will regard their achievements.....

The same with Mayweather and Manny when they go........

by Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:06 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:It's a question with no answer really..........

Duran won 154 and 160 titles but got shamed in New Orleans and humiliated against Hearns.......

The Leonard win was contentious and back home talk was of Leonard fighting the wrong fight and Duran fighting his best.........

But it's a great win none the less..........Leonard was a superstar..

Whether he would have been regarded as quitting because he knew he couldn't win a rematch who knows........Doubt it....

I don't think Duran would be ranked any different.......People can still look at his record and pick out the good stuff from the bad..

It's the same with Ali............Holmes/Berbick don't matter

Don't think it makes a jot of difference........

Why I don't think Holy and Jones jr will suffer........Because people will regard their achievements.....

The same with Mayweather and Manny when they go........

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:11 am

Is that your contribution ??

by Scottrf Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:18 am

I think for Jones the most, there seems to be a perception that he was found out, whereas most others it's just that they went on too long. Without the DQ which I didn't agree with, unbeaten Middle to Heavy while making decent boxers look stupid. Perhaps to a certain extent the fact that people consider him to be exposed or whatever may be due to a feeling he didn't prove enough at his prime though.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:31 am

Disagree about Junior.......He went eleven years unbeaten after he won his first title..........

Griffin being the joke it was.......

by Scottrf Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:33 am

How exactly do you disagree? I was talking about the general perception of him rather than my thoughts, I don't think you disagree at all.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:34 am

I disagree that it's the general perception.

by Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:37 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I disagree that it's the general perception.

by Hammersmith harrier Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:38 am

Jones would be regarded a fair bit higher than he is today, the Tarver and Johnson losses were not purely down to getting old but not having a plan B. Up to that point he'd had a fairly easy career in that he took next to no punches but his fall from grace was very sudden.

Robinson, well I think his reputation would be less if he hadn't have had the Maxim performance, he might not have won but he thoroughly outboxed the far bigger light heavyweight champion. After his retirement it neither adds or detracts from his legacy, he tended to lose then win the rematch before he was just too old.

Chavez at that point would still have had the Whitaker and Taylor performances, they are the biggest black marks he has rather than the losses to Randall, Oscar or Tzuyu, so he'd be rated exactly the same.

Pep the same as Robinson really.

Duran is more complicated depending on your point of view, do the titles at 154lbs and 160lbs do more good for his legacy than No Mas, Laing and Hearns do harm to it or vice versa.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:38 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I disagree that it's the general perception.

by Group Cpt Lionel Mandrake Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:39 am

Morales 52-9-0

On the plus side, every fight he's had since 2001 has been for a "title" but on the flipside he's lost 8 out of his last 13 fights and been embroiled in PED controversy which technically looks to have ended his career. Looked an absolute shell of his former self in recent fights. He should probably have retired after beating Manny in 2005 and at the very least have not came back after losing four on the bounce following his win against Manny and then having 3 years out.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:41 am

i think the PEd will have a lasting impression perhaps.......But I imagine like Holy we'll remember the good stuff......

by Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:43 am

Castillo

by Hammersmith harrier Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:43 am

Morales is a fair point, Pacquiao was his last big hurrah, hadn't looked great before and looked decidedly average after. At his best he doesn't lose to anyone he subsequently lost to and that includes Pacquiao.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:45 am

I think Morales also isn't as great as the others that have been mentioned and so know one really knows just how good he was really.........

A level or two down from Jones.....

by Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:51 am

I've a feeling Pacquiao might well slip into this type of thread in the future.

Didn't he say he promised his mum he would retire a couple of years back, only to go on and have more fights (losing 2 of them, 1 getting sparked badly).

If Rios beats him, he may well keep fighting for that bowing out fight, and the more losses, the smaller the purses. It could be a downward spiral.

Also, beating Rios will mean nothing also, so it may well be he is going to keep fighting beyond his years at the top.

Hope he hangs them up soon as he hasn't looked the same in a good 2 years at least and things will only get worse.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 10:56 am

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Jones would be regarded a fair bit higher than he is today, the Tarver and Johnson losses were not purely down to getting old but not having a plan B. Up to that point he'd had a fairly easy career in that he took next to no punches but his fall from grace was very sudden.

Robinson, well I think his reputation would be less if he hadn't have had the Maxim performance, he might not have won but he thoroughly outboxed the far bigger light heavyweight champion. After his retirement it neither adds or detracts from his legacy, he tended to lose then win the rematch before he was just too old.

Chavez at that point would still have had the Whitaker and Taylor performances, they are the biggest black marks he has rather than the losses to Randall, Oscar or Tzuyu, so he'd be rated exactly the same.

Pep the same as Robinson really.

Duran is more complicated depending on your point of view, do the titles at 154lbs and 160lbs do more good for his legacy than No Mas, Laing and Hearns do harm to it or vice versa.

