want to test a little theory

[hitmanhatton]

ok guys, on this forum and on other sites i see a lot of people descrediting certain fighters resumes and credentials, for example iv seen many people claim that Hopkins resume consists of blown up welters or that calzaghes best wins are over old and/or over hyped fighters

basically i think that its possible to discredit to any fighters reputation and resume in one way or another with maybe the exception of a couple like SRR and maybe Ali ,

so to test this i want people to post a fighter who they think is an ATG and has a brilliant resume , and then to see if anyone else can give logical thought out reasons as to why they are not so great

[Thread Stealer]

I don't know, I think you can just about make any fighter look overrated.

There's a line between nit-picking and just being plain ridiculous though.

How about one trying to downgrade Ezzard Charles and his achievements? That's a pretty tough one.

[killersheep]

I don't know, I think you can just about make any fighter look overrated.

There's a line between nit-picking and just being plain ridiculous though.

How about one trying to downgrade Ezzard Charles and his achievements? That's a pretty tough one.

Simple he had way too many Z's in his name and you can't compare that to people without Z's in their names it's like apples to oranges.

That was a tough one to start with man, you win.

[hitmanhatton]

I don't know, I think you can just about make any fighter look overrated.

There's a line between nit-picking and just being plain ridiculous though.

How about one trying to downgrade Ezzard Charles and his achievements? That's a pretty tough one.

i think the weak era arguement would get used here to be honest

i dont know too much about ezzard charles but i dont think he beat anyone that notable did he ?

[ICB]

ok guys, on this forum and on other sites i see a lot of people descrediting certain fighters resumes and credentials, for example iv seen many people claim that Hopkins resume consists of blown up welters or that calzaghes best wins are over old and/or over hyped fighters

basically i think that its possible to discredit to any fighters reputation and resume in one way or another with maybe the exception of a couple like SRR and maybe Ali ,

so to test this i want people to post a fighter who they think is an ATG and has a brilliant resume , and then to see if anyone else can give logical thought out reasons as to why they are not so great

Well i could downgrade Muhammad Ali easily i thought he lost to Jimmy Young, Ken Norton x2, Earnie Shavers, draw with Doug Jones. Infact you could make an argument that Ali could have 10 losses on his record then would people consider him so great ? no doubt Ali done alot for the sport and was a very smart fighter with alot of strong attributes but i think he is overrated. And he also did struggle with alot of lesser fighters aswell far too many times IMO.

[ICB]

I don't know, I think you can just about make any fighter look overrated.

There's a line between nit-picking and just being plain ridiculous though.

How about one trying to downgrade Ezzard Charles and his achievements? That's a pretty tough one.

i think the weak era arguement would get used here to be honest

i dont know too much about ezzard charles but i dont think he beat anyone that notable did he ?

Ezzard Charles beat Archie Moore 5 times, aswell as the great Charles Burley, Jersey Joe Walcott etc.

[killersheep]

I don't know, I think you can just about make any fighter look overrated.

There's a line between nit-picking and just being plain ridiculous though.

How about one trying to downgrade Ezzard Charles and his achievements? That's a pretty tough one.

i think the weak era arguement would get used here to be honest

i dont know too much about ezzard charles but i dont think he beat anyone that notable did he ?

Jersey James Walcott for one, he earned everything fought his way through the ranks and conquered

[hitmanhatton]

I don't know, I think you can just about make any fighter look overrated.

There's a line between nit-picking and just being plain ridiculous though.

How about one trying to downgrade Ezzard Charles and his achievements? That's a pretty tough one.

i think the weak era arguement would get used here to be honest

i dont know too much about ezzard charles but i dont think he beat anyone that notable did he ?

Ezzard Charles beat Archie Moore 5 times, aswell as the great Charles Burley, Jersey Joe Walcott etc.

oops as i said though my knowledge of him is very limited

[Thread Stealer]

i think the weak era arguement would get used here to be honest

i dont know too much about ezzard charles but i dont think he beat anyone that notable did he ?

Ezzard Charles beat Archie Moore 5 times, aswell as the great Charles Burley, Jersey Joe Walcott etc.

oops as i said though my knowledge of him is very limited

Here's some info for you on Ezzard Charles. His record against Hall of Famers:

24 fights against 9 Hall of Famers for a record of 18-6 with 2 KOs.

• 1-0 (0) against Teddy Yarosz
• 2-0 (0) against Charley Burley
• 5-0 (0) against Joey Maxim
• 1-0 (0) against Joe Louis
• 0-1 (0) against Harold Johnson
• 2-2 (0) against Jersey Joe Walcott
• 4-1 (1) against Jimmy Bivins
• 0-2 (0) against Rocky Marciano
• 3-0 (1) against Archie Moore

1941:

• 1-0 against Teddy Yarosz

1942:

• 2-0 against Charley Burley
• 2-0 against Joey Maxim

1943:

• 0-1 against Jimmy Bivins

1946:

• 1-0 against Jimmy Bivins
• 1-0 against Archie Moore

1947:

• 1-0 (1) against Jimmy Bivins
• 1-0 against Archie Moore

1948:

• 1-0 (1) against Archie Moore
• 1-0 against Jimmy Bivins

1949:

• 1-0 against Joey Maxim
• 1-0 against Jersey Joe Walcott

1950:

• 1-0 against Joe Louis

1951:

• 2-0 against Joey Maxim
• 1-1 against Jersey Joe Walcott

1952:

• 0-1 against Jersey Joe Walcott
• 1-0 against Jimmy Bivins

1953:

• 0-1 against Harold Johnson

1954:

• 0-2 against Rocky Marciano

[hitmanhatton]

i checked him out on boxrec and didnt notice hardly none of those names , man im gettin blind

[antimoron]

a hypothetical possiblity, benchmark is what we need.. and should be facts and not speculation or bias idea.. facts means record that speaks for themselves..

[RozzySean]

Bob Foster - you can use the weak era argument on him, for sure. He lost every time he stepped up against a good heavyweight. Dick Tiger was past his prime. Neither Mike Quarryt, Pierre Fourie, or Chris Finnigan were all that great and they were his best wins. Padded his KO record with bums.

[RozzySean]

Here we go. I'll trash my favorite fighter. Duran dominated lightweight in weak era, and he padded his record with bums. Other than the first Ray Leonard fight, he came up short in every other fight against top competition - Benitez, Hearns, and Hagler. Iran Barkley was overrated. The only good fighter he ever beat was Hearns, so that win doesn't mean much. He fought way past his prime and ruined his legacy losing to guys like Paz and Lawlor.

This is a fun game!

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

Three words ROY JONES JR.

[Thread Stealer]

Three words ROY JONES JR.

Too easy to nitpick and criticize his resume.

Fighters of the past are harder because they were fighting so frequently and often against quality opposition.