21 Years On Does Anyone Crack Ring List?

In 1994, Steve Farhood put together the following all-time list by division. If we accept the list for what it is, 21 years on, which modern fighters crack the top five? Does anyone survive at super middleweight?

Heavyweight

Muhammad Ali
Joe Louis
Jack Johnson
Rocky Marciano
Jack Dempsey

Cruiserweight

Evander Holyfield
Dwight Qawi
Carlos DeLeon
Ossie Ocasio
Orlin Norris

Light heavyweight

Ezzard Charles
Archie Moore
Bob Foster
Gene Tunney
Tommy Loughran

Super Middleweight

Chong-Pal Park
Sugar Ray Leonard
Thomas Hearns
James Toney
Michael Nunn

Middleweight

Sugar Ray Robinson
Carlos Monzon
Harry Greb
Stanley Ketchel
Marvin Hagler

Jr Middleweights

Thomas Hearns
Mike McCallum
Koichi Wajima
Wilfred Benitez
Julian Jackson

Welterweight

Henry Armstrong
Sugar Ray Robinson
Sugar Ray Leonard
Barney Ross
Jimmy McLarnin

Jr Welterweights

Julio Cesar Chavez
Aaron Pryor
Barney Ross
Antonio Cervantes
Jackie (Kid) Berg

Lightweight

Roberto Duran
Benny Leonard
Joe Gans
Tony Canzoneri
Ike Williams

Jr Lightweight

Alexis Arguello
Julio Cesar Chavez
Azumah Nelson
Flash Elorde
Alfredo Escalera

Featherweight

Willie Pep
Terry McGovern
Abe Attell
Sandy Saddler
Salvador Sanchez

Jr Featherweight

Wilfredo Gomez
Jeff Fenech
Sergio Victor Palma
Kennedy McKinney
Victor Callejas

Bantamweight

Carlos Zarate
Eder Jofre
Ruben Olivares
Manuel Ortiz
Panama Al Brown

Jr Bantamweight

Khaosai Galaxy
Gilberto Roman
Jiro Watanabe
Sung-Kil Moon
Rafael Orono

Flyweight

Jimmy Wilde
Miguel Canto
Pascual Perez
Frankie Genaro
Benny Lynch

Jr Flyweight

Michael Carbajal
Jung-Koo Chang
Yoko Gushiken
Myung Woo Yuh
Hilario Zapata

Strawweight

Ricardo Lopez
Phalan Lukmingkwan
Bong Jun Kim
Chana Porpaoin
Hiroki Ioka

I imagine 168 now goes:

Roy Jones
Joe Calzaghe
Andre Ward
Carl Froch
Mikkel Kessler

As one of boxing's seminal historical figures, is there room for the 'Barbados Demon' Joe Walcott (1890-1911) at welterweight? Nailed on top five man at the weight for me.

But your question is rather which modern fighters might crack the list?


Zaghie and Froch and Jones nailed on I would guess at super middle off the top of my head.

Could Hopkins replace any of those names at middleweight? Possibly , but not quite for me. Much tougher division to crack than Super Middle.

There must be room for May/Pac(regardless of what happens in the superfight,) but the question is at what weight? Probably somewhere at a weight lower than welter in both cases.

And in answer to the other question, could any of those names at super middle survive? I think the answer has to be a resounding 'no.' Possibly Toney but he's more 5-10 on achievements for me.

Herman Jaeger wrote:As one of boxing's seminal historical figures, is there room for the 'Barbados Demon' Joe Walcott (1890-1911) at welterweight? Nailed on top five man at the weight for me.

But your question is rather which modern fighters might crack the list?


Zaghie and Froch and Jones nailed on I would guess at super middle off the top of my head.

Could Hopkins replace any of those names at middleweight? Possibly , but not quite for me. Much tougher division to crack than Super Middle.

There must be room for May/Pac(regardless of what happens in the superfight,) but the question is at what weight? Probably somewhere at a weight lower than welter in both cases.