Think it may be a long term/short term thing legacy wise...If at all....

My guess is the longer you are retired the more people remember the good wins rather than the bad..........

All legacies get better over time.......

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 11:00 am

I think they all would have been elevated in the all time rankings, especially Jones and Chavez.

Duran is generally rated in the top ten -- could he have possibly cracked the top four?

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 11:02 am

Probably means he'd have to be rated above Ali, Greb, Armstrong and Robbo.......

So no..........

by Atila Fri 11 Oct 2013, 11:36 am

Larryn Holmes is a good candidate for this thread.

If he'd retired at 48-0 with 20 title defences he would have been better thought of. I never thought that he needed to beat Marciano's record. 48-0 with 20 title defences was better than 49-0 with 6 title defences.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 11:39 am

I think holmes does better than he should now Atila..........

Don't think Spinks or Tyson hurt him too much........Especially as he beat Spinks in the return anyway....

Holmes beat Norton and shavers who had both lost previous big fights....and gets away with witherspoon while Mayweather gets castillo chucked at him...

Holmes is kind of Top 5........when in reality he should be 8 or 9.....

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:00 pm

Three of the five are usually rated top ten of all time -- is it a stretch to imagine Jones and Chavez joining them had they left at those points?

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:04 pm

Jones is top 10ish for me.........

No way can I have Chavez above Leonard types..

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:10 pm

Generally, Jones doesn't rank that high. Had he walked away after Ruiz, however, I imagine he'd have fit comfortably into the top ten.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:14 pm

Generally..............Is an interesting word............

Generally in the polls you read he doesn't............

Enjoy your input but you have a way of calling conjecture........FACT.

For me Jones jr is around Ten.......For me he is higher than Chavez and even Duran..

(laughing smiley alert)..

by Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:16 pm

Danny Green

He beat Jones.

When you beat one, you become one. So Green must rank higher.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:20 pm

Love this foe button thingy, Adam !! thumbsup

gets rid of all pitiful little irritants.

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:29 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Generally..............Is an interesting word............

Generally in the polls you read he doesn't............

Enjoy your input but you have a way of calling conjecture........FACT.

For me Jones jr is around Ten.......For me he is higher than Chavez and even Duran..

(laughing smiley alert)..

I don't think you enjoy my input really and I don't see how in writing "generally" I'm "calling conjecture fact".

Generally, in most media listings (such as Ring Magazine, ESPN, Boxing News etc), Jones doesn't feature as a top ten all time great. That's due to his drop off at light heavyweight when he was crunched by Johnson and Tarver. If those fights hadn't happened, then he'd probably rank somewhere up where you have him.

You have some strange issue with people quoting experts or writers or historians as in your opinion, you know as much as these guys and your opinions should be viewed with equal validity (despite the fact you exhibit unrivalled personal bias towards the men you're judging).

You also insinuate that I'm quoting polls that promote my own personal bias (which I don't have). I'd be most interested to see these other polls that contradict the ones I've quoted?

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:32 pm

I haven't a problem with people quoting historians..........Only with people suggesting they are always right......

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:40 pm

I've never suggested that. Their opinions are to respected, though. Like it or not they are experts in their field.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:44 pm

You have suggested it Haz.........You belittled me and Hammer on another thread by saying Bob Mee's opinion counts for more so we are wrong......

first grade stuff.......

You routinely chuck lists at people as....... FACT..............That you are right on something....

When lists come in all shapes and sizes..........

I do appreciate your input..........when you aren't being a silly billy..

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:48 pm

I respect Mee's opinion far more than yours and your side kick's, yes. Mee is an authority on the sport.

I merely post lists to provide context when I see posters such as yourself bandying about ridiculous statements such as: Fighter A is top five all time....fact.....end of....etc.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:52 pm

I'm an authority on the sport..........

I've been watching it for thirty years and unlike you Brits I watched it all the time.......because it was widely available back home.........I've seen more fights than Bob Mee I reckon.......

I've also written more articles on here (even If 99% were crap)...and on the old bbc than any other poster......

Does that make my opinion better than ONETWO's.........Nope............

Does it make you a sheep..............Probably.......

Bless you anyway.

by Hammersmith harrier Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:52 pm

You respect them Haz if you think they're right, I don't respect Sugar and Fleischer because I couldn't disagree with their opinions much more than I do. To me a boxing 'historian' knows facts about the sport and can write about it very well but their ability to judge boxing ability often leaves a lot to be desired. I'm more interested to hear who Moore rates highest as he fought real quality and when he says Burley is the best man he faced that is something to take notice of. Not necessarily the views of writers because they ultimately are in the same position of you and me, looking in from the outside rather than looking out from the inside.

