PDA

View Full Version : Pipino Cuevas... how great was he?...



fatcity
06-07-2006, 04:50 PM
People seem to have differing opinions about how good Cuevas was... some think he was great others claim he was simply ordinary... I think the Hearns fight influences peoples judgement too much, Cuevas was better than that... taking nothing from Tommy I think Pipino was on the slide when he met the Hitman... burnt out even... in earlier fights he looked absolutely awesome... seemed to be literally punching holes in his opponents.... and his opposition was not exactly soft. Where do people here rate Cuevas, was he a great champion or rather a great puncher... personally I think he has to be rated 'great' as his power would give him a shout against all but the very elite of the 147 champions...

kikibalt
06-07-2006, 04:59 PM
http://i5.tinypic.com/121c11j.jpg

fatcity
06-07-2006, 05:06 PM
Great pics, thanks!... did you ever see Cuevas fight 'live'.....

kikibalt
06-07-2006, 05:14 PM
Yes a few time, I'll tell what I think later as right now I'm tying to eat.

Frank

starlingstomp
06-07-2006, 05:15 PM
A great puncher and a good Welterweight champion.I'd put him on a similar level to fighters like Danny Lopez and Hamed.

Palomino's very mediocre defence would have made a fight with Cuevas very intriguing, even though Carlos was clearly the superior champion in terms of all-round ability and toughness.

fatcity
06-07-2006, 05:23 PM
A great puncher and a good Welterweight champion.I'd put him on a similar level to fighters like Danny Lopez and Hamed.

Palomino's very mediocre defence would have made a fight with Cuevas very intriguing, even though Carlos was clearly the superior champion in terms of all-round ability and toughness.

I think Cuevas had more skill than he is generally credited for, but he was simply so tough he could walk through his opponents punches... maybe this is why he burnt out. By the time he fought Hearns he'd already had what amounted to a full career. I'd say Carlos had better boxing skills but Cuevas at his best had the better chin imo... Carlos could be dropped and was a slow starter... I think Pipino would have been too strong for him and would have koed him....

kikibalt
06-07-2006, 06:06 PM
I don't think Cuevas was a great fighter , he was good , he was a good puncher, but he lost to many fights to be call great, he lost 15 while winning 35, that's not a great record, he simply did't have the all around ability to be call great.

I seen him fight Felipe vaca, Hermen Montes, Roberto Duran and Andy Price , out of the four fights that I seen him fight live he lost three.

I also think that some of the fighters of years past that would beat him would be , Jose Napoles, Ernie " Red " Lopez, and Mando Muniz,

Today fighters that I think would beat him would be Shane Mosley, Oscar De La Hoya and Felix Trinidad.

If Hermen Montes can knock Cuevas out, I don't think the guys that I mention would have a hard time doing it too.

Frank

Chuck1052
06-07-2006, 08:04 PM
I think that Pipino Cuevas was an overrated fighter. Yes,
he had a powerful left-hook, but his boxing skills were
minimal and his chin wasn't nearly as good as Carlos
Palomino's. One reason that Cuevas had a number
of successful W.B.A. world welterweight title defenses
is that his management matched him very carefully.
As a result, I think that Palomino would have taken
Cuevas apart.

- Chuck Johnston

fatcity
06-07-2006, 08:33 PM
I don't think Cuevas was a great fighter , he was good , he was a good puncher, but he lost to many fights to be call great, he lost 15 while winning 35, that's not a great record, he simply did't have the all around ability to be call great.

I seen him fight Felipe vaca, Hermen Montes, Roberto Duran and Andy Price , out of the four fights that I seen him fight live he lost three.

I also think that some of the fighters of years past that would beat him would be , Jose Napoles, Ernie " Red " Lopez, and Mando Muniz,

Today fighters that I think would beat him would be Shane Mosley, Oscar De La Hoya and Felix Trinidad.

If Hermen Montes can knock Cuevas out, I don't think the guys that I mention would have a hard time doing it too.

