Eder Jofre - what to do with him, and the vagaries of ranking fighters

Morning, lads. How is everyone doing?

Looking to tie a few loose ends together with this article, really. Strongback mentioned the other day on Azania's thread concerning Floyd, Duran and JC Superstar that all boxing forums and websites tend to carry their own little "idiosyncrasies" which are unique to that particular group of posters when it comes to ranking fighters from yesteryear. In this case, he was referring to the fact that only a very small minority of posters on v2 consider Joe Louis, a monolith in boxing history, to be a top ten (or even top twenty) pound for pound merchant, despite the fact that such a view contrasts wildly with those of long-running and world-wide publications such as Ring Magazine or the UK's 'Boxing News', as well as the likes of Bert Sugar, arguably boxing's most notable (and certainly most charismatic and interviewed!) historian of the past three decades.

On the other hand, Eder Jofre is a name only really known by boxing obsessives and certainly wouldn't command anything like the respect Louis gets in the aforementioned publications, which are often taken as something close to gospel by those who are just starting to become interested in the history of the sport. When a fan starts trying to spread their knowledge back to bygone eras, as most do in at least some degree eventually, it's pretty easy to find out a glut of information, facts and figures and biographies on great Heavyweight champions. But try finding the same information on a great Bantamweight one, and you'll have to be prepared to dig a little deeper, I can assure you!

Our own little "idiosyncrasy" on 606v2, as well as the old BBC 606 board, seems to be that we rated the brilliant Brazilian, Jofre, a lot higher than the so-called 'experts' would, first off because both boards were / are made up of plenty of genuine, thoughtful boxing fans with a keen appreciation for the history of the sport and who realised that the fame of a boxer doesn't necessarily equate to quality, and also because a couple of the most respected of those posters (particularly the Captain and, of course, the sadly departed but never forgotten Windy) did some great trumpeting of the lad.

As such, Jofre became a bit of a 'cult' (probably not the right word, mind you!) figure around these here parts, and most of us have studied him, seen some of his fights and taken time out to weigh up where he ranks as both an all-time Bantamweight, but also an all-time pound for pounder.

In the publications listed above, Jofre would be lucky to see the top ten of the latter with a telescope, but that's exactly where many of us (and some other great posters who never made the switch over) had him back on the old BBC board. And when Ghosty ran the first v2 'Top 10 Pound for Pound Boxers of All Time' article in the summer of 2011, we collectively voted the Brazilian as the seventh greatest fighter of all time across all weights. Our own little idiosycrasy, if you like, as I'm not aware of too many other forums or widespread networks who'd hold the little man in such high regard.

However, it appears that Jofre's lustre has dimmed a little bit on here in the past couple of years. About a year after Ghosty's initial thread, Rodney carried out another top ten pound for pound vote - this time, while Eder still racked up five votes in the lists of various posters, he couldn't maintain his top ten place overall in the collective standings.

And then, quite surprisingly you'd have to say given what's gone before, when Rowley ran the next v2 top ten pound for pound vote earlier this month, not only did Jofre fail to regain a top ten place, he failed to garner a single mention in anyone's top ten, not being mentioned on the thread once.

First off, I'm interested to know what people think this signifies about how we rank fighters. Are we easily influenced by others, and do we subconsciously allow our opinions to be swayed? Do we overcompensate at times for fighters who were grossly underappreciated and undervalued in their own time (as Jofre certainly was) and go over the top in trying to make up for that once they've retired? Or is this just reflective of how many great fighters there have been and how difficult it is to narrow so many names down to a final list of ten? Also, is this a 'trend' more than anything else? Can you imagine Jofre featuring in the next v2 all-time top ten just as regularly as he has done in the past, making his recent fall from grace (bit of an overstatement, but you get my drift!) seem irrelevant in the long run?