And in answer to the other question, could any of those names at super middle survive? I think the answer has to be a resounding 'no.' Possibly Toney but he's more 5-10 on achievements for me.

Floyd would be top 2-3 at junior lightweight. There's an argument for him at top spot there (but he's probably second).

Super bantamweight is wide open for Morales, Barrera, Pacquiao etc.

And I forgot Andre Ward, the Son of God, who just might one day knock Jones off.

Forgot Morales, Barrera too.

Haye at cruiserweight? Or Nelson? Makes me puke.

Haye in at Cruiser, not sure if Jones Jr is a top five Light-Heavy per second but he'd be above Loughran in my opinion.

Going purely on 168 exploits I'd have Benn taking Leonard's place. Needless to say that Calzaghe and Ward take Park and Hearns' spots there as well. Hopkins takes Ketchel's spot at Middleweight for me, too. Norris and Wright would be my #3 and #4 Light-Middles so out go Wajima and Jackson.

Tszyu has a claim to a top five spot at Light-Welter. Whitaker had left 135 lb by 1994 but he was still pound for pound number one until about 1996 and he's easily top five (top three for me) at Lightweight. Canzoneri loses his place for me. Mayweather obviously challenges for top spot at Super-Featherweight now, so it's goodbye to Escalera. Of the Super-Bantams Farhood has listed only Gomez is safe as Morales and Barrera certainly take their place there now, with Donaire and Rigondeaux in the frame, too.

Darchinyan unified at 115 and never lost those titles which easily makes him one of the top three at that weight, and at 108 Gonzalez should probably outrank Carbajal. Sorjaturong reigned for a long time after beating the unified champ in Gonzalez too, so he's another must at Light-Flyweight.

Rosendo Alvarez could be in there at both Strawweight and Light-Flyweight, and I'd say that Roman Gonzalez has already done enough to be included in both of those divisions, too. Last but not least, Ivan Calderon, probably a solid number two to Lopez at 105 lb.

88Chris05 wrote:Haye in at Cruiser, not sure if Jones Jr is a top five Light-Heavy per second but he'd be above Loughran in my opinion.

Going purely on 168 exploits I'd have Benn taking Leonard's place. Needless to say that Calzaghe and Ward take Park and Hearns' spots there as well. Hopkins takes Ketchel's spot at Middleweight for me, too. Norris and Wright would be my #3 and #4 Light-Middles so out go Wajima and Jackson.

Tszyu has a claim to a top five spot at Light-Welter. Whitaker had left 135 lb by 1994 but he was still pound for pound number one until about 1996 and he's easily top five (top three for me) at Lightweight. Canzoneri loses his place for me. Mayweather obviously challenges for top spot at Super-Featherweight now, so it's goodbye to Escalera. Of the Super-Bantams Farhood has listed only Gomez is safe as Morales and Barrera certainly take their place there now, with Donaire and Rigondeaux in the frame, too.

Darchinyan unified at 115 and never lost those titles which easily makes him one of the top three at that weight, and at 108 Gonzalez should probably outrank Carbajal. Sorjaturong reigned for a long time after beating the unified champ in Gonzalez too, so he's another must at Light-Flyweight.

Rosendo Alvarez could be in there at both Strawweight and Light-Flyweight, and I'd say that Roman Gonzalez has already done enough to be included in both of those divisions, too. Last but not least, Ivan Calderon, probably a solid number two to Lopez at 105 lb.

You'd have Calzaghe, Ward and Benn over Jones at 168?

Not sure Hopkins cracks the top five bearing in mind the guy at five (if we assume Farhood's rankings stay the same).

Not sure about Darchinyan either - think I'd have Montiel over Vic (and not sure either makes the cut).

Arce and Mijares alone make Darchinyan comfortably above Montiel at 115lbs, will admit I had to check the weights on Boxrec as keeping track of who fought whom where is near on impossible below Featherweight.