Frank

I know what you mean, probably 'great' is an overused word, but don't you think that a lot of Pipinos defeats were either when he was still developing and then when he was on the slide... I think the Montes defeat was right at the end of his career when he didnt have much left, even against Duran he was pretty faded and hadnt fought in over a year I think. I think Napoles would beat him, but I think he'd be too strong for Delahoya and Mosley, though their speed would trouble him, I think he'd punch too hard for Trinidad as well, I remember a British fighter Kevin Leushing flooring Felix in their fight and if he could do that then Cuevas would ko him I think.

Mr E
06-07-2006, 08:48 PM
I think Cuevas was a great puncher but only a good fighter. But, man, could he hit!

I was at the Forum in Inglewood the night he nearly decapitated Scott "Golden Boy" Clark -- that big left hook that started Clark on his way out sounded like a freakin' bomb when it landed. KA-BOOM! Like hitting a steer with an axe.

kikibalt
06-07-2006, 08:53 PM
Well flooring Trinidad was no big thing , just about everybody did it , I think even my mom if she was alive could floor Trinidad, but no Cuevas was not that good of a fighter.
I agree with Chuck Johnston that Cuevas was overrate, I also agree that he had a powerful left-hook but you could see it coming a mile away.
It was not a short hook a la Tony Baltazar, I just had to put that in sorry.

Frank B.

kikibalt
06-07-2006, 09:09 PM
I think Cuevas was a great puncher but only a good fighter. But, man, could he hit!

I was at the Forum in Inglewood the night he nearly decapitated Scott "Golden Boy" Clark -- that big left hook that started Clark on his way out sounded like a freakin' bomb when it landed. KA-BOOM! Like hitting a steer with an axe.


Yes but he was fighting Scott Clark who was not even a good fighter.

Frank B.

kenmore
06-07-2006, 10:01 PM
My opinion --and it's speculative-- is that Cuevas, in his prime, may have been a vastly underrated fighter.

He is regarded by many experts as having been just a brute, a raw powerpunching, attacking machine who either kayoed his foes fast or got kayoed himself. But maybe there was more to him.

Watch Cuevas's two round kayo of Pete Ranzany to see what I mean.

Ranzany, by any measure, was an excellent stand-up, technical boxer. He was lightning fast, and threw hard, beautiful, long range combinations. To my amazement, in the Cuevas fight, though, it was Cuevas who was actually slipping Ranzany's punches expertly, deftly moving his head from side to side, and very quickly scoring with long-distance punches of his own, including counterpunches.

You have to watch the match in slow motion to see what I mean...but I really do believe that Cuevas was in the process of outslicking Ranzany before finishing the bout with the brutal, devastating combinations he threw in round two.

Very, very few welterweights were athletic enough to outslick Ranzany...so I believe Pepino may have had some hidden talents that we overlooked.

As for Cuevas's 15 career losses, it's important to remember that Cuevas turned pro at the age of 15, without much (or any amateur career). I think 6 of Cuevas's losses took place very early in his career, while he was still learning his trade. Most of the other losses took place when Pepino was over the hill, and I don't think they should be counted against him.

Kikibalt: what do you think about my view that Cuevas --potentially-- was underrated as a technical boxer? Am I nuts?

Thanks.

Olympic Auditorium
06-07-2006, 10:07 PM
Cuevas was a good champion.Theres a lot of fighters that lose some early fights n their career,and at the end of their career when there basically trying to get a last payday.I think Cuevas is a good example,when he fought Duran it was at 154 I beleive,Cuevas was done by then.Montes beat him at the end also.Napoles would beat Cuevas we know that,but Muniz I dont think so.Muniz would knocked out.

kikibalt
06-07-2006, 10:12 PM
Kenmore

No I don't think you're nuts but I think Imo that you're wrong, you see things one way and thats your right and I see things another way thats all.

Frank B.

kenmore
06-07-2006, 11:43 PM
Kenmore

No I don't think you're nuts but I think Imo that you're wrong, you see things one way and thats your right and I see things another way thats all.

Frank B.

