He's not done yet, if he beats Green, thats a nice little win. He could pull some George Foreman type second career out, you never know. ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Nameless
Printable View
He's not done yet, if he beats Green, thats a nice little win. He could pull some George Foreman type second career out, you never know. ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Nameless
Sure, but still not enough to come close to the top 100 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by No ContestHe's not done yet, if he beats Green, thats a nice little win. He could pull some George Foreman type second career out, you never know. ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Nameless
I am absolutely convinced that he is the 154th best boxer of all time.
Tarver was better than McCall.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
He was consistently one of the very best at 175lbs. He beat Jones Jr 3 times in my book. He avenged his losses to Johnson and Harding and beat Clinton Woods and Griffin.
He was the unisputed champ, I think he won about 5 world titles in that weight class in all, a 3 time world champ.
He's far above Oliver McCall. He ranks with Coralles, Castillo and Hatton imo, at his best, was the number 1 in his weight class, and even after losing, went back and regained hist title.