The issue with that Hopkins argument is that he should be above Ketchel and the fact Farhood bizarrely but predictably has Hagler below him shouldn't alter that.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Arce and Mijares alone make Darchinyan comfortably above Montiel at 115lbs, will admit I had to check the weights on Boxrec as keeping track of who fought whom where is near on impossible below Featherweight.

The issue with that Hopkins argument is that he should be above Ketchel and the fact Farhood bizarrely but predictably has Hagler below him shouldn't alter that.

Arce? Everyone whipped Arce. Vic only had around five fights at 115 didn't he? Montiel had two title reigns and got way more done. There's not a lot in it but I don't think either crack the top five.

My perception of Montiel is that for the early part of his career he was happy defending his WBO titles against the second tier while Darchinyan was facing the elite fairly consistently. Do agree that there's not a lot in it but the Mijares knockout which was beautiful separates them.

When we talk about Vic Dar, Montiel, Donaire, Arce, Mijares etc. it's very hard to pinpoint a division as they all moved up and down too regularly to cement themselves at one weight. All of them are cracking fighters and if only the higher weights followed their lead in getting almost every single fight made, not a ducker between them.

Vic went 4-0-1; Montiel was something like 14-1. I'd give him the nod.

Four wins just isn't enough to rank in the top five all time.

hazharrison wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:Going purely on 168 exploits I'd have Benn taking Leonard's place. Needless to say that Calzaghe and Ward take Park and Hearns' spots there as well. Hopkins takes Ketchel's spot at Middleweight for me, too. Norris and Wright would be my #3 and #4 Light-Middles so out go Wajima and Jackson.

You'd have Calzaghe, Ward and Benn over Jones at 168?

Not sure Hopkins cracks the top five bearing in mind the guy at five (if we assume Farhood's rankings stay the same).

Benn above Jones? Behave! I'm not working on the assumption that Farhood's rankings stay the same, Haz, seeing as most people naturally are likely to disagree with them. I'm just talking about top fives in general. Depending on what you like, Calzaghe and Ward could conceivably be placed ahead of Jones at Super-Middle given that they were 'career' 168 pounders and nobody could really have a strop about it, but not a great deal of doubt in my mind that Jones is the best fighter (ignoring stats or how long each man was at the weight) to have graced Super-Middleweight so far in the division's history and starts a healthy favourite over the rest of them.

I think Hopkins is just about a top five Middle. The three guys I'd put ahead of him every time are Greb, Monzon and Hagler. Outside of that, Robinson and Ketchel are the other guys I'd generally have in the frame. I think the case for Robinson to be above Hopkins at a 160 pounder is a compelling one based on how a post-prime Robinson fared against Fullmer (I thought he was pretty unlucky not to come away with better than a draw in their third bout to go along with that stunning knockout win in their second) and the fact that he was still the best fighter on the planet for his first two reigns as champion at Middle. But unfortunately I think Ketchel was just taken too early in his prime for me to put him above Benard. I appreciate that Hopkins was beaten by Jones, but after that he basically did every single thing he could reasonably be expected to do in the division for a decade.

Ketchel's wins over Papke were excellent but I feel he has a touch of the James Dean about him too, with people often seduced by the fact that he was taken at a young age and was such a phenomenal puncher. I'd give Hopkins the advantage in terms of legacy and achievements at the weight.

My gut feeling was that Hopkins probably replaces Ketchel but didn't want to upset Haz.

Those other four middles look cast iron.

Holmes and Lewis both crack top 5 at HW for my money, Whittaker displaces Williams at LW.

Herman Jaeger wrote:My gut feeling was that Hopkins probably replaces Ketchel but didn't want to upset Haz.

Those other four middles look cast iron.

Ha! Gotta love Ketchel man but I'll concede that Hopkins belongs above him (JUST NOT HAGLER!!).