And also, what are your own thoughts on where to rank Jofre? Which of his placings in the three v2 articles listed above rings true with you? The first one which had him comfortably inside the top ten, the second one which had him just missing out, or the third one which had him nowhere in sight in comparison? If you're one of the posters who considered him top ten a couple of yearws back but have became slightly less impressed as time passes, then why? Alternatively, if you're still of the opinion that the former Bantamweight and Featherweight champion is top-ten worthy, and that his placing as such in 2011 wasn't down to wanting to go with the trend but was one hundred percent deserved and genuine, then this is your chance to argue your case for him.

So, what does Jofre's three pretty different placings amongst us on v2 within the space of a couple of years say about how we rank fighters and what possible faults or inconsistencies we may have in doing so, and also, where do you rank the great man as of now - in a nutshell, that's what I'm getting at!

Cheers, everyone.

Great article

Don't know enough of the man but knew who he is. I am in the process of watching some of his fights

cheers

Ashamed to admit it but Jofre is something of a blind spot for me knowledge wise. When the likes of the captain, jimmy and Windy raved about him I did a bit of digging on him and it does seem their praise was more than justified, his work in his comeback was particular impressive, particularly in light of how infrequently comebacks go well.

As a rule I tend not to have him in my top ten solely because I tend not to think it is fair to chuck a guy in when my knowledge of them is skeletal at best. However I have been thinking long and hard for a guy who can justify me kicking Duran out of my top ten so may have to do some more digging on Jofre as he may well be the guy to fit the bill. You have prompted me to find some time for youtube this evening Chris.

As an aside mate the IBRO have him at 15, one place behind your personal bête noire Jimmy Wilde which I am sure you will have something to say about.

Good article about one of the greats of the game who does appear to slip under the radar somewhat.

Playing devil's advocate: Is it likely that some throw Jofre's name into the argument because he's so niche -- to give the impression they're connoisseurs?

He's been hailed as a mini-Ray Robinson by some yet I couldn't see it from the clips I managed to find on him.

hazharrison wrote:Playing devil's advocate: Is it likely that some throw Jofre's name into the argument because he's so niche -- to give the impression they're connoisseurs?

Not so much that, Haz. More of a watered-down version, I'd guess.

As I said in the article, Jofre was a highly respected Bantamweight champion when at his peak and it was considered a huge shock when Harada usurped him as the 118 lb boss. But due to fighting in one of the less heralded weight classes, being Brazilian (not a country associated with producing legendary fighters) and not being a Stateside money spinner he never really captured the imagination the way a fighter of his calibre should have done. Boxing was at a low ebb in the first half of the sixties, with many networks unwilling to back a sport which had been shown to be riddled with corruption and Mob influence thanks to the very public Kefauver investigation, and it was never likely to be Jofre's kind who were going to bring new life to the sport (step forward a certain Muhammad Ali).

I think because of this, there is perhaps a tendancy to go a little over the top when people try to compensate. Now understand that I'm not saying that fellas such as Windy, Captain, Superfly etc, big Jofre fans who have made genuinely brilliant cases for him, are doing that. Not at all. Rather, the fact that they were able to seemingly (and seemingly is the key word!) influence so many to share their train of thought is what interests me. Evidently, they did such a good job of arguing the case for him that many - me included - felt compelled enough to, at some stage or another, give Jofre a top ten placing, but I do suspect that there is an ever-so-small case of sheep following that went on in that respect, for want of a better phrase!

hazharrison wrote:Playing devil's advocate: Is it likely that some throw Jofre's name into the argument because he's so niche -- to give the impression they're connoisseurs?
He's been hailed as a mini-Ray Robinson by some yet I couldn't see it from the clips I managed to find on him.

As I said a couple of years ago, it was this sort of thing (from posters who knew Hatton, Calzaghe and "that other fella" but then started namedropping the likes of Ketchel into their p4p lists) and folk jumping onto the latest bandwagon that I find most irritating about this site. Admittedly I AM a miserable so and so at the best of times, but for some reason, I find it infuriating.