I was curious about your opinion because I'm sure you would have had lots of exposure to Pepino in Southern California in the '70s.

Who would you have picked to win, assuming they both fought their best, in 1978: Cuevas or Carlos Palomino?

fatcity
06-08-2006, 05:43 AM
I disagree really that Cuevas fought poor opposition, a lot of his opponents also fought Leonard, Benitez and Hearns... look how Cuevas destroyed Ranzany and Espada and Weston... these were very good boxers...

fatcity
06-08-2006, 05:53 AM
My opinion --and it's speculative-- is that Cuevas, in his prime, may have been a vastly underrated fighter.

He is regarded by many experts as having been just a brute, a raw powerpunching, attacking machine who either kayoed his foes fast or got kayoed himself. But maybe there was more to him.

Watch Cuevas's two round kayo of Pete Ranzany to see what I mean.

Ranzany, by any measure, was an excellent stand-up, technical boxer. He was lightning fast, and threw hard, beautiful, long range combinations. To my amazement, in the Cuevas fight, though, it was Cuevas who was actually slipping Ranzany's punches expertly, deftly moving his head from side to side, and very quickly scoring with long-distance punches of his own, including counterpunches.

You have to watch the match in slow motion to see what I mean...but I really do believe that Cuevas was in the process of outslicking Ranzany before finishing the bout with the brutal, devastating combinations he threw in round two.

Very, very few welterweights were athletic enough to outslick Ranzany...so I believe Pepino may have had some hidden talents that we overlooked.

As for Cuevas's 15 career losses, it's important to remember that Cuevas turned pro at the age of 15, without much (or any amateur career). I think 6 of Cuevas's losses took place very early in his career, while he was still learning his trade. Most of the other losses took place when Pepino was over the hill, and I don't think they should be counted against him.

Kikibalt: what do you think about my view that Cuevas --potentially-- was underrated as a technical boxer? Am I nuts?

Thanks.

Maybe we're both nuts:D but you're saying what I've been trying to say!. Certainly Cuevas to me doesnt look the totally unskilled wild puncher that some describe him as. He had a way of getting to his opponents, he certainly slipped some punches along the way, and when he let the punches go they came from all angles. Watch the way he beat Weston, who was like Ranzany a very good boxer. A lot id made of Pipinos defeats but many of them were either when he was just starting out or on the way down... the Cuevas who beat Weston and the Cuevas who lost to Duran, Stafford, Hwang etc were very different fighters imo... its a bit like judging Benitez by his latter defeats.... so anyway, yeh, I agree with you that Pipino is underrated if anything, ...just my opinion though!:D :D

fatcity
06-08-2006, 05:58 AM
I should really know this but was Cuevas ever dropped before the Hearns fight?... I think it was the first time that he was dropped, or I may be getting my facts muddled!.
Also does anyone know if there were ever moves to make Cuevas vs Palomino?...

kikibalt
06-08-2006, 08:08 AM
I was curious about your opinion because I'm sure you would have had lots of exposure to Pepino in Southern California in the '70s.

Who would you have picked to win, assuming they both fought their best, in 1978: Cuevas or Carlos Palomino?

Carlos Palomino

Frank

BDeskins
06-08-2006, 10:15 AM
Do any of you guys know if Cuevas was ever knocked down prior to his bout with Hearns?

Zevl
06-08-2006, 10:21 AM
http://i5.tinypic.com/1230hub.jpg

Zevl
06-08-2006, 10:22 AM
http://i6.tinypic.com/1230i9u.jpg

Zevl
06-08-2006, 10:29 AM
Do any of you guys know if Cuevas was ever knocked down prior to his bout with Hearns?