At the same time i'm not too bothered by the opinion of Moore on fighters that he hasn't faced because he's then looking in albeit with a greater understanding of what they're doing. He famously doesn't rate Joe Louis but around 1951 when he had returned from retirement he apparently turned down Moores offer for a fight so there may be a bit of personal bias there.

by Hammersmith harrier Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:54 pm

Truss you may have seen more fights live but I doubt you've seen more fights overall, there is a wonderful website now called Youtube.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:55 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You respect them Haz if you think they're right, I don't respect Sugar and Fleischer because I couldn't disagree with their opinions much more than I do. To me a boxing 'historian' knows facts about the sport and can write about it very well but their ability to judge boxing ability often leaves a lot to be desired. I'm more interested to hear who Moore rates highest as he fought real quality and when he says Burley is the best man he faced that is something to take notice of. Not necessarily the views of writers because they ultimately are in the same position of you and me, looking in from the outside rather than looking out from the inside.

At the same time i'm not too bothered by the opinion of Moore on fighters that he hasn't faced because he's then looking in albeit with a greater understanding of what they're doing. He famously doesn't rate Joe Louis but around 1951 when he had returned from retirement he apparently turned down Moores offer for a fight so there may be a bit of personal bias there.

100% agree..........

A historian collates.................Haz was laughing at Duran's opinion that Leonard beats Hagler in 83........

Mee who never fought either of them but didn't call people PUTA's knows more..........apparently.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:56 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Truss you may have seen more fights live but I doubt you've seen more fights overall, there is a wonderful website now called Youtube.

All due respect CBS, ABC, ESPN etc carried undercards as well.........

But I see your point..

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 12:59 pm

Funny thing is I saw this bob Mee guy on skysports last night and he seems a nice guy........I'm sure he'd be the first to agree he isn't right all the time and that his opinion is just his opinion......

He is an expert but one of many...........and most contradict eachother.........

Moore is every bit of an expert.........to me.

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 1:01 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'm an authority on the sport..........

I've been watching it for thirty years and unlike you Brits I watched it all the time.......because it was widely available back home.........I've seen more fights than Bob Mee I reckon.......

I've also written more articles on here (even If 99% were crap)...and on the old bbc than any other poster......

Does that make my opinion better than ONETWO's.........Nope............

Does it make you a sheep..............Probably.......

Bless you anyway.

You really aren't an authority on the sport I'm afraid. And once again you descend into pettiness -- it's pointless replying to you.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 1:02 pm

You responded by inserting about 30 smileys to a post I made before about Mee

and you are calling me petty..

You really are something...........

A first grade debater..

Or second If Bob Mee say's so..

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 1:05 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You respect them Haz if you think they're right, I don't respect Sugar and Fleischer because I couldn't disagree with their opinions much more than I do. To me a boxing 'historian' knows facts about the sport and can write about it very well but their ability to judge boxing ability often leaves a lot to be desired. I'm more interested to hear who Moore rates highest as he fought real quality and when he says Burley is the best man he faced that is something to take notice of. Not necessarily the views of writers because they ultimately are in the same position of you and me, looking in from the outside rather than looking out from the inside.

At the same time i'm not too bothered by the opinion of Moore on fighters that he hasn't faced because he's then looking in albeit with a greater understanding of what they're doing. He famously doesn't rate Joe Louis but around 1951 when he had returned from retirement he apparently turned down Moores offer for a fight so there may be a bit of personal bias there.

That isn't correct at all. I respect all of their opinions. I may not agree with some of them personally but they are/were authorities on the sport (some of them more useful than others).

You don't need to have boxed in order to know boxing.

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 1:06 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You responded by inserting about 30 smileys to a post I made before about Mee

and you are calling me petty..

You really are something...........

A first grade debater..

Or second If Bob Mee say's so..

That's the level you tend to debate on so I thought I'd join you for the day to see if I could make contact. It sucked.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 1:07 pm

Let's not argue Darling.............

by Hammersmith harrier Fri 11 Oct 2013, 1:10 pm

A historian knows far more facts about the sport than I do but beyond that is personal preference on how to decipher a record and how much emphasise to place on performances, age, opponent, quality of era etc.

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 1:12 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Let's not argue Darling.............

Can't win a debate? Bring out the childish insults. That still isn't working? Go camp.

by Strongback Fri 11 Oct 2013, 5:10 pm

Eddie Futch, Emmanuelle Stewart, Freddie Roach and the other great trainers are whose opinion I rate the highest, as long as they are not talking about one of their own fighters of course.

I rate these opinions higher than posters opinions.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 11 Oct 2013, 5:22 pm

Apart from yours........I don't.

by J.Benson II Fri 11 Oct 2013, 5:30 pm

History would have been kinder to Audley Harrison if he walked away before his pro debut.

by hazharrison Fri 11 Oct 2013, 6:00 pm

J.Benson II wrote:History would have been kinder to Audley Harrison if he walked away before his pro debut.

Ha! Poor Audley - he gave it everything but just wasn't cut out for the pros.

by Sponsored content