Andre Ward

by **hampo17** Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:44 pm

First topic message reminder :

Has officially signed with Roc Nation, wonder if we'll see him fight now he has a new promoter.

by hazharrison Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:38 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The IBRO top twenty is as follows

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Harry Greb
3. Henry Armstrong
4. Muhammad Ali (Tie)
4. Joe Louis (Tie)
6. Sam Langford
7. Roberto Duran
8. Benny Leonard
9. Willie Pep
10. Bob Fitzsimmons
11. Joe Gans
12. Ezzard Charles (Tie)
12. Sugar Ray Leonard (Tie)
14. Jimmy Wilde
15. Eder Jofre
16. Mickey Walker
17. Archie Moore
18. Jack Dempsey
19. Jack Johnson
20. Gene Tunney

Now I would say the legacies of 13 of those men were improved by moving up in weight, of the others 4 were heavyweights which leaves Pep, Gans and Wilde. So I think a lot weight is placed on moving up in weight and to suggest it rarely does is again trying to legitimise your views on Hagler for not doing so. Of the ten also rans six of them benefited from jumping weight.

Outside the Heavyweight division it is very rare for a great fighter to have stayed in the same division his whole career.

As I said: depends who they fought. Hold on....where's Floyd?

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:44 pm

Where's Mayweather on a list that was published in 2006?

Each and every one of the weight hoppers on that list moved up to face a fellow all time great at some point.

by hazharrison Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:47 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Where's Mayweather on a list that was published in 2006?

Each and every one of the weight hoppers on that list moved up to face a fellow all time great at some point.

Point being what?

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:51 pm

Pointing out how many of the greats had their legacies improved by moving up and testing themselves, had they stayed in their comfort zone they wouldn't be in that top 20.

by hazharrison Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:54 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Pointing out how many of the greats had their legacies improved by moving up and testing themselves, had they stayed in their comfort zone they wouldn't be in that top 20.

Pointing out the obvious again.

My point was that Leonard and Spinks didn't (in my opinion).

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:02 pm

After all what does moving up to beat the middleweight and heavyweight champion respectively mean.

by hazharrison Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:12 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:After all what does moving up to beat the middleweight and heavyweight champion respectively mean.

I maintain that Spinks would be more highly regarded had he never left light heavyweight.

Leonard was no longer a great fighter the night he defeated Hagler - nor was Hagler. Had the decision gone against Ray, he wouldn't have been downgraded in the all-time standings. Leonard secured his legacy as a welterweight.

The achievements of Fitz and Armstrong were incredible but how exactly did Moore's heavyweight career improve his legacy? Would he have moved up if the light heavyweight crown had been held in higher regard (and had proven more lucrative) than the heavyweight one? Would Tunney?

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:19 pm

I think Archie Moore stepping up from Middleweight in the first place made a fairly significant difference to his legacy don't you?

Tunney's whole career was primed towards beating Dempsey, it was the only thing he ever had his eyes fixed on and used the light heavyweights as a way to hone his skills.

Your Leonard point makes no sense, as the semi retired former Welterweight he had a lot to gain from beating Hagler whether he was past his best or not. On the other hand Hagler had a lot to lose by losing to him and while Leonards legacy was secured it could still be improved.

by hazharrison Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:30 pm

Moore didn't move to light heavyweight in order to challenge himself - he was chasing the title shot that eluded him at middleweight.

The Leonard point is in plain English - no need to reiterate.

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:34 pm

None of your points ever make any sense, why does it matter why Moore moved up and I would say moving up to earn a title shot is challenging himself.

It might be in plain English but being coherent doesn't stop it being wrong Haz.

by hazharrison Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:34 pm

Leonard won a contentious decision over Hagler, had his butt kicked by Hearns, was dropped by Howard and Lalonde, fought a dreary rubber match with Duran and was pounded by Norris and Camacho.

Had none of that happened, I don't believe his legacy would have suffered.

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:36 pm

Like I said before returning from an enforced lay off, stepping up in weight and beating Hagler did improve his legacy and it's fundamentally false to suggest otherwise.

by hazharrison Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:39 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Like I said before returning from an enforced lay off, stepping up in weight and beating Hagler did improve his legacy and it's fundamentally false to suggest otherwise.

You haven't grasped my point (which isn't unusual for you).

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:42 pm

I have grasped your point but as usual I simply don't agree with it, Leonards legacy being secure before that fight doesn't mean it wasn't improved by winning it.

Hagler's legacy couldn't be improved by winning but could take a hit by losing as he did, he was in a lose lose situation, when you have one man moving up in weight the credit for winning isn't equal.

by hazharrison Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:47 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I have grasped your point but as usual I simply don't agree with it, Leonards legacy being secure before that fight doesn't mean it wasn't improved by winning it.

Hagler's legacy couldn't be improved by winning but could take a hit by losing as he did, he was in a lose lose situation, when you have one man moving up in weight the credit for winning isn't equal.

You haven't grasped my point - clearly. Maybe sleep on it (the penny might drop).

by hazharrison Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:08 am

How many great fighters genuinely moved up in weight in order to test themselves?

I can only think of two in recent times: Roy Jones and Felix Trinidad.

Hearns and De la Hoya were eliminated from the welterweight division. They spent their post welterweight careers searching for redemption after losing their defining fights. Hopkins was eliminated from the middleweight division. Marquez chased Pacquiao. Pacquiao chased Oscar. Floyd chased Oscar. Mosley chased Oscar. All three did so in order to secure enormous purses (more than they'd ever earned). Holyfield was in a crud division with few prospects. Cotto kept moving in order to rebuild. Toney did the same. The list goes on I'm sure.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:22 am

This is where you are failing to grasp the point, why does it matter why they moved up and in chasing the bigger money they were all invariably testing themselves outside of their comfort zone.

By chasing the bigger money which comes against tougher tests they all added to their legacies something Ward should do and something Monzon and Hagler could have done.

by hazharrison Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:23 am

Hammersmith harrier wrote:This is where you are failing to grasp the point, why does it matter why they moved up and in chasing the bigger money they were all invariably testing themselves outside of their comfort zone.

You missed the point again. Seriously, sleep on it.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:25 am

hazharrison wrote:
Hammersmith harrier wrote:This is where you are failing to grasp the point, why does it matter why they moved up and in chasing the bigger money they were all invariably testing themselves outside of their comfort zone.

You missed the point again. Seriously, sleep on it.

Not sure why you think you have a monopoly on every debate where it's your way or no way, you make it up as you go along just to suit your particular argument on any of your chosen favourite boxers.

by hazharrison Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:26 am

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
hazharrison wrote:
Hammersmith harrier wrote:This is where you are failing to grasp the point, why does it matter why they moved up and in chasing the bigger money they were all invariably testing themselves outside of their comfort zone.

You missed the point again. Seriously, sleep on it.

Not sure why you think you have a monopoly on every debate where it's your way or no way, you make it up as you go along just to suit your particular argument on any of your chosen favourite boxers.

Sleep.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:28 am

Have you been caught talking complete and utter hypocritical BS for the umpteenth time so are throwing your toys out the pram yet again.

What does Bob Mee think?

by hazharrison Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:30 am

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Have you been caught talking complete and utter hypocritical BS for the umpteenth time so are throwing your toys out the pram yet again.

What does Bob Mee think?

No.

Bob would agree.

Some of us have jobs to go to in the morning.

by Sponsored content

Andre Ward

Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward

Re: Andre Ward