I believe I read somewhere that the knockdown suffered against Hearns was the first of his career.

pendleton23
06-08-2006, 11:49 AM
How can Cuevas not be considerd great is a mystrey to me.
He defended his ttle I think 10 times against thwe contenders of his time.
He broke bones literally.
I agree he was not a great boxer in terms of skill but he was a great puncher and that alones earns him the right to be called great.Not too many people could hit the way he did.And he beat some outstanding boxers as well.
He crushed Weston who was a very good boxer.He ruined Espada.He walked right through Ranzany who was tough and skillful.
I think the Sheild's bout took alot out of him as he did sustain a lot of punishment.
I think by the time he fought Hearns he was a champion ready to be taken.Mix in Hearns power and skill and you have a mismatch.
Turning pro at such a young age is bound to damage you quickly.As Benitez about that.
When you talk about the greatest punchers at welterweight he makes the top ten easily.And throw in he was a champion who defended his title numerous times you have to say he was an all-time great.

Punchdrunk
06-08-2006, 12:57 PM
Cuevas was an electrifying, exciting WBA champ in his day. That cannot be taken from him. The ability to end a fight with one punch always will make any fighter attractive to fans. He possessed a hellacious left hook and combined with leaky defence, his appearences in the ring were a draw no matter the opponent. But agreat one? No, I echo Franks beliefs on this one.

BDeskins
06-08-2006, 01:15 PM
Trying to post a photo here:


http://i5.tinypic.com/1236wpj.jpg

Zevl
06-08-2006, 01:19 PM
Trying to post a photo here:


http://i5.tinypic.com/1236wpj.jpg


Nice picture BDeskins!

Zevl
06-08-2006, 01:22 PM
http://i6.tinypic.com/12378ci.jpg

kikibalt
06-08-2006, 01:23 PM
http://i5.tinypic.com/12378sw.jpg

pendleton23
06-08-2006, 06:05 PM
When Cuevas faced top competion such as Weston he crushed them.If he beat a bunch of nobodies then I would agree he had great power but basically couldn't defeat anybody worldclass.
I mean he destroyed Ranzany who was a damn good boxer and world class at that.

HE Grant
06-08-2006, 07:06 PM
Cuevas was very tough...I personally think he would have beaten Palamino .. he simply burnt out and then faced an exceptional welterweight in Hearns who was a terrible match up ...

kenmore
06-08-2006, 10:10 PM
Maybe we're both nuts:D but you're saying what I've been trying to say!. Certainly Cuevas to me doesnt look the totally unskilled wild puncher that some describe him as. He had a way of getting to his opponents, he certainly slipped some punches along the way, and when he let the punches go they came from all angles. Watch the way he beat Weston, who was like Ranzany a very good boxer. A lot id made of Pipinos defeats but many of them were either when he was just starting out or on the way down... the Cuevas who beat Weston and the Cuevas who lost to Duran, Stafford, Hwang etc were very different fighters imo... its a bit like judging Benitez by his latter defeats.... so anyway, yeh, I agree with you that Pipino is underrated if anything, ...just my opinion though!:D :D

I have a hunch that Cuevas was indeed faster, more athletic, more agile and more technically adept than the world has given him credit for. It's a sneaky feeling I have.

Your reference to Cuevas's brutal, one-sided destruction of tough, slick boxing Harold Weston Jr. illustrates my point. That night Cuevas didn't have much trouble finding the chin of a guy that most other welterweights couldn't even touch.

If Cuevas had fought Carlos Palomino in 1978 while both were at their best, I'll bet that Pepino would have been too much for Carlos. I would go with Cuevas by kayo.

Kikibalt: thanks for your opinion...I will definitely watch films of Palomino very closely, to see perhaps if I'm overlooking anything.

I would love to pick up a copy of Palomino's sensational, upset kayo over John H. Stracey in 1976 for the title. Palomino was a 3-1 underdog that night.

I have already seen Palomino KO11 Davey "Boy" Green, and that is one of the best fights I've ever seen.

But I think Cuevas would've finished both Stracey and Green very, very early.

PeteLeo
06-09-2006, 12:39 AM
My buddy Steve has Palomino-Stracey on tape. He calls the quality "mediocre," and some of the rounds are shortened, but I didn't have any trouble viewing it. Decent fight. PeteLeo.

kenmore
06-09-2006, 01:33 AM
My buddy Steve has Palomino-Stracey on tape. He calls the quality "mediocre," and some of the rounds are shortened, but I didn't have any trouble viewing it. Decent fight. PeteLeo.

