IMO Tapia wins convicingly.. People tend to forget because Tapia stayed around ALLOT longer then he should have and all the drug stories, that a young prime Tapia was one of the all time Greats for his divisions 115/118 ... I would not count him out against anyone in those 2 weight classes - especially 115 .. Tapia was really undefeated for something like the first 55 fights of his career. He was ripped off in the Ayala fighs and even then he was past it but I still thought he won both fights ... His first real loss was to MAB and we all know he was WAY past it he was by then and 2 weight classes up at 126. Against a prime Tapia , Wayne would give it a go but he is just out classed in this fight ...
I agree that Tapia was a great fighter but there is no he'd get the KO against wayne. I think a SD either way.
I was just guessing at what the odds might've been. Back then, no one really knew how tough McCullough was. Everyone thought he'd be out in three rounds against Hamed.
Of course I'd favor Tapia by decision. Both these guys are(were) light punching iron chined warriors in their time so a ko is highly unlikely.
McCullough gets his ears boxed off. He was nowhere near Tapia's level in anything other than toughness and chins.
Neither were the boxer that Tapia was, who was so good he could fight you in different ways. The guy was an amazing talent when his head was screwed on right. Also it's one of the most ridiculous things ever to compare Hamed boxing somebody to Tapia doing it. Hamed was not a boxer, he was just an unorthodox fighter. Remember it was Hamhead who wound up getting his ears boxed off by MAB. Also Eric was often too undisciplined to consistently box anybody. He too often threw caution to the wind and just tried to take people's heads off.
I would probably pick Tapia by decision, but... well, I'll have to rewatch some of his old fights before confirming how much I disagree with some of the posts here. Danny Romero's one of my all-time favorites, so given their rivalry back then it's possible that I viewed Tapia's career with a jaded opinion. But I most certainly do not recall him knocking everyone out at 115, at least not anyone notable. Nor do I believe that he was jobbed in the first Ayala fight. Rematch, hell yeah. First fight? Close fight, damn good fight, but Ayala won and I always thought Showtime's call that night was along the lines of most of their other broadcasts back then - heavily slanted toward the house fighter (which Tapia was at the time). I agree with TKO that it would be a split decision either way, but having to pick one or the other, I'd pick Tapia. Again, a difficult thing to admit, as I was as big of a McCullough fan as I was of Romero. But while it would be high contact throughout, Tapia was probably a little too slick for Wayne to brawl his way to victory.
I not a Naz fan far from it, I thought he was a joke, but he hit hard and he was a featherweight, Wayne was super ban, but he couldnt knock wayne out, either could Eric. Im not taking anything away from Tapia both of these guys a two of my favorites, but Tapia aint knocking Wayne out anymore than wayne's knocking him out !!
Tapia beat the crap out of Ayala in the rematch ... Tapia was also past prime at that point ... To this day I can't see how he did not win that fight. I don't blame him for just leaving and walking away after the scores were announced ..
You're arguing with me for something I never said. The reason I said "Tapia boxes his ears off" and not, "Tapia KO's him" is for the very reasons you just gave. Wayne had a top 5 chin and Tapia didn't hit nearly as hard as Hamed or Eric.
I agree. I was just as pissed as he was. He dominated Ayala in the rematch with good boxing and defense and he was robbed because he just got out of his contract with Arum I believe and didn't reup. However Jake was saying Tapia lost the first fight and that one was so close it could have gone either way. Even Tapia didn't complain about the first fight. I do disagree that Wayne gets even one judge to give him a win against Tapia. That fight would be a UD for Tapia.
Nah, Tapia did bitch about the decision in the first fight. He thought that he was going to get Jim Grey to toe the company line and say it was a bullshit decision, but Grey flat out said that Paulie won the fight. That's when Johnny changed his tune. That loss was legit. If we're going to say that the Barrera fight was his first true loss and count controversial losses as wins, then you also have to consider his close, controversial wins as well. The Medina fight was a horrible decision; nobody in the arena thought Tapia won that night, and I still can't find anyone outside of hardcore Tapia fans who thought he deserved the nod. His bantamweight titlie winning effort over Nana Konadu was close and could've gone either way. I thought it was a closer fight than Ayala-Tapia I. I thought he lost against Chapo Vargas (was on the undercard of DLH-Ruelas). He escaped with a draw which is good enough. The only judge who had him winning the fight was Dalby Shirley. Nuff said. His fight w/ Arthur Johnson could've easily gone either way. So, keep that in mind the next time we want to claim Tapia should've been undefeated through 55 fights.
I never said he should've been undefeated ... I was just more or less making a point that the MAB fight was the first time he "clearly" lost a fight ... :nono: Don't be a tough guy with me Jake ... ghfjdgs ghfjdgs You're just a Tapia hater ...:1:
:jester: I hope so, cos I thought Tapia lost two, maybe three rounds tops of that fight...including a shitty knockdown call. I'm no Tapia fan, but I didn't think the fight was really even competetive. Konadu basically sold his title, because his effort was pretty non-existant. I do agree on the Vargas, Johnson and Medina fights though. I actually think his loss to Medina is one of the worst decisions of all-time. Tapia got beaten by a country mile and looked like the slow, fat, old, former flyweight that he was. Tapia was a pretty good fighter, but his stakeholders are the kind that have been divided by both love and hate for the guy. He's one of those fighters that has very little middle ground. Was he nearly as good as his 48-0 (or whatever it was) indicated? Nowhere near. But he was also a borderline P4P fighter for around 3 or 4 years. Thats no slouch.
:jester: ... no, I just haven't watched the fight since the night it happened. And like I said, back then, Tapia was losing any close fight on my scorecard. Did I mention that I had Tapia-Romero a draw? :sulkoff:
