I think that's a common misconception that a hard hitter wouldn't be able to go some distanceOriginally Posted by Black Hand
No dog will win multiple times without meeting one where he will need some time to figure it out
I think that's a common misconception that a hard hitter wouldn't be able to go some distance
No dog will win multiple times without meeting one where he will need some time to figure it out
This is a whole other can of worms, but I hear you, and I agree with you ... in a sense.
If you're looking to produce a multi-winning animal, many of them are the type to "blow things out of the water" ... however many of the greatest ever were NOT.
Robert T (a 9xW who beat two 4xWs and two Grand Champions) was a steady, distance animal.
Gr Ch Buck (a 7xW, who beat two Champions and a Gr Ch) was a steady, distance animal.
Gr Ch MelonHead (a 14xW, which is the most wins of any modern animal) was a steady, distance animal.
Oftentimes, the dog that CAN run over a lesser dog early canNOT do that to a truly tough, truly rounded animal ... and so winds up losing in the end.
To give you an idea of what I am talking about, when compared to humans, I prefer to breed a dog like Marvin Hagler, Julio Cesar Chavez, or Muhammad Ali.
None of these guys was known as a 1-punch KO artist. None of these guys swarmed their opponents.
And none of the awesome punchers in their weight class could just run out there and KO these guys either.
Hagler, Chavez, and Ali were too tough, too smart, and too good to let ANYone do that to them. Ever.
In fact (in their primes) ALL of these guys beat fighters who hit harder than they did by being superior ALL AROUND fighters, by pacing themselves, and by gradually INcreasing the pressure as the fight wore on ... rather than burning themselves up early. And they were ALL considered superior fighters to the heavier one-punch KO artists of their day. And they beat virtually all of them too.
That is the kind of dog I try to breed ... a dog you "can't" just blow out of the water, one that is too tough to do that to, and who has A LOT of skills to draw from, and the intelligence and absolute determination to get you at some point.
Jack
I would disagree on the comparison between Ali, Hagler and Chavez. In my opinion Ali is the polar opposite of Hagler and Chavez.
Hagler was a devastating puncher 62 wins with 52 kos. He put constant pressure from the start to the end and most of his kos were in the first half of the fight! Take two or three flush punches from Hagler and it was lights out. He was not a puncher like Liston, Jackson or Tyson but at the time he was probably the hardest punching middleweight.
Chavez was a pressure fighter too but not near the level of Hagler. He too was a very hard puncher not the one punch ko specialist but still he is the total opposite of Ali.
Both Hagler and Chavez were devastating body punchers while Ali has went entire fights without throwing one shot to the body.
What I would say these fighters had in common was their durability their heart and their chins.
Now I don't usually compare dogs to human athletes/fighters but if I were to I would not use boxers I would choose to compare them to amateur wrestlers, Jiu Jitsu practitioners or MMA fighters. These dogs are in constant contact when hunting where as boxers are rarely in contact like this except in a clinch.
So if I were to choose a fighter to explain the type of dogs I like I would say Cain Velasquez. Constant pressure can finish fast but if not he can go the distance and still win.
If I were to choose a boxer then yes Hagler would be the top of the list without doubt!
I understand Hagler and Chavez had different styles from Ali. You're right.
I didn't mean for my point to be lost in arguing human fighters; but to be made that (1) NONE of these fighters was a 1-punch KO artist; (2) NO ONE could just walk out there and steamroll these fighters; and (3) these fighters BEAT harder punchers than they were.
My point was I prefer these types of all-around, good, tough fighters (whether they be rock-durable pressure fighters, or rock-durable slick fighters) to "big punchers" that ultimately prove lacking in other departments, as is so often the case.
Jack
PS: To say that Chavez was "not at the level" of Hagler is absolutely wrong. Chavez had a better record, and a higher-KO percentage at his best weight (Junior Lightweight) than Hagler. Chavez was absolutely on the same level, if not a higher level, pound-for-pound, than Hagler when both were in their primes. So too did Monzon. None of these fighters were 1-punch KO artists. All were authentically-tough, authentically-game, WELL ROUNDED fighters, that could stand up to anything that was thrown at them, never falter, and would systematically dismantle their opponents and get them in the end.
As a matter of fact, to quote Marvin Hagler as to why he was considered one of the greatest middleweights of all time, and yet not a 1-punch KO artist, he said:
"Oh, I don't try to get you out of there right away. I take my time with you. I give you an ass whipping, and I make sure you're not the same man when you get out of here as you were when you got in."
