Errol Spence Jr. Seriously Injured In Car Crash

Sure he was.

A more complete technician.

 

Madness.

Carlos Ortiz was a magnificent fighter. The third greatest fighter of the 60s behind Ali and Jofre.

 

Thats madmess

 

More strategically versatile, maybe but Chavez was just as good in fundamental technique and more importantly was stronger, tougher, had a lot more power and was way more consistent

And third greatest fighter of the 60s? Jose Napoles was in his prime in the 60s, Ruben Olivares, Emile Griffith, Luis Rodriguez, Bob Foster, Dick Tiger, Gene Fullmer the first part of the decade... Carlos Ortiz was great, for sure and belongs in that group but I can't see him a clear head above any of it, that's a formidable list of fighters... the sixties was tough; most of the divisions were stacked with quality during the decade... there's probably two dozen very good fighters that never won a belt whose primes took place largely in the 1960s

 

You mentioned Napoles, Foster, and Olivares when all three of those guys didn't capture their respective titles until the VERY end of the 60s. And Gene Fullmer? LOL. Gene Fullmer couldn't shine Carlos Ortiz's shoes, and you know it. We're talking about all time great technician versus a tough guy with some craft.

I'm the biggest Bob Foster fan on this forum, but Ortiz's resume is just a lot deeper than Bob's - although, I think of Bob as the more formidable H2H force.

Ortiz basically dominated lightweight for the better part of the decade.

He's criminally underrated, in my mind.

This is not to discredit Chavez, who was an AWESOME fucking fighter in his prime, but Ortiz on his best day was just more compete. Could box masterfully from the outside, was a SUPERB infighter, had one of the best jabs in history, could throw every single punch in the book in beautiful combinations, and had and an insanely high ring IQ.

Chavez was not as versatile as Ortiz.

 

Put it this way, Ortiz is higher on the 60s list than Chavez is on the 80s list.

I have Chavez at 5th in terms of 80s greatness - behind Leonard, Hagler, Spinks, and Tyson.

I suppose you could make a case for him over Mike (although I more value the fact that Mike unified and cleaned out the division in dominant fashion), but he would have zero case over Leonard, Hagler, and Spinks.

 

Fullmer's comp > Ortiz's ... by a lot ... you're hung up on wether it looks pretty or not ... Fullmer was never going to win any style points but the guy fought a murderer's row of opposition and usually won

Holy fuck you overrate Ortiz

Dominated lightweight? He lost his title twice, each time to guys that wouldn't beat Julio Cesar Chavez in a million fucking years!

As for the "when they won titles" argument, look at how many fights Jose Napoles fought and won in the 1960s and the people he won them against... then look at the 1970s and tell me which decade constitutes his peak ... do the same for Foster... Even Olivares (who fought far more in the 70s than either of those two)

The idea that Ortiz is some no-brainer choice over any of these people (plus the ones I mentioned previously) just isn't objectively supported

 

Chavez would beat Ortiz h2h

 

The time/titles argument is especially weird because your number one and two of the decade each didn't fight for three years of the decade!

 

Yup

 

No.

 

Insanity

 

I'm not overrating Ortiz. He and Gomez are the consensus top 2 best/greatest PR fighters in history (you can have either at #1) and considering all the greats Puerto Rico has produced, I'd say that puts him in pretty high standing.

 

There's a few guys I'd pick over Chavez H2H, even if they weren't as great.

Another example would be Cervantes - I'd pick him to beat Chavez H2H at 140.

 

Mexico has had more and where does Chavez rank there?

 

The answer is obviously Chavez. You're not getting it. I'm not disputing who was greater. I'm saying Ortiz would win H2H.

 

And I'm disagreeing... how's he going to do it? He can't hurt him and it's not like Ortiz was some cutie like Pernell Whitaker or a speed demon like Taylor... Ortiz was very good at lots of things and that versatility made him a great fighter but I can't see any one strategy he's good enough at to beat Chavez in a fight

 

Who said those were the ONLY two ways to beat Chavez?

I'll tell you how he could do it: He would outbox Chavez from the outside, as even you gotta admit that Chavez has ZERO case for being better than Ortiz from the outside. And he would hold his own on the inside, as he was a terrific infighter.

I might add, Ortiz was EXTREMELY physically strong at lightweight. Strong enough that Chavez wouldn't bull him around the way he did Rosario.

Rosario was a murderous puncher, but he wasn't especially physically strong. Ortiz was. And Ortiz had as high a ring IQ as any fighter.

The debate will probably go nowhere - neither one of us will give up our stance, but I truly believe Ortiz would have won a competitive, yet deserved decision.

Chavez's style suits Ortiz well.

A far worse style for Ortiz to have to face would be Whitaker or Floyd.

 

There's not a chance in hell that Ortiz boxes well enough from the outside to beat Chavez ... who the fuck did he do that against that is in any way comparable to a guy like Chavez?

And Chavez is clearly stronger than Ortiz

 

I could counter and say the same goddamn thing about Chavez!

What fighter did he ever beat as good as Ortiz?

And don't say Taylor, cause Taylor was hardly better than Ortiz - faster, sure. But Meldrick was a dumbass. Hardly a thinking technician like Ortiz.

I guess it comes down to which you prefer - Chavez's beatdown of Rosario, or Ortiz's white washing of Brown for 15 rounds.

And no, Chavez was not "clearly" stronger at all. While looks aren't everything - Ortiz was built like a brick shit house at lightweight. He physically man handled most guys, and there's no evidence that Chavez has a clear edge on him in that department.

 

BTW - Ortiz should have a win over Locche on his already impressive resume. But all accounts, it was a terrible robbery, and Ortiz beat Locche easily.

 

You said Ortiz would beat Chavez by adopting an "outside" strategy... who the fuck did he do that against? You make it sound like Ortiz is Ken Buchanan dancing around jabbing

I know how Chavez will fight ... just like everybody knew the plays Lombardi's Packers were going to run, the problem was stopping them ... You honestly think Ortiz can box more effectively on the outside than say someone like Roger Mayweather? That wasn't his game at all ...

 

I said he would beat Chavez by COMBINING an outside game with holding his own on the inside, which he would - Ortiz was an outstanding infighter, it would not be a one sided affair in close.

You're doing a combination of underrating Ortiz and overrating Chavez.

Let's not act like Chavez fought murder's row.

I would concede to Duran beating Ortiz clearly, but sure as Hell not Chavez.

 

Only a clip, but this perfectly exhibits how much of machine a young Ortiz was. Look at how effective he was in close:

 

Oh, and to answer your question: Yes, Ortiz EASILY boxed better from the outside than the fucking diabetic Roger! Why is that even a question?

The FUCK did Roger ever prove?

Unless you think schooling Pazienza is as impressive as schooling Joe Brown.

 

Carlos Ortiz was not a better outside fighter than Roger Mayweather... you have to be kidding

He was a better fighter but he was not better at long range boxing than Mayweather

who was better at long range... Roberto Duran or Maurice Blocker?

 

Yes very

But Chavez ain't Len Matthews

 

Chavez would beat Ortiz by punching him hard in the face and body.

 

I like how this thread has turned from Herol Spencer not boxing (on PEDs) again...to an old-timers' Mythical Matchup argument.

 

Fightbeat. More hijackings than the Bader Meinhof Gruppe and Black September combined.