What are your favorite fights of all time?

MickFleetwood

Well? Over the course of boxing history we have been given some great wars from the likes of Bobby Chacon, Arturo Gatti, Matthew Saad Muhammad, etc.

Anyway. Name some of your favorite fights of all time! They don't have to be slug-fests, just your personal favorites.

Mine are, in no order:
1 - Alexis Arguello vs. Ray Mancini
2 - Bobby Chacon vs. Ray Mancini
3 - Manny Pacquiao vs. Erik Morales I
4 - Bobby Chacon vs. Cornelius Boza-Edwards II
5 - Miguel Cotto vs. Antonio Margarito I
6 - Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Thomas Hearns I
7 - Alexis Arguello vs. Andy Ganigan
8 - Bernard Hopkins vs. Felix Trinidad
9 - Ernesto Marcel vs. Alexis Arguello
10 - Paul Williams vs. Sergio Martinez I

Of course, there are many more that I love, but those are in general my favorite.

FTA69

Toney vs Jirov
Dunne vs Cordoba

MickFleetwood

I thought of them also. Cracking battles.

Duran vs. Leonard I
Duran vs. Barkley
Ali vs. Frazier I
Ali vs. Frazier III
Ali vs. Foreman
Foreman vs. Lyle
Holyfield vs. Qawi I
Holyfield vs. Dokes
Holyfield vs. Bowe I
Holyfield vs. Cooper
Lewis vs. Klitschko

gaztop1979

Rios v Alvarado I and II
Especially II
Bradley v Provodnikov
Gatti v Ward Trilogy

MickFleetwood

Ah, Bradley-Provodnikov. Fight of the Year so far, in my opinion. Brilliant scrap.

seklly

The Barrera v Morales trilogy still stands out in my memory

The Pheasant

Ali vs. Williams
Dempsey vs. Willard
Ali vs. Frazier I and III
Marciano vs. Walcott II

Dick phelan

Holyfield vs Bowe I

Dunne vs Cordoba

Gatti vs Ward I

Hatton vs Tszyu

Leonard vs Hearns I

Rios vs Alvarado II

Coralles vs Castillo I

mewe

The thrilla in manilla for me-purely sentimental Love Ali and especially his battles with Frazier

FTA69

Ali's fights, mainly because I was given a box set of them as a kid and watched them a million times.

Castillo Corrales 1 was fantastic.

Barrera vs Hamed
Ward vs Froch - both of these are well worth watching for the boxing lessons alone.

Jack Johnson is also fantastic to watch, the footage I have seen anyway.

slapbangwallop

Some great fights listed here, but I'll tell you what, Dunne-Cordoba takes some beatin for excitement.

MickFleetwood

Anybody ever see Carlos Monzon's first bout against the Italian Nino Benvenuti? Matthysse-Olusegun is another nice little fight that took place quite recently.

On Jack Johnson; I feel he was a step ahead of the competition at the time, but I feel he's overrated legacy-wise. He never did do all that much as a champion except beat a washed up Jim Jeffries.

Henno30

Just off the top of my head:

Bobby Chacon vs Bazooka Limon IV
James Toney vs Vassiliy Jirov
Juan Manuel Marquez vs Juan Diaz I
Juan Manuel Marquez vs Manny Pacquiao II
Felix Trinidad vs Fernando Vargas
Oscar De La Hoya vs Shane Mosley I
Marvin Hagler vs John Mugabi
Roberto Duran vs Ray Leonard I
Miguel Cotto vs Antonio Margarito
Miguel Cotto vs Shane Mosley
Marco Antonio Barrera vs Erik Morales I
Marco Antonio Barrera vs Naseem Hamed
Sergio Martinez vs Paul Williams I
Arturo Gatti vs Mickey Ward I

In very recent times, Salido-Lopez II and Rios-Alvarado II would have to get a mention as well.

MickFleetwood

Barrera-McKinney, anybody?

Salido-Lopez II was an amazing battle. The ninth round IIRC was some round, wasn't it?

walshb

Nobody got Holyfield-Qawi 1, McGuigan-Cruz?

I loved Katsidis-Earl. Terrific back and forth slugfest.

You know, you would be hard pushed to beat Bowe-Holyfield 1. The HW division, two great men, in great condition, full at it and banging so heavy.

I loved Hearns-Leonard 1. One of the best WW fights ever. Two men at their peak at the weight to unify the division.

Toney-Nunn was an exceptional match. Such a varied display of skills from two polar opposite men. Serious high quality.