I'll be dropping him in my next list....Now I've heard of him..

One space below Don Curry...........

In fairness to Jofre, watching film of him you can clearly see that he was a beautiful boxer-puncher and a superb all-rounder. Scores highly in all areas without being absolutely exceptional in any particular one; not Hector Camacho or Meldrick Taylor, but still very fast with his hands. Not Carlos Zarate, but still a very good puncher. Not Whitaker, but still very good in the art of evading punches. Not Armstrong or Pryor, but still owning an excellent engine and blessed with very good stamina.

On top of that, he boxed out of a textbook and had brilliant economy of movement. The way he had Medel missing just by a few inches almost every time, never moving his head to massive degrees but just enough to avoid the incoming fire and make space for himself, is great to watch, really. Obviously, Medel wasn't from the highest plate by any means but nevertheless, Jofre was pretty fantastic to watch, I think.

With Jofre, the problem lies in trying to weigh up his talent and consistency with his actual record and opposition. 72-2-4 or whatever it was, with five years as a Bantamweight champion and an unexpected comeback title at Feather aged thirty-seven (a fossil in Featherweight terms) with fifty knockouts and no stoppage losses is formidable, but his opposition doesn't particularly stand out. Sanchez, Caldwell and Medel aren't going to be worrying any all-time Bantamweight list any time soon and it's a shame for Jofre that Becerra walked away from the sport so young, as that would have likely trumped all the names on his record at 118.

His Featherweight comeback was remarkable in many ways and is often seen as the deal clincher for his place amongst the immortals, but the Legra decision wasn't the most convincing and Saldivar had been out of the ring for a long, long time when Jofre hammered him and wasn't in the same form he'd shown in his peak years. Two good wins for Jofre, but enough for a top ten spot?

I guess it depends on what means more to you; opposition beaten, longevity, all-round skills and the like. Jofre's probably top five in one of those departments, at best top fifty in another and maybe something like twenty-fifth, for argument's sake, in the other. Combine all of that and it's difficult to know exactly where he goes, but still top twenty for me.

Just found it curious that his stock has fallen so much on here in the past couple of years more than anything, really!

Well If his opposition didn't stand out and you rate him highly.....then you won't contradict yourself next time we discuss Mayweather as he fought better fighters and had bag loads more longevity..

Nice attempt at shoehorning Floyd in there, Truss. I rate Floyd higher than Jofre pound for pound, you'll be delighted to know.

When I saw the thread title the first thing that came to mind was "overated by 606". Then I read the article, should kick off a good debate.

My second thought was the lack of opposition. Beautiful fighter to watching but nowhere near as flash as SRR. I don't know he if fought all comers or ducked a couple, Chris might know.

He's hard to rate but I do think influential posters on here have elevated his status a bit.

Which influential posters???

I think the problem is, most of us are sneaking on during work and dont realy have the time to go through it thoroughly so end up filling the gaps with whoevers in the next mans list. Either than or just reshuffling someone elses list.

Gordy's list...........

Reminds me of when a certain poster had Pongsaklek Wonjongkam as his P4P number 5, yet admitted to never watch ANY of his fights......and the fact that Wonjongkan had been beaten about a month before by a journeyman!!!

It must be comfortable on that old bandwagon!

He gets a pass though If he spelt the name right!!

Cheers, Strongback.

I don't think Jofre avoided anyone so to speak, particularly at Bantam. He proved his stones by going to Harada's (as a side note, how underrated is he in most quarters?) backyard to defend his title.

It was more just a case of there not really being an outstanding Bantamweight around until Harada stepped up. In those circumstances, Jofre did all he could do really by stringing together a long list of dominant wins and consumate performances against the best Bantams available. No Super-Bantamweight at that time, remember, so going up in weight to search for extra titles when 126 lb was populated by some really outstanding fighters like the peak version of Saldivar, Winstone, Sugar Ramos etc was never likely to be Jofre's preferred option.