Can you describe how that fight went? I know that the first four rounds were even or perhaps for Stracey, and after that, Palomino took over with his body attack. I heard also that in the twelfth round Stracey's ribs were so worked over that he actually screamed from the final body shots he took.

Does this sound accurate? What was your take?

Did Stracey fight a subpar bout, in terms of tactics and general strategy? I remember some people believed the result to be a fluke...more a result of Stracey having an off night than Palomino being that good.

I'm interested.

Steve McV
06-09-2006, 06:02 AM
I wouldn't call him "great." Don't mean to put the man down, I respect all fighters, but his defense sucked, his chin was average, and he wasn't the most skillfull of boxers on offense.

I'll say this for him; he could put some serious hurt on people. When he landed, I swear, at least sometimes, the other guy seemed almost to quiver, as though the shock of the blow went right through them. When Cuevas hit you, he hurt you.

fatcity
06-09-2006, 07:21 AM
I wouldn't call him "great." Don't mean to put the man down, I respect all fighters, but his defense sucked, his chin was average, and he wasn't the most skillfull of boxers on offense.

I'll say this for him; he could put some serious hurt on people. When he landed, I swear, at least sometimes, the other guy seemed almost to quiver, as though the shock of the blow went right through them. When Cuevas hit you, he hurt you.

Well since I posted this thread I've been rewatching his fights, especially his title bouths and the guy was awesome... the way he cut off the ring and stayed on top of slick guys like Weston, Ranzany etc... and I think his skills were underatted... as for his chin he is often thought of now it seems as 'chinny' after the Hearns and Duran fights, but the Hearns fight was the first time he had even been floored... in his prime he had a great chin.
I think the bottom line is that he was slipping when he fought Tommy and never really got over that defeat... after that bout he was a different fighter imo...

fatcity
06-09-2006, 07:22 AM
I wouldn't call him "great." Don't mean to put the man down, I respect all fighters, but his defense sucked, his chin was average, and he wasn't the most skillfull of boxers on offense.

I'll say this for him; he could put some serious hurt on people. When he landed, I swear, at least sometimes, the other guy seemed almost to quiver, as though the shock of the blow went right through them. When Cuevas hit you, he hurt you.

Well since I posted this thread I've been rewatching his fights, especially his title bouths and the guy was awesome... the way he cut off the ring and stayed on top of slick guys like Weston, Ranzany etc... and I think his skills were underatted... as for his chin he is often thought of now it seems as 'chinny' after the Hearns and Duran fights, but the Hearns fight was the first time he had even been floored... in his prime he had a great chin.
I think the bottom line is that he was slipping when he fought Tommy and never really got over that defeat... after that bout he was a different fighter imo...

hawk5ins
06-09-2006, 08:23 AM
I personally think he falls just short of Great.

Of the "Sensational Six" at 147 in the late 70's early 80's, I would place him thusly (rankings strictly on how I see these fighters at 147):

1-Leonard
2-Hearns
3-Duran
4-Benitez
5-Cuevas
6-Palomino

This is not meant as a disrespect to Cuevas and Palomino to bring up the rear on this group, but let's be honest, this was a strong group and I don't think it is a stretch to state the the top 4 were in a slightly higher class than the bottom 2.

Comparing this group to the recent star grouping of Whitaker, Trinidad, Mosley, Quartey and de la Hoya strictly on a WELTERWEIGHT ranking, I would have Pea and Tito ahead of Cuevas. And I have Palomino on even par with (or slightly above or below) Mosley Ike and Oscar.

That said, I can see a scenario where Cuevas takes OUT Tito and I can also see Oscar and Mosley being able to out speed Pipino. I would favor the fighters I have placed ahead of the others, but certainly alternate endings are possibilities.

Cuevas' power makes him competitive with several upper echelon fighters in this division's history. But by and large, I think he is a full step or two below the elite's of the division.