ThunderCat

seklly wrote: »

The Barrera v Morales trilogy still stands out in my memory

+1 My favourite as well. Such hatred between the two.

MickFleetwood

walshb wrote: »

Nobody got Holyfield-Qawi 1, McGuigan-Cruz?

I loved Katsidis-Earl. Terrific back and forth slugfest.

You know, you would be hard pushed to beat Bowe-Holyfield 1. The HW division, two great men, in great condition, full at it and banging so heavy.

I loved Hearns-Leonard 1. One of the best WW fights ever. Two men at their peak at the weight to unify the division.

Toney-Nunn was an exceptional match. Such a varied display of skills from two polar opposite men. Serious high quality.

I mentioned Holyfield-Qawi I, an absolutely insane fight.

walshb

MickFleetwood wrote: »

I mentioned Holyfield-Qawi I, an absolutely insane fight.

Lost out to McGuigan-Cruz as FOTY in 1986.

MickFleetwood

walshb wrote: »

Lost out to McGuigan-Cruz as FOTY in 1986.

I have never seen that one, unfortunately. Silly of me, I'll have to check it out sometime.

Ortiz-Berto? Mayweather-Chavez?

walshb

MickFleetwood wrote: »

I have never seen that one, unfortunately. Silly of me, I'll have to check it out sometime.

Ortiz-Berto? Mayweather-Chavez?

I liked both of them fights. Moreso Berto-Ortiz.

Henno30

MickFleetwood wrote: »

Salido-Lopez II was an amazing battle. The ninth round IIRC was some round, wasn't it?

Superb fight, didn't really get the attention it deserved in my opinion, but yeah, an utterly absorbing war. Round 8 was brilliant, Round 9 was off the charts.

Henno30

ThunderCat wrote: »

+1 My favourite as well. Such hatred between the two.

The animosity made it all the better

danbrosnan

Dunne vs Cordoba

Khan vs madania

darced

This post has been deleted.

tdv123

Gatti vs Ward 1 was just something else.

Chavez vs Taylor 1

The Barrera/Morales trilogy was great, two of the most skilled fighters of their generation just giving every they got.

Barrera vs Hammed not the most exciting fight but just loved Barrera schooling the "prince".

Pacquiao/Marquez trilogy.

MickFleetwood

Well, Pacquiao-Marquez isn't really a trilogy anymore.

walshb

Anyone got Moorer-Cooper? Cooper-Holyfield? Dokes-Holyfield was excellent!

MickFleetwood

I also mentioned Holyfield-Cooper, another great fight in Evander's collection. Holyfield-Dokes. Hell, even Holyfield-Foreman to a certain extent.

I also loved Ezzard Charles square off against Harold Johnson. Somewhat disputed decision, people thinking that Charles had won, but I had Johnson a close but clear victor. Not even the KD could secure the victory for Ez'.

MickFleetwood

Fenech-Villasana? Fighting Harada vs. Lionel Rose?

Rose and Fenech were two brilliant Aussie boxers. Love me some Jeff Fenech! I enjoyed Floyd Mayweather's fight against Miguel Cotto last year, plenty of skill, even if Miguel was a rather weak titlist at light-middleweight. I felt Floyd was going to stop Cotto in the twelfth when he had him hurt.

walshb

MickFleetwood wrote: »

I also mentioned Holyfield-Cooper, another great fight in Evander's collection. Holyfield-Dokes. Hell, even Holyfield-Foreman to a certain extent.

I also loved Ezzard Charles square off against Harold Johnson. Somewhat disputed decision, people thinking that Charles had won, but I had Johnson a close but clear victor. Not even the KD could secure the victory for Ez'.

I was tempted to mention Foreman-Holyfield. That really was a great scrap. I haven't seen the Charles-Johnson fight. Will watch that later.

MickFleetwood

walshb wrote: »

I was tempted to mention Foreman-Holyfield. That really was a great scrap. I haven't seen thr Charles-Johnosn fight. Will watch that later.

Charles-Johnson wasn't really a war, but it was a very interesting tactical battle and I definitely recommend it. Harold's jab was brilliant and he was fighting who I consider to be the greatest light-heavyweight of all time, even if he was past his best in Charles.

