Julio Cesar Chavez isn't a top 50 boxer of all time

Tyson barely makes a top 15 for HW list, yet alone amongst all boxers. He's not superior to Chavez.

Canelo will be there by end of career, his resume is great, even if im not a fan of the person. Holyfield - YES he makes it, absolutely. Ward, on talent alone makes it, but on what he's done, despite great, did miss a lot of his prime with promotional issues.
Tyson beat far better fighters than Chavez. Past-prime Holmes, Spinks, and Berbick shit on Roger Mayweather, Frankie Randall (should've lost to him in the rematch), and Camacho.

Why do people keep parroting Roger Mayweather as some great win? Just because he's a Mayweather?

The man wasn't elite on his best day.
 
What about Holyfield?
Canelo?
Tyson?
Ward?

Those four guys wouldn't make the top 50 cut on most "expert" (aka nostalgics who rank Greb and Armstrong ahead of Ali) lists, yet I think they're all superior fighters to Chavez.
I don't really know how to argue that he's top 50 without seeing a top 50 list and that sounds like a lot of work. How about showing me a top 50 with Chavez in it and arguing against his place there and who should replace him?
 
Last edited:
Tyson beat far better fighters than Chavez. Past-prime Holmes, Spinks, and Berbick shit on Roger Mayweather, Frankie Randall (should've lost to him in the rematch), and Camacho.

Why do people keep parroting Roger Mayweather as some great win? Just because he's a Mayweather?

The man wasn't elite on his best day.
Tyson wasn't even the 1st or 2nd best HW of his own damn era, he was the third. He has the worst loss of any boxer in HISTORY on his record during his "prime" even though his physical prime lasted longer. Tyson also mentally quit in every major fight that wasn't going his way. You cant say that about Chavez(see Taylor 1).
 
Salvador Sanchez is the greatest Mexican boxer ever.
And Him and Chavez are both top 50.
 
Tyson wasn't even the 1st or 2nd best HW of his own damn era, he was the third. He has the worst loss of any boxer in HISTORY on his record during his "prime" even though his physical prime lasted longer. Tyson also mentally quit in every major fight that wasn't going his way. You cant say that about Chavez(see Taylor 1).
I don't agree with the "quit" thing. He just gave back to Evander. Other than that, he just got legitimately stopped a couple of times against elite level fighters (obviously prime or close to, we're talking here).
 
Tyson beat far better fighters than Chavez. Past-prime Holmes, Spinks, and Berbick shit on Roger Mayweather, Frankie Randall (should've lost to him in the rematch), and Camacho.

<LikeReally5>

This of comparing both records is flat-out terrible.
 
Tyson beat far better fighters than Chavez. Past-prime Holmes, Spinks, and Berbick shit on Roger Mayweather, Frankie Randall (should've lost to him in the rematch), and Camacho.

Why do people keep parroting Roger Mayweather as some great win? Just because he's a Mayweather?

The man wasn't elite on his best day.
lmao get the fuck outta here. you’re listing berbick on tyson’s resume over guys like bruno, ruddock, bone crusher, the truth because you heard he beat ali at some point in his career, i guarantee it.

camacho is a hall-of-famer by the way
 
The ring just wrote an article claiming he was the best Mexican boxer of all time. I have a hard time agreeing with that personally but he’s definitely in the discussion. He is probably the most popular Mexican in boxing history though. Definitely top 50 probably top 20. Padded resumes are par for the course.
 
The ring just wrote an article claiming he was the best Mexican boxer of all time. I have a hard time agreeing with that personally but he’s definitely in the discussion. He is probably the most popular Mexican in boxing history though. Definitely top 50 probably top 20. Padded resumes are par for the course.
who’s better? marquez? finito? sanchez? chavez had a more dominant career than marquez and beat better names than finito and sanchez.
 
The ring just wrote an article claiming he was the best Mexican boxer of all time. I have a hard time agreeing with that personally but he’s definitely in the discussion. He is probably the most popular Mexican in boxing history though. Definitely top 50 probably top 20. Padded resumes are par for the course.
There’s still a lot of opportunities to lose, padded or not; when you fight 5 times a year. Also when you turn pro at 17, you have to figure, you’re talking 20-30 fights just preparing you as a pro if you hadn’t had an amateur background
 
What about Holyfield?
Canelo?
Tyson?
Ward?

Those four guys wouldn't make the top 50 cut on most "expert" (aka nostalgics who rank Greb and Armstrong ahead of Ali) lists, yet I think they're all superior fighters to Chavez.

I don't rate Greb so highly in my personal estimations out of nostalgia, and not least of which because I was born long after he died. I rate Greb highly (don't know where or ahead or behind of who), because of his resume, peak work, longevity, skill in rematches, and his ability to handle bigger fighters. He has literally no ducks and fought blacks and whites (winning very often) when he didn't have to.
 
who’s better? marquez? finito? sanchez? chavez had a more dominant career than marquez and beat better names than finito and sanchez.
Honestly I’m not sure if I have a concrete opinion. Like I said, he is definitely in the running but, Mexican boxing has a very rich history. I find it hard to say that he is the clear number one. I’m not really a fan of a end all be all structured all time rankings. I tend to have a few guys that I consider the best and I don’t really like to marry myself to the idea that one is clearly the best when there’s no way to really substantiate that besides a personal bias. I have a hard time with p4p rankings for the same reason.
 
Everyone with that many fights has a bunch of poor opponents on their record. No one has fought 100 amazing all time greats in a row.

I don't think there is a great boxer in history that I haven't seen someone online discrediting everything they have ever done. If I was to listen to them all I would think there has never actually been a good boxer before.
 
I honestly think you'd have a hard time finding 49 guys who were clearly better than Chavez. I mean, I wouldn't have him in my top 10 or even 20 but from there, you're not going to find many guys that you can say are clearly better than Chavez.

I'd argue it's even weird to not have him in your top 20. but I guess I could see it.
 
Tyson beat far better fighters than Chavez. Past-prime Holmes, Spinks, and Berbick shit on Roger Mayweather, Frankie Randall (should've lost to him in the rematch), and Camacho.

Why do people keep parroting Roger Mayweather as some great win? Just because he's a Mayweather?

The man wasn't elite on his best day.
Berbick > Camacho?

Come on son...
 
I thought Whitaker beat him.

watch the Taylor fights. I don’t get the controversy in the stoppage, regardless, if you doubt JCC’s great after that I can’t help you.
 
Berbick > Camacho?

Come on son...
berbick is definitely the only other name he recognized on tyson’s record. there’s no possible explanation to list him as a good win. berbick did fuck all. i think you could argue JCC’s win over camacho is better than any of tyson’s.
 
berbick is definitely the only other name he recognized on tyson’s record. there’s no possible explanation to list him as a good win. berbick did fuck all. i think you could argue JCC’s win over camacho is better than any of tyson’s.
Beat Ali.
 
Back
Top