Excellent fighter. Just shy of Great. BUT, certainly GREAT Power. Which in any matchup, can be the great equlaizer.

Hawk

fatcity
06-09-2006, 08:37 AM
I personally think he falls just short of Great.

Of the "Sensational Six" at 147 in the late 70's early 80's, I would place him thusly (rankings strictly on how I see these fighters at 147):

1-Leonard
2-Hearns
3-Duran
4-Benitez
5-Cuevas
6-Palomino

This is not meant as a disrespect to Cuevas and Palomino to bring up the rear on this group, but let's be honest, this was a strong group and I don't think it is a stretch to state the the top 4 were in a slightly higher class than the bottom 2.

Comparing this group to the recent star grouping of Whitaker, Trinidad, Mosley, Quartey and de la Hoya strictly on a WELTERWEIGHT ranking, I would have Pea and Tito ahead of Cuevas and Palomino on even par with (or slightly above or below) Mosley Ike and Oscar.

That said, I can see a scenario where Cuevas takes OUT Tito and I can also see Oscar and Mosley being able to out speed Pipino. I would favor the fighters I have placed ahead of the others, but certainly alternate endings are possibilities.

Cuevas' power makes him competitive with several upper echelon fighters in this division's history. But by and large, I think he is a full step or two below the elite's of the division.

Excellent fighter. Just shy of Great. BUT, certainly GREAT Power. Which in any matchup, can be the great equlaizer.

Hawk


I think Pipino would be too strong for Mosely and Delahoya... they never faced anyone who can bang like Pipino... look how Mosely reacted to Forrests power. I really think Tito is overrated, no disrespect, but I see Cueves blasting him out.... Tito didnt have the chin to take what Cuaevas would have hit him with imo.

fatcity
06-09-2006, 08:39 AM
Trying to post a photo here:


http://i5.tinypic.com/1236wpj.jpg

Great pic Barry...;)

hawk5ins
06-09-2006, 09:36 AM
re Mosley and Oscar. And while I would make Tito the favorite agianst Pipino, if Tito get's hit and dropped the way he did agianst Carr, Lueshing and Campos, I agree, Cuevas finishes the job. Cuevas' hook lands as cleanly on Felix's chin the way other's have, he's done.

Hawk

Sharkey
06-09-2006, 10:08 AM
p4p Oscar would beat him. At welter, tough call for me..I am not sold on defaulting to Cuevas in a clear Pipino victory.

Ike's stamina issues would play against Cuevas..intriguing fight. Quartey had, for all of his faults and roboticism, effective stuff. It is easy to view Cuevas as 'going to win' any of these bouts when the opportunity arises..yet he could be soundly outboxed by Oscar say, and who is to say Cuevas is the guy to put Tito to sleep when he never was more than sleepy his entire career? I dunno. Kind of thinking and typing here but it is interesting to ponder.

Difficult for me to form an encompassing view of Cuevas...I am not of the opinion that it would take a Hearns to derail him; yet it is hard to ignore what Lopez did while barely in shape to the guys he fought...and 'what he could do, Pipino could do' (better?)

Perhaps the modern welter stars can best be summed up as really good fighters and as welters, really good fighters. No more. No less.

*I like Pea to beat Cuevas. At welter.

fatcity
06-09-2006, 02:16 PM
p4p Oscar would beat him. At welter, tough call for me..I am not sold on defaulting to Cuevas in a clear Pipino victory.

Ike's stamina issues would play against Cuevas..intriguing fight. Quartey had, for all of his faults and roboticism, effective stuff. It is easy to view Cuevas as 'going to win' any of these bouts when the opportunity arises..yet he could be soundly outboxed by Oscar say, and who is to say Cuevas is the guy to put Tito to sleep when he never was more than sleepy his entire career? I dunno. Kind of thinking and typing here but it is interesting to ponder.

Difficult for me to form an encompassing view of Cuevas...I am not of the opinion that it would take a Hearns to derail him; yet it is hard to ignore what Lopez did while barely in shape to the guys he fought...and 'what he could do, Pipino could do' (better?)