Only a ten-rounder, I think? The decision is disputed amongst a small minority, mainly Rocky Marciano fans who try to push the agenda that Charles wasn't past his best by saying they felt that Charles beat Johnson. The skill, craft, etc. Is all on display and it's a beauty to watch.

walshb

MickFleetwood wrote: »

Charles-Johnson wasn't really a war, but it was a very interesting tactical battle and I definitely recommend it. Harold's jab was brilliant and he was fighting who I consider to be the greatest light-heavyweight of all time, even if he was past his best in Charles.

Only a ten-rounder, I think? The decision is disputed amongst a small minority, mainly Rocky Marciano fans who try to push the agenda that Charles wasn't past his best by saying they felt that Charles beat Johnson. The skill, craft, etc. Is all on display and it's a beauty to watch.

So, similar to Groves-DeGale?;)

MickFleetwood

walshb wrote: »

So, similar to Groves-DeGale?;)

I get what you mean, but it's generally accepted among unbiased scorers that Johnson won the fight, whereas there is a strong case for DeGale. The overwhelming majority (that I've talked to) had it for DeGale, including a professional boxer.

MickFleetwood

Here it is in full. Very nice quality also. Could you imagine these two in the barren light-heavyweight division today?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXNTTDVw8Ug

gene_tunney

Audley Harrison vs David Haye
Danny Green vs Paul Briggs
Sonny Liston vs Muhammad Ali II
Freddie Flintoff vs Whatsthatguys Nameagain
Bernard Hopkins vs Everyone

MickFleetwood

gene_tunney wrote: »

Audley Harrison vs David Haye
Danny Green vs Paul Briggs
Sonny Liston vs Muhammad Ali II
Freddie Flintoff vs Whatsthatguys Nameagain
Bernard Hopkins vs Everyone

I love watching Hopkins, he's a master. :pac:

gene_tunney

MickFleetwood wrote: »

I love watching Hopkins, he's a master of spoiling. :pac:

MickFleetwood

gene_tunney wrote: »

48 years old and still beating ass, man.

gene_tunney

MickFleetwood wrote: »

48 years old and still beating ass, man.

I'm not denying he's effective. But we all saw what happened when he tangled with a true great.

MickFleetwood

gene_tunney wrote: »

I'm not denying he's effective. But we all saw what happened when he tangled with a true great.

You mean one of the very, very greatest fighters of all time in his prime? Yeah, we also saw what happened when Hopkins fought all-time greats in Trinidad and De La Hoya.

We continuously see his greatness, when even when he nears 50 he's still one of the best in the division. You don't have to love him, in fact, you don't have to like him. I understand that.

But you have to give him his dues, and the fact is, Bernard Hopkins is a living legend and one of the best middleweights of all time. And I loved several of his fights, such as against Felix Trinidad, Kelly Pavlik, Antwun Echols II, Glen Johnson, Tavoris Cloud, Jean Pascal I and II, etc.
Here's a nice excerpt on him from boxing.com, which I frequent daily.