That statement right there has always stuck with me. It describes the kind of gradual thorough destruction I was talking about ... and, to me, is a ultimately a more brutal way to get defeated than by a one-punch KO.
Similarly, in the dogs, I think suffering a constant, thorough, progressive ass kicking ... where a dog gets better and better the longer it goes ... likewise describes an ultimately more thorough, more bruat way to truly beat a dog than by "a lucky bite," hold, hitting a bleeder, etc.
Jack
Yes in my opinion Chavez was not on Hagler's level, I believe if they were in the same weight class Hagler would have beat him. I think Chavez was hyped up from early on. His first 50 or so fights were against novices, he was awarded some dodgy decisions also. The fight against Whitaker was shocking, Whitaker outclassed him. Hagler was the type of fighter that no one could have outclassed.
I understand we all have our favorite fighters, Hagler is one of mine, Chavez is one of yours, we are going to speak up for them lol.
Ok back on the dogs. I agree, durability is one of the best traits a dog can have without a doubt. I do like a dog that gets it done quick but they must be able to stay in there if need be too. I am not talking about a dog that if he can't get it done quick he can't win.
At the end of the day no one wants to go home after hunting with a half dead dog so this is why I prefer a dog that gets the job done as quick as possible.
Just to clarify, I have nothing against dogs that get stronger as the show goes on and show their gameness in winning at the end, I love that but given a choice I would prefer to go home without having to see how game my dog is.
To each his own
Okay, we disagree then. Chavez was awesome at his weight. Simply awesome. Hagler is also among my favorites (that's why I listed him and quoted him).
You say Hagler was the type of fighter no one would have outclassed, I guess you forget how Leonard made him look silly
You see, this is where the art of thinking correctly comes into play
Hagler did lousy against an old, retired welterweight who was 13 lb lighter than he was, naturally at his best weight, yet Leonard (spent and retired) moved up to face Hagler and beat him ... yet you sing the praises of Hagler
So, while you point out the fact that Chavez struggled to fine a slick Whitaker, who was in his prime, you fail to understand it was CHAVEZ who moved up 10 lb to face Whitaker ... at his best weight!!!
You see, you're not thinking correctly. I mean, if you don't factor in things like this, weight, etc., then how can you make accurate statements? You can't.
Chavez was 87-0, and up 10 lb over his best weight, when faced Whitaker. That isn't "hype," buddy, that is one bad mofo.
Hagler was 62-2-2 when he faced the spent, naturally 13-lb smaller Leonard, who "bulked up" to face Hagler.
Chavez cleaned out his entire division, facing everybody who was anybody, and never lost.
Hagler was awesome, and cleaned out his division, but he did lose twice (avenging them), and then let a little bitty guy bitch-slap him for 12 rounds.
Hagler never once moved up ... because he knew he would have been in BIG trouble, trying to move up and face Michael Spinks ... as Chavez moved up and blew away Rosario, etc.
So think again on your "rating system"
Hell, had Chavez stayed at Junior Lightweight, I can't even begin to imagine him EVER losing to a little bitty guy coming up 10 lb to fight him ... no way.
Hagler is definitely one of my favorite fighters, which (again) is why I mentioned him and quoted him
But you are wrong about Chavez and not thinking correctly if you call that BEAST of a fighter (for his weight) "all hype" ...
Gameness and durability are THE backbone of what a bulldog should be ... and, of course, if you can build on that foundation and add things like speed, brains, mouth, finish, then I like that too
I understand. The flipside to that is, a dog that gets it done as quick as possible tends not to pace itself. That can be okay, if he's physically superior to his opponent. It will make him look real good.
However, dogs like this, when they face a "Hagler" (since you like him, lol), a dog that is every bit as strong and capable as it is, but who is a WALL, and CAN'T be steamrolled ... the barn-burner is NOT going to get it done early; they're just not.
And if they're not used to pacing themselves, and if they're not used to being in the trenches with an equal, this is usually why you see the "fast dog" quitting when they get in a war: they're not used to it and they don't handle it as well.
I didn't say I wanted to see my dogs get banged up. I said I like it when they're just able to stay out of trouble, nullify the attack, establish control ... and just pace themselves. They pour it on when they other lets up, and then really pour it on. I don't want my dog to be a stupid punching bag "that just scratches."Just to clarify, I have nothing against dogs that get stronger as the show goes on and show their gameness in winning at the end, I love that but given a choice I would prefer to go home without having to see how game my dog is.
To each his own
That is not what Hagler did, what Chavez did, or what Ali did, was it?
Did they just sit there and "scratch" with no skills? No.
