Do fighters always fight prime opposition?

By Boxing News - 07/24/2015 - Comments

dela43545By Robert “Big Moe” Elmore: When somebody says, Salvador Sanchez, Alexis Arguello, Muhammad Ali, or Joe Louis, people automatically shout the word “greatness”. But the phrase “he fought the best in their prime” always comes out as well. That phrase can be played either way by people depending on the outcome of a fight or the person.

There have been fights that have taken place when both fighters were in their primes. Sometimes it takes place when one or the other is in their prime. And sometimes a fight takes place when neither fighter are in their primes. What some fail to acknowledge by default or on purpose is that there is always a shift in boxing where one era is escorted out and another is brought in. Some might remain around and continue to fight through another era. But what is considered in or out of their prime? Is it the number of fights one fighter has had or the number of wars a fighter has been through? I think it’s a little bit of both. If a fighter has had over 50 plus fights then I check the quality of his opponents. If he has had fewer fights then I check the quantity. I will discuss all three phases of in prime out of prime fights.

Both fighters in their prime. This simply means that both fighters are at their peak. They are not war ridden, relatively young in age, and their skills are still in tip top shape. In 1981, when Ray Leonard and Thomas Hearns fought in their epic unification match, both fighters were in their primes. They were young and their skills hadn’t even begun to erode. Leonard was 25 and Hearns was 23. Mike Tyson and Tony Tucker fought for the undisputed heavyweight title in 1987. Tyson was 21 and Tucker was 29. Then we have the case of when one fighter is in his prime and the other is not. In 1991, George Foreman was well past his prime when he challenged then 29 year old Evander Holyfield for the heavyweight crown. Holyfield was the crisper sharper puncher while Foreman, who was much slower, showed that he could still compete somewhat at 42 years of age.

Oscar De La Hoya battled Julio Cesar Chavez for Chavez’s junior welterweight title. Chavez was well over 100 fights while Oscar was just in 22nd professional fight. Then we have the case of both fighters not being in their prime.

Ray Leonard took on Roberto Duran in their rubber match in 1989. Both fighters were nowhere in their primes. What sold the fight, was their names alone. Bernard Hopkins and Roy Jones is another example. Hopkins had slowed a great deal, but his fundamentals is what kept him in the game so long. Jones mostly relied on his legs for defense early in his career. When his legs went, we began to see Jones getting caught with punches and knocked out with punches that wouldn’t have landed early in his career (check his fights with Antonio Tarver and Glen Johnson) There are a lot more examples but I’ll stop here. Like I stated above, age, number of fights, ONLY come to fore when a fighter loses. I don’t believe a fighter just ages over night or during a fight. If a fighter is past his prime and decides to fight, then he his past his prime going into the fight, during the fight, and afterward. Same scenario goes for a younger fighter.

The excuse for the young fighter can be “he’s not experienced enough or too green”. Still that fighter steps into the ring believing that his skill set is good enough to compete with a more experienced fighter. The excuses that are made all depend on the particular fan you talk to. Each of us has a favorite fighter (s) that we will go to war and maintain that stance to very end. My suggestion is support your stance with facts and leave the emotions at home. Make no mistake, there will AWLAYS be one the three happening as long as boxing exists. One, both fighters are in their prime. Two, one fighter is in their prime while the other is not. And three, neither fighter is in their prime.



Comments are closed.