Perhaps the modern welter stars can best be summed up as really good fighters and as welters, really good fighters. No more. No less.

*I like Pea to beat Cuevas. At welter.


But remember Cuevas fought very good boxers in Ranzany, Weston and Sheilds and beat them all... Cuevas wasn't that easy to outbox because he was on you all the time. Pea would be difficult for Cuevas but I dont know if he could have avoided him bombs all night...

kikibalt
06-09-2006, 02:24 PM
But remember Cuevas fought very good boxers in Ranzany, Weston and Sheilds and beat them all... Cuevas wasn't that easy to outbox because he was on you all the time. Pea would be difficult for Cuevas but I dont know if he could have avoided him bombs all night...

Fatcity

Out of the three that you mention only one was a good boxer , Weston, the other guys were walkin kind of fighters.

Frank B.

kikibalt
06-10-2006, 11:24 AM
http://i5.tinypic.com/13z8k93.jpg

Zevl
06-22-2006, 02:04 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJWk4cunnKQ

Pipino Cuevas vs. Angel Espada

gregbeyer
06-22-2006, 09:07 PM
kenmore,

i have the complete palomino- stracey fight and it was basicaly a very one sided beating. carlos took john apart with some of the best bodyshots you will ever see. i always thought palomino would have ko'd cuevas. better all around fighter with enough grit and skill to handle pipino. IMO.
greg

peter murphy
10-24-2012, 03:17 PM
pipino was great he was a big big big big puncher and would have knocked hearns head into the crowd if he had landed that left hand bomb no douth

Michael Frank
10-26-2012, 06:19 AM
pipino was great he was a big big big big puncher and would have knocked hearns head into the crowd if he had landed that left hand bomb no douth
Not sure how "great" Cuevas was, though I always liked him for several reasons, incl. his power, his exciting style, and his gentlemanliness.

However, he was a Tyson with fewer fundamentals and a solid but not great chin. Worse; Cuevas was a wild swinger with terrible footwork. The fighters he beat were simply subpar.

He never would have beaten Hearns in a million years. Tommy was a far superior fighter with a MUCH longer career when they fought-- if you include the amateurs-- as Steward had pointed out before their fight. Yes, in theory, IF Pipino had landed one on the chin, then . . . but Hearns was a highly skilled fighter, way better than the Ranzanys and Westons of the world, with every possible physical advantage over Pipino.

I think that Pipino was simply exposed in the Hearns fight; no more, no less. He had a fine run because he had met no great fighters, indeed, no one who could even threaten to beat him. In retrospect, I like Palomino to beat Cuevas.

Had he met Leonard, Duran, and Benitez back then, he would have lost to all of them, plus Hearns of course.

walshb
10-26-2012, 07:16 AM
I haven't watched all that much of Cuevas, but to me he was a good hitter with less than sound technique. He was rather crude in his delivery, his feet looked very ordinary. Reminds me a bit of the late Edwin Valero.

peter murphy
10-31-2012, 06:42 PM
pipino would have knocked leonard and palomino heads into the crowd as well, sure both were scared of pipino

Elwill7847
10-31-2012, 10:37 PM
Leonard, Benitez, Duran and Palomino all would have beat Pipino. We know what Hearns did to Cuevas.

Trinidad would stop Pipino in a great slugfest. maybe he could beat Oscar, though I doubt it.

Michael Frank
11-01-2012, 06:23 AM
pipino would have knocked leonard and palomino heads into the crowd as well, sure both were scared of pipino
On what evidence? That Cuevas had destroyed a bunch of nobodies?

Well, what we know is that Pipino got decapitated by Hearns, who had no fear of him whatsoever. 3 years later, Duran, also with zero fear of Pipino, beat his brains out. Pipino quit in that one as much as anything.

So Leonard, who beat both of the former, would have his head knocked into the crowd by Pipino? As would Palomino, who would have broken Pipino's ribs before Cuevas even got going?

You're serious about all this?