Lewis slipped my mind a bit in terms of potential top fivers who arrived / peaked from 1994 onwards, to be honest. Wouldn't have him in a top five personally but I imagine plenty would. Wonder if this list was done before November in 1994, as that was the month that Foreman reigned again twenty years after losing to Ali in Zaire? Obviously Foreman in overall terms was no post-'94 fighter but the Moorer win elevated his standing somewhat.

88Chris05 wrote:Lewis slipped my mind a bit in terms of potential top fivers who arrived / peaked from 1994 onwards, to be honest. Wouldn't have him in a top five personally but I imagine plenty would. Wonder if this list was done before November in 1994, as that was the month that Foreman reigned again twenty years after losing to Ali in Zaire? Obviously Foreman in overall terms was no post-'94 fighter but the Moorer win elevated his standing somewhat.

Probably before Chris. I'm sure Ring Mags were always behind (and usually a couple of months out of date by the time they reached Blighty).

I wouldn't have Lewis in my Top 5 list..........

But If Dempsey is at 5...............I'll stick Lewis at 4..........

Interesting that Farhood has Robinson as his top Middleweight here. Seems to me that until the turn of the century Robinson had a lot more support as the greatest Middle ever than we've come to expect now. Along with Farhood, Harry Mullan's edition of the World Encyclopedia of Boxing was first published in 1999 and Robinson's chapter opened with the words, "There are not enough superlatives in a thesaurus to do justice to Sugar Ray Robinson, the ego-driven genius who was the greatest Middleweight of all time, and very probably the greatest Welterweight, too." That same year, Ring Magazine named him as their 'Middleweight of the Century' as well.

I tend to feel that, historically speaking, Robinson has been a shade overrated as a Middleweight, the belief being that because he's the consensus all-time number one irrespective of weight and because he was the pound for pound king as he stepped up from Welter to Middle that he must automatically have been the greatest and untouchable there, too. His record as a 160 pounder is still exceptional and makes him a serious top five contender, but I'll be damned before I put a guy who only won just over half of his fifteen world title fights at Middle in front of a guy like Monzon who won all fifteen of his outright.

A few of those losses came when Robinson was long in the tooth of course and his legacy purely at Middleweight is probably built more on what he did when he was past-prime rather than in it, because his against-the-odds rematch wins over Basilio and Fullmer were outstanding. But I tend to think that anything which came before his initial retirement in 1952 is still a peak Robinson and even then, once he'd stepped up to Middle I think that between them Van Dam and Turpin had highlighted that he wasn't quite the same marvel at 160 as he'd been at 147 (if he's the clear number one in any division it's Welter - Mullan got it the wrong way round!).

I think based on the problems you see Robinson experiencing on film as a Middleweight he wouldn't rate number one in a head-to-head sense, either. Again, it's Welter where he'd hold that distinction as realistically the only guys at 147 you'd think were evens or only very marginal underdogs against him would be Leonard and Hearns, whereas the rest would be firm underdogs (doesn't mean they couldn't have conceivably beaten him, of course).

Unbelievable Welter, top of the pile pound for pound, but not a real candidate for the number one spot at Middleweight, for me.

I think Pea is a good shout to displace Ike Williams too.

Herman Jaeger wrote:I think Pea has a good shout to displace Ike Williams too.

And Gans. And Benny. And Duran.....

Maybe in a parallel universe where he didn't send half the audience to sleep Chris.

I could have Pea third or fourth. Interchangeable with Gans behind Leonard and Duran. I like Leonard for top spot but I think most would say Duran.

Canzoneri displaced to fifth.

You're a cruel man sometimes, Hammersmith.

To be honest I think it gets badly over-played how supposedly 'boring' Whitaker was as a Lightweight. Although they were primarily boxing clinics, the Haugen and Ramirez (II) fights did have more than a whiff of 'beatdown' about them as well even though Whitaker was only a moderate hitter, and he showed he could slug and be the outright aggressor against Uncle Roger and Paez, too. His days as Welterweight produced a few more low-key fights as he trimmed down some of his attacking arsenal and concentrated more on controlling bigger guys with the jab to ensure not getting hit, granted, although the McGirt and Chavez fights are a reminder of the somewhat underrated offensive fighter he could be.