#51 Bernard Hopkins (53-6-2)
“The Clock has worked in my favor.”
If you have time, watch this. It is footage of Bernard Hopkins’ unique 1997 stoppage of Glen Johnson. The first thing you will hear the commentator say is “Hopkins, relentless in attack.” For readers of a certain age, hearing this may come as something of a surprise. Sure, Hopkins burst into the mainstream with that brilliant knockout defeat over a favored Felix Trinidad in 2001 when he was still riding the coattails of this style, but it was his 2004 knockout of Oscar De La Hoya that really made him famous. By this time, Hopkins was training to master lions rather than to fight like one.
The defeat of Johnson represents the perfection of Bernard’s first stylings, namely those of an aggressively stalking box-puncher. On his toes on the outside, Hopkins flashes in fast hard punches and when he falls in, it is not to neutralize or stall but to flesh out his offense with infighting ability all but unequaled for his era. See him, on the bell for the ninth, make room for his own shots without giving up space for Johnson to retaliate. Hopkins is a hurting, points-gathering machine that is using physical and technical advantages to defeat his opponent. Look closely however, and you will see the genesis of the thinking style that would take him into the next decade and then the one after making him one of the few professionals to box in four. His control of range and his uncanny ability to read the machinations that control the ebb and flow of offense and defense are already at work. At 2:40 of the next he stands at range, hands up, flat-footed, he has dominated the round so far with stiff jabs and that is what Johnson expects, so Hopkins surprises him with a lead left hook to the body. Then he goes on walkabout, dancing on his toes, lashing out with a wide variety of punches against an unbeaten opponent that would one day be the champion at 175 lbs. Listen to the great Gil Clancy wax lyrical:
“Hopkins is just enjoying himself in there now. Doing anything he wants to do…just about anything you’ve seen a fighter do, Hopkins is doing in this fight…look at that feint…he feinted a right hand. His balance is so good Jim. That’s why he can do these things.”
Doesn’t that sound to you a little more like something a commentator would say about Roy Jones? Hopkins had an offense in those days that in no way compromised his defense because he was able to move back into the defensive envelope as fast as any fighter I have ever seen. If he felt something he didn’t like in the opponents offense, he would make a move, in or out, that would stymie that offense and this was the essence of his defining win over Felix Trinidad, crystalized in the one-handed parry and knockout punch he lands in the twelfth round to become the first man to stop Trinidad, too.
In an irony not infrequently seen in boxing, Hopkins in 2001 and 2004 won fights that brought him the fame he craved just as his body was beginning to let him down. Unlike, say, Ivan Calderon, he birthed a solution, a solution that had its genesis in the fights that immediately followed his one-sided loss to Roy Jones back in 1993, that bore fruit even as he moved into his forties. By this point, he had amassed twenty defenses of his IBF strap and unified the titles, unquestionably a lock for both the Hall of Fame and your average top ten middleweight list.
After dual losses—the second, very questionable—to the athletic but limited Jermain Taylor, Hopkins used his incredible skills at reverse engineering based on existing qualities that did not dominate his style to buy him victories over middleweight champion and pound-for-pounder Kelly Pavlik, 3-1 favorite and light-heavyweight supremo Antonio Tarver, thoroughly intimidated pound-for-pounder Winky Wright, the seventeen years younger Jean Pascal and very nearly pound-for-pounder Joe Calzaghe. The Calzaghe fight, in my opinion, represented the beginnings of a new genesis in Hopkins, one that relied upon absolute control of footwork, yes, partly his own in terms of economy, but more than that, the opponent’s. That saw its final resolution against Tavoris Cloud earlier this month. What is terrifying is that this latest incarnation may allow Hopkins to remain relevant into his fifties—and that would be amongst the most astonishing achievements in boxing history.
Of course, we have Archie Moore, rightly and inarguably lurking somewhere above Hopkins on this list but I think it must now be agreed that Hopkins is the man who has done the most to keep Time at bay in the boxing ring. When he says “the clock has worked in my favor,” what Hopkins means is that he has had the opportunity to gather information about the nature of himself and of boxing whilst iron discipline keeps total disintegration of his physical assets at bay; the result is as astonishing a career as has been seen in the modern era. Whilst losses to Dawson and Taylor, the best athletes he has faced in a boxing ring, is concerning, it is also true that Hopkins has continued to bounce back. He might continue to bounce back well into this decade.

gene_tunney

MickFleetwood wrote: »

You mean one of the very, very greatest fighters of all time in his prime? Yeah, we also saw what happened when Hopkins fought all-time greats in Trinidad and De La Hoya.

De la Hoya and Trinidad? Seriously? A middleweight against two welterweights.

MickFleetwood

gene_tunney wrote: »

De la Hoya and Trinidad? Seriously? A middleweight against two welterweights.

Why the "Seriously?" towards Trinidad? Undefeated at welterweight (besides the De La Hoya farce) moved up to 154, beat Reid, Thiam and then destroyed a 20-0 Fernando Vargas.

Then, up to middleweight, and all but tears William Joppy's head off, one of the best middle's in the world at the time, and he did it with ease.

He established himself as an ATG at welterweight, and a P4P warrior at 154 and 160 by virtually destroying and dominating everybody at the weights. He had been removed from welterweight by two years and four fights later. He was heavily favored not only to beat Hopkins, but demoralize him. 'Nard was considered an old cúnt back in '01; over a decade ago.

Bernard wasn't knocked out and battered from pillar to post like he was supposed to by this tiger, he instead put out one of the greatest performances of the twenty-first century against a young, confident, unbeaten lion.

As for De La Hoya, well, I agree, not exactly great boxer at middleweight. But one of the greats nonetheless, and he was stopped in nine.

walshb

Something that has always bugged me was the credit Hop gets for beating a blown up Trinidad, who by the way wasn't even a great WW. Yes, very good at his time, but loses convincingly to the greats like SRL/SRR and Hearns. Hop is a boiled down LHW. Trinidad did nothing at MW. Tailor made for Hopkins. Anyone think Trinidad gets a sniff against Hagler/Toney/Jones/Benn/Eubank/Nunn/McCallum, or even Collins? Because I don't. He loses to all, and to some by KO.