So that is not what I want in a dog, either.
I want the dog to be gamer, tougher, stronger, and relentlessly dismantle ... I never said anything about "having to prove" their gameness.
I think Hagler was game as hell ... but I never really saw him have to prove it by "coming from behind" ... he proved it by how badly he wanted to win, by relentlessly demolishing his foes.
Hope that clarifies
Jack
Ok, I get what you are saying about the dogs and I agree but I never said that I only like a dog that can only barnstorm. I like a dog that can finish quick but can stay there if need be. Like Bulldoghistorian said it is a common misconception. For instance there was a dog once who breezed through schooling wrecking everything. First show did the same, second show met a dog who was close to his equal but the damage done at the start caught up with him in the end but that hunt was back and forth for 40 min. Even for a head dog you would have to have a fairly special one to avoid getting touched for an entire show. They don't come around too often. I like both types but if I choose the dog that has the best chance to finish early. That is just my preference.
Now on the boxing you could not be more wrong! If you think Leonard made Hagler look silly that is just plain wrong. I suggest you watch the fight again. Leonard basically tried to steal rounds in the last 30 seconds. Now he did win a number 3 or 4 of the first 6 rounds of that fight until Hagler decided to stop trying to box Leonard and begin to hunt him down. I thought Hagler won that fight but it could have went either way. Please watch that fight again and you will see what I mean. To say Leonard slapped Hagler silly is complete nonsense.
So if we are going to talk about making accurate statements and thinking correctly and factoring in weight etc how about the demands Leonard had for that Hagler fight. 12 rounds instead of 15, 10oz gloves instead of 8 and he wanted no smaller than a 20 ft ring.
Leonard was dying a death in that fight from the 5th round on. Hagler pummeled his body, hurt him several occasions. I am pretty sure if that was a 15 round fight Leonard would not have made it. Leonard was the pretty boy and he stole the rounds in the last 30 seconds!
You know that Goody Petronelli complained about an british judge that was supposed to judge that fight because he thought he would favor Leonard's boxing over Hagler's pressure. They had him replaced by a Mexican judge who scored the fight a ridiculous 118-110 for Leonard. The English judge scored it at home 115-113 for Hagler. Now had they not complained about that judge then Hagler would have been the winner.
Don't forget Leonard later went up in weight again to super middleweight and light heavy to win more titles. It is not that Hagler was huge and way too big for Leonard. A lot of fighters move up in weight as they get older to say that their proper weight is the weight they started at is not accurate either. You said Chavez moved up to face Whitaker, yes he did but not 13lbs. He was the champ at light welter and Whitaker the champ at welter so he moved up 7lb. Chavez was the bigger fighter and Whitaker also started out his career at super featherweight also.
Boxing is full of fighters that have moved up from their supposed best weight and doing better than ever. Pacman moved up 8 divisions and still doing it better than ever. Mayweather 5 divisions, Cotto 4 divisions, JMM 5 divisions, the list goes on and that is just current fighters. A fighters lowest weight is not always his best weight as evidenced by these fighters.
As I said to each their own, I think Hagler was a better fighter than Chavez you think otherwise that is fine by me.
I have said my piece on this, I have not typed this much in years, we can debate boxing until the cows come home but I think people have different views on it and when favorite fighters are involved no one is going to cave so on that note I am out
Okay, we agree (for the most part) on the dogs.
What I said was not plain wrong. You're just in plain denial.
I agree Hagler was the better man. Physically. And by a country mile. I also agree Leonard fought to steal the rounds, as opposed to trying to beat the man, Hagler, in a legitimate fighting effort. You're right again.
But Leonard was the smarter man and beat Hagler, mentally, before the fight even started by getting him to go along with setting the stage for this very thing to happen
I don't need to watch the fight again; I have it on tape and have seen it dozens of times. Everything you said is correct ... except you're still in denial. You even just finished saying, "I thought Hagler won but it could have went either way."
The point you can't seem to accept is Hagler let that happen. There was nothing he could do to KO a 13-lb smaller man. You yourself admit, "It could have gone either way," when Leonard was a little man bulked-up against the NATURALLY-BIGGER Hagler.
The other point you can't seem to accept is that Chavez fought a similar "pick em" fight with Whitaker, where it could have gone either way, but yet Chazez was the smaller man against the bigger Whitaker. You can't seem to get this through your head. You even LIED to get yourself to keep thinking Hagler is as good as Chavez (see below).
Again, you are too blind to see the truth of Hagler's mental inferiority in your own statements
You're right: Hagler gave in to all of Leonard's demands. That means he put Leonard's interests over his own interests. That is a loss right there, a mental loss. Hagler basically bent over and said, "Give it to me, Sugar."
That means HAGLER LOST BEFORE THE FIGHT STARTED. He gave in on every level.
I absolutely think Hagler would have won a 15 round fight, in a smaller ring, 8 oz gloves ... and so did Leonard ... and so Leonard got Hagler to cave in on everything. Hagler didn't even know HE was the Champion. Hagler should have said, "Fuck you chicken boy, you want my title, you come to fight me for it, not run from me.", but Hagler just said, "Yessuh, Mr. Leonard, anything you say, sah," which is why he lost the fight before it started.
Leonard was dying in the 11th and 12th only. He was doing fine with his ploy during MOST of the fight, however.
But still, in the end, Marvelous Marvin Hagler was out-negotiated, out-smarted, and out-maneuvered by a retired, 13-lb-smaller welterweight ... and there is no way in hell any "smaller man" would have done that to Chavez at junior lightweight. Chavez was UNDEFEATED at his best weight, and he had NEARLY 60 FIGHTS at junior lightweight. Period.
Blah-blah, has nothing to do with point of this discussion.
You're reaching and scrambling. I don't care how many weight divisions Chavez (or Whitaker) or Leonard moved up.
I am talking about WHERE THEY SPENT THE MOST TIME, THEIR PRIME WEIGHT CLASSES.
Chavez fought the first 55 fights of his career at 129 lb or less. That is basically DOUBLE the amount of fights Whitaker even had at that point. I mean, you can't even think clearly, if you want to talk about Chavez moving up to 147. That is 17 lb over his best weight!! For a little guy! Hell, Chavez could only come in at 142 it was so far off where he was supposed to be at 129. That is 13 lb over his best weight. Whitaker was at 145 also, 2 lb under the limit, and 3 lb heavier than where Chavez came in. Whitaker began his career at 135. That is also where he was at in the Olympics. What fucking planet do you live on to call Chavez "the bigger man" than Whitaker? I can't even have a discussion with someone this clueless. It's too frustrating, and it is a waste of my time.
Genius. Chavez fought nearly 60 fights at 129!
Do you know how many fights Whitaker had at that weight? ZERO.
Whitaker started his pro career at 135; he even weighed this much (and more) in the Olympics.
Wake TF up and stop making outrageously-false statements just to keep talking.
I can debate facts all day; I can't stand debating outright lies and stupidity.
You can't even put Hagler in the ballpark with Chavez, really. Hagler didn't equal Chavez' record at their respective divisions, and Hagler never came up at all. He NEVER ONCE moved up to risk getting his own ass demolished up at 175, which is proportionally less weight for a bigger man to move up. He wouldn't even go up to 168. And, in the end, Hagler lost his 160-lb title to a natural 147-lber, bulked up.
You are just in left field here ...
Three facts are true:
1) NONE of the fighters you mentioned had SIXTY FIGHTS at one weight ... before they moved up. (Except Hagler, who lost 3, and drew 2, while Chavez lost ZERO at his best weight.)
2) ANYone who fights that many fights "at one weight" has had THEIR PRIME YEARS at that weight.
3) Anyone who cannot see, understand, and acknowledge this is either a retard, or not being reasonable, one or the other.
You have shown, on many levels, that you're not thinking, and this evaluation would just be one more area.
You mean, said your peace (not piece).
You are entitled to have your favorites, as is anyone else. But, while you did say many true things (about Hagler/Leonard, the pre-fight terms, etc.), you also failed to see the weak mind it proved Hagler to have, by comparison to Leonard (and anyone else with a brain). And the statements you made about Chavez being "the bigger man" than Whitaker, were outright falsehoods.
I will gladly keep debating you on any boxing subject, so long as I don't have to field flat-out lies like "Chavez was the bigger man," when he was 3 lb smaller in the actual fight, and 5 lb smaller at their prime weights.
Jack
Jack you are wrong on so many things it is not even funny. I am in no mood for drawn out long winded posts as I have a yard to look after.
Ok you said Leonard slapped Hagler silly WRONG.
You said Chavez was in a pick um fight with Whitaker WRONG Chavez barely won 3 rounds.
You said Whitaker never fought at super featherweight WRONG.
Go and add up Chavez opponents records for his first 55 fights see what you come up with.
No need to throw insults Jack I am not here to take your abuse about spelling mistakes and other crap, seems to be a habit of yours when someone does not agree with what you say. Not a very good sign of character in my opinion.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