Anyway, I think Pea is a serious candidate to the number one spot at 135 along with Duran and Leonard, albeit last time I thought about it I had him third in that group. But I change my mind quite regularly on that issue depending on my mood. Can appreciate that I'm in a minority on that front, though, as most have Duran and Leonard a little ahead of Whitaker, with Gans the more likely imposter on the top two places. Hey ho.

The Duran-Leonard debate in that respect is always a great one. As I said earlier, I have a hard time separating the two both at Lightweight and pound for pound. Might be because I was watching Leonard's first fight with Lew Tendler the other day (the Newspaper Decision one, great performance by Leonard and worth a watch for anyone who hasn't seen it as it has about thirty-one of the thirty-six minutes of action, and at least something from every round), who knows, but today I have an urge to put Benny on top, but if you ask me tomorrow I'd probably say Duran.

If Pea had a longer reign at lightweight then that could put him in contention for tops. Head to head who's to say he wouldn't school Duran? Although, just to counter that, you'd have to say Duran's pressure(at lightweight) could be even more intense than that of Chavez. Duran and Leonard had so many more fights and remained dominant throughout. That gives them the edge for me. Their greater longevity swings it.

I have that issue in the loft somewhere but I'm sure he gives a lot of credence to a fighter's social impact - hence Dempsey, Johnson etc.

Herman Jaeger wrote:If Pea had a longer reign at lightweight then that could put him in contention for tops. Head to head who's to say he wouldn't school Duran? Although, just to counter that, you'd have to say Duran's pressure(at lightweight) could be even more intense than that of Chavez. Duran and Leonard had so many more fights and remained dominant throughout. That gives them the edge for me. Their greater longevity swings it.

Suspect a lot of people would make a similar argument, Herman, but I think using his lack of longevity (in relative terms of course) compared to Leonard or Duran at Lightweight isn't totally fair on Whitaker, really. All three of them (Leonard, Duran and Whitaker) took care of all business at Lightweight before retiring / moving up in weight at the end of the day - I don't think Pea should effectively be docked points just for doing it in fewer fights than they did.

Leonard fought a huge number of fights against the best assortment of guys that any Lightweight champion has faced to be fair, but many of them were Newspaper Decision wins which weren't observed under full championship conditions. The fact that he went 26-6-3 against Welsh, Tendler, Britton, Kilbane, Dundee, Kansas, Ritchie, White, Mitchell, Bartfield, Moran and Ted 'Kid' Lewis in his career is still amazing though, with or without the No Decision rule. Similarly, De Jesus winning the WBC title in 1976 gave Duran a big reason to stick around a bit longer and add to however many defences he'd made of his WBA belt by that stage - he had a burning desire to unify, and was locked at 1-1 with the other champion who was a rival on both a personal and professional level. He needed that extra time at the weight to get that done.

On the other hand, by late 1991 (last title defence) or early 1992 (when he vacated the belts) Whitaker didn't really have any reason to stick around and rack up more defences. He'd systematically unified the WBC, WBA and IBF belts, made a few defences as undisputed champion, cleaned out all of the recognisable names at Lightweight and shut out the leading Super-Featherweight in the world (and one of the best ever) in Nelson on top of all that - there was just nothing left. So he moved up for bigger fights and new, tougher challenges.

De la Hoya didn't challenge for a Lightweight title until the best part of three years after Whitaker's last defence at the weight, and Mosley didn't get there until 1997 - and that's how far you have to go along the timeline before you can find a couple of Lightweights who would have even given Whitaker a decent argument. I guess Pea could have stayed put to get his numbers as Lightweight champion in to that Leonard and Duran kind of league, but that would have meant largely pointless rematches against the likes of Pendleton and Paez, or a string of uninspiring mandatories such as Gamache, Parisi etc.

Would another half-dozen of those kind of fights really have been enough to convince anyone that he deserved to be mentioned in the same breath as Leonard or Duran if they didn't think it already? I have my doubts. Instead, with all the titles sewn up and nobody to really give him a fight, I imagine that public opinions on Whitaker's career and opposition might have been pretty similar to the ones that Jones had levelled at him at 175 in the late nineties / early 2000s - and as we know, Roy came in for plenty of criticism and many felt that the guys he was facing were just too overmatched to really add any weight to his legacy.

Whittaker is a product of the modern era...

He wouldn't be on the list If he'd fought thirty years earlier because promoters would have chased him out of town....

Stinker...............But Top 5 for sure..

Would think that Norris must be better than Wajima at 154. The super-bantams can all be re-written after Gomez - loads of contenders from the modern era there. Floyd (definitely) and Manny (arguably) have strong claims at 130, although I'd likely keep Alexis at the very top. Super-middles have blossomed since Farhood's list. None of his top 5 would be there now. Whitaker at lightweight - obvious; Roy Jones at 175 a possibility - I have him at 6, personally, but could hardly argue if someone wanted to swap him with someone like Foster. Hopkins gets in at 5 at 160, as does Darchinyan at 115. The absence of Humberto Gonzalez at 108 is a joke in a list in which Carbajal sits at number 1.

Few other maybes, but those are the ones that seem cast-iron to me.

The Hearns-McCallum argument at Light-Middleweight is always an interesting one. Norris just had a couple too many shock losses to break in to the top two at 154, and though I'd probably take Winky to beat McCallum peak for peak he didn't quite have the names to put him at a Hearns or McCallum-type level once he'd shrugged off the disappointments of the Vasquez, Simon and Vargas (dodgy decision) fights and became kingpin at the weight.

Hearns certainly beat a far superior fighter (Benitez) to lift his version of the title than McCallum did (Mannion) but outside of that an argument could be made that McCallum, as well as having a couple more defences, maybe took care of a better collective group while champion. As a Light-Middleweight Jackson was a hell of a lot more dangerous than Duran, and his (McCallum's) systematic taking apart of Milton McCrory was my favourite performance of the 'Bodysnatcher.' A real dissection. He also succeeded where Hearns failed in stopping Minchello, albeit he had the luxury of a 13th round which Tommy didn't. Away from that, Kalule and Curry on Mike's ledger compare pretty well to Medal, Sutherland and Hutchings on Tommy's.

I guess a reasonable tie-breaker would be who you'd back to win a 154 lb showdown between them between 1984 and 1986....And I have a problem deciding on that one, too.

I think the Curry that lost to McCallum beats Benitez at 154...........

Sharpest I'd ever seen the Cobra that night....since Stafford........

Not sure about that, Truss.

Curry gave McCallum problems early on but that wasn't unusual for Mike. McCrory gave him problems early doors as well but eventually got sussed and taken apart. Curry was looking good but as I've said before, I don't think he was giving McCallum the same kind of clowning that you do. I thought McCallum was warming to the task a bit in the third (probably still a Curry round) and definitely won the fourth. But that's a small quibble. Benitez looked completely at home as a 154 pounder and his performance against Hope was pretty brilliant. Hearns had to box out of his skin and completely forget about knocking Benitez out when they fought to get the win, and even then I thought it was a pretty competitive fight. Think it would have been asking a bit much for the post-Honeyghan version of Curry to beat Benitez....If we'd have seen him as a Light-Middleweight before Lloyd beat him I'd almost certainly feel a bit more confident.

Never seen the Stafford blowout, but my personal favourite performance by Curry was the beating he gave Colin Jones. I watched Curry's maiden world title fight against Hwan not too long ago, and when you compare the two fights you can see how much Curry had improved even in that time span. He showed plenty of promise against Hwan but by the time he came over to the UK to hammer Jones you could see how much Curry's defence had improved, how much more comfortable he was fighting right in at close quarters and how he'd developed a nasty streak and willingness to sit down on his shots and combinations, rather than the singles and counters he concentrated on in his earlier days.