I do kind of think that Jofre gets a bit of a pass for the Harada defeats, mind you. Yes, the first one was very close and most observers felt that Jofre was a shade unlucky to not get at least a draw and hold on to his title in some capacity (no doubt in my mind that Harada beat him second time out fair and square, mind you). He was also beset by management troubles and was struggling to get down to 118 lb. But as I've said before, unless there are truly extenuating circumstances, I tend to think that a fighter leaves his excuses outside the ropes once he steps through them. Harada was the best fighter at Bantamweight that Jofre faced and he didn't beat him, ultimately.

At Featherweight, Jofre didn't stick around long enough to war it out with a young, emerging Arguello, but I think we can forgive him that one, given that he was very long in the tooth for a little'un at that stage. Ernesto Marcel was the other recognised 126 lb champion at the time and a unification win over him would have been huge for Jofre's already impressive legacy, but it never happened for whatever reason (the pair of them both retired around the same time, having never lost their Featherweight belts in the ring).

I should stress that Jofre does have lofty admirers away from v2. Both Barney Ross and Willie Pep refereed world title bouts involving Jofre and the pair of them maintained that he was the greatest boxer of that era.

I wouldnt have him in my own top ten, but theres only a handful of guys I think are worth cast iron placings, plus a handful of guys I think are strongly overrated, and the order of the rest that tend to follow them could change on any given day. I agree there was a period where he Jofre seemed to be very popular on here. I saw rated him up there at 3 or 4 a few times which I couldnt really see particularly strong case for. I think you have probably answered your own question though as to why. I also dont think these all time lists are all that definative either, whether you are an "expert" or just a regular fan. Im sure experts are no different to the rest of us and change their mind constantly. Its an impossible ask to do in the context of accuracy and consistency.

Who are your strongly overrated fighters manos. If you say Duran I will disembowel you with a rusty spoon. Other than that everyone is fair game.

ShahenshahG wrote:Who are your strongly overrated fighters manos. If you say Duran I will disembowel you with a rusty spoon. Other than that everyone is fair game.

ShahenshahG wrote:Who are your strongly overrated fighters manos. If you say Duran I will disembowel you with a rusty spoon. Other than that everyone is fair game.

Not so much Duran no. He wouldnt be a fighter that I think is an automatic top ten guy but at the same time I would think he is a must for top 15. He usually features in this bracket so I wouldnt consider him particularly over/underrated in general.

The main guys I would consider overrated are Dempsey, Wilde, Marciano and to a lesser extent Ketchel and Johnson. I dont think for various these guys merit a top 20 twenty place.

I should probably have added there are lots of fighters from the very early era's that I find extremelly difficult to rank - the likes of McGovern, Dixon, Kilbane, Gans, Walcott, Barry, Attell etc

i've seen few fights on him, youtube and on espn Classic

He just didnt look that good to me, sure world class, but thats as far as I would go

Doing this on my phone so not likely to be the most detailed response. I've probably been guilty in the past of rating him a bit too high - think I recall having him as high as 5 which in retrospect is clearly not right. Ability wise there may be some justification for such a high placing - he's about as complete a fighter as I've ever seen and maybe I got carried away after looking at the footage.

I still think there is a place for him in my top 10. Certainly the greatest in one if the original weight divisions - was a bit like Ricardo Lopez for much of his bantamweight career in that he beat everyone before him without really seeming to have to exert himself until he lost 2 close and disputed fights to Harada on Harada's home turf. Then came back at featherweight to complete perhaps the greatest comeback from retirement that the sport has seen. Added to the already mentioned completeness of his game, there's enough there for him to be mentioned along with the very best.

Not done a top 10 list for a while but would hope to find a place for him somewhere between 8 and 10. Saying that, he's likely part of a group of fighters between the lower reaches of the top 10 and 15 who are pretty interchangeable depending on how critical you want to be of a given fighter's career.