Oscar showed how vulnerable Trinidad was at WW. Yes, he lost, but he made Trinidad look quite pedestrian. Imagine SRL or Hearns in there at WW vs. Trinidad?

MickFleetwood

walshb wrote: »

Something that has always bugged me was the credit Hop gets for beating a blown up Trinidad, who by the way wasn't even a great WW. Yes, great at his time, but loses convincingly to the greats like SRL/SRR and Hearns. Hop is a boiled down LHW. Trinidad did nothing at MW. Tailor made for Hopkins. Anyone think Trinidad gets a sniff against Hagler/Toney/Jones/Benn/Eubank/Nunn/McCallum, or even Collins? Because I don't. He loses to all, and to some by KO.

There's about two or three people in welterweight history who don't lose convincingly to Leonard and Hearns. Nobody beats Robinson convincingly at welterweight, in fact, I don't think anybody beats him at all.

Trinidad was an all-time great, albeit on the lower end of the spectrum. He punched holes in a highly rated middleweight in William Joppy. Obviously if you match him up with actual great middleweights he gets his head caved in, but the fact is, he was supposed to win brutally and was viewed as one of the best fighters on the planet, and a definite top five at middleweight, if not top three at the time. It wasn't even close, and it was one of the best performances of my lifetime.

MickFleetwood

Anyway, we'll all fall into a debate about so and so, so I think it's best to nip this Hopkins-Trinidad shít in the bud.

Let's talk about the fights! Did you score that fight, walshb?

walshb

MickFleetwood wrote: »

There's about two or three people in welterweight history who don't lose convincingly to Leonard and Hearns. Nobody beats Robinson convincingly at welterweight, in fact, I don't think anybody beats him at all.

Trinidad was an all-time great, albeit on the lower end of the spectrum. He punched holes in a highly rated middleweight in William Joppy. Obviously if you match him up with actual great middleweights he gets his head caved in, but the fact is, he was supposed to win brutally and was viewed as one of the best fighters on the planet, and a definite top five at middleweight, if not top three at the time. It wasn't even close, and it was one of the best performances of my lifetime.

Joppy was a punch bag. Bottom line: Trinidad didn't suddenly become a great MW because he beat Joppy. Whoever favoured Tito vs, Hop was seriously devaluing the MW Hopkins. I wouldn't put Tito in the top 25 MWs in a fantasy tournament. Here's other names I would have to beat him at MW: Kalambay, Reggie Johnson, Tim Littles, Barkley, SRL, Montell Griffin, Watson, Monzon, Bennie Briscoe.

Oh, and G man and The Hawk murder him at MW.

MickFleetwood

walshb wrote: »

Joppy was a punch bag. Bottom line: Trinidad didn't suddenly become a great MW because he beat Joppy. Whoever favoured Tito vs, Hop was seriously devaluing the MW Hopkins. I wouldn't put Tito in the top 25 MWs in a fantasy tournament. Here's other names I would have to beat him at MW: Kalambay, Reggie Johnson, Tim Littles, Barkley, SRL, Montell Griffin, Watson, Monzon, Bennie Briscoe.

Obviously Tito loses horribly to them. Especially Kalambay.

But he was rated by his contemporaries as among the best at the time, so I can't in all honesty speak in hindsight about how he was **** at the weight. Joppy was a good enough punch bag to be rated amongst the best.

walshb

MickFleetwood wrote: »

Obviously Tito loses horribly to them. Especially Kalambay.

But he was rated by his contemporaries as among the best at the time, so I can't in all honesty speak in hindsight about how he was **** at the weight. Joppy was a good enough punch bag to be rated amongst the best.

Not saying he wasn't rated high at the time. I am saying that IMO the credit Hop gets given for the win is way OTT. It was a big big MW against a ww-lmw. And, we're not talking about a Hearns or SRL moving to MW, guys with serious skills. It's Trinidad. Skilled, but not near the versatility to hang with Hop.

MickFleetwood

Well, the general public didn't think so.

gene_tunney

If Hopkins was a great he would have utilised his comprehensive size advantage and knocked Trinidad out. Hopkins has no heart, he doesn't take fights unless he knows he can win them.

MickFleetwood

gene_tunney wrote: »

If Hopkins was a great he would have utilised his comprehensive size advantage and knocked Trinidad out. Hopkins has no heart, he doesn't take fights unless he knows he can win them.

Ah, so you haven't actually seen the Tito fight then.

Because Felix was knocked out.