By the time of the Jones and McCrory fights, he really did look like the complete fighter. Against Jones he was on the front foot, right in front of a big-time puncher and hardly took a half-telling shot, just hitting him with an array of shots and making him pay every time he missed. Fantastic fluidity and balance to his boxing.

88Chris05 wrote:Not sure about that, Truss.

Curry gave McCallum problems early on but that wasn't unusual for Mike. McCrory gave him problems early doors as well but eventually got sussed and taken apart. Curry was looking good but as I've said before, I don't think he was giving McCallum the same kind of clowning that you do. I thought McCallum was warming to the task a bit in the third (probably still a Curry round) and definitely won the fourth. But that's a small quibble. Benitez looked completely at home as a 154 pounder and his performance against Hope was pretty brilliant. Hearns had to box out of his skin and completely forget about knocking Benitez out when they fought to get the win, and even then I thought it was a pretty competitive fight. Think it would have been asking a bit much for the post-Honeyghan version of Curry to beat Benitez....If we'd have seen him as a Light-Middleweight before Lloyd beat him I'd almost certainly feel a bit more confident.

Never seen the Stafford blowout, but my personal favourite performance by Curry was the beating he gave Colin Jones. I watched Curry's maiden world title fight against Hwan not too long ago, and when you compare the two fights you can see how much Curry had improved even in that time span. He showed plenty of promise against Hwan but by the time he came over to the UK to hammer Jones you could see how much Curry's defence had improved, how much more comfortable he was fighting right in at close quarters and how he'd developed a nasty streak and willingness to sit down on his shots and combinations, rather than the singles and counters he concentrated on in his earlier days.

By the time of the Jones and McCrory fights, he really did look like the complete fighter. Against Jones he was on the front foot, right in front of a big-time puncher and hardly took a half-telling shot, just hitting him with an array of shots and making him pay every time he missed. Fantastic fluidity and balance to his boxing.

One of the best boxing masterclass I've ever seen..................."Not unusual for Mike" ...........Nearly hit the deck in the second..

I'm talking about Mccallum - Curry which fight are you talking about ??

Maybe these fights look different on youtube...

Too everything for a 154 pound Benitez..

Mccallum commented on how technically gifted he was..........Maybe you should tell him It wasn't anything unusual..

Everyone commented on Curry's technical ability. That doesn't automatically mean he was giving McCallum the beating of a lifetime. Whatever "boxing masterclass" Curry handed out only lasted two rounds. Hey, if you gave him the third and fourth as well then fair enough, but don't see how they'd be seen as clear rounds or how you could argue that McCallum wasn't even getting a sniff in them.

The fight was competitive before the knockout in my opinion and McCallum showed signs of coming in to it in the couple of rounds which went before.

The knockout was against the general run of play in rounds one to four but you're talking as if McCallum was on the verge of being stopped or had totally given up on trying to box and was just winging in desperate shots with his eyes closed in the hope that he'd get lucky.

Benitez couldn't even beat Curry's brother Mate..

And I said so many nice things about your boy Don above as well, Truss....

Never saw it as quite the one sided beat down you had it truss. Curry was ahead for sure, but I see it more like Chris.

All rendered irrelevant when he forgot to duck.

Chilling knockout

he was hit so hard he thought it was the Police and put his hands up as he hit the ground.

Take the mcallum and mcrory fights and don was on either end of the 80's signature ko's.

Aye the MM knockout was the most beautiful knockout i've ever seen first the knockdown with the punch thrown in anticipation of the opportunity presenting itself then the savage cross to end proceedings after the ref had chosen rather callously to let him continue

Yeh mixed feelings on it. The left hook knock down is as sweet as it gets.

How did reg describe the right hand? 'Curry just helped himself to a piece of mcrory' or words to that effect. A bit sickening.

Damn I miss reg. now we get nick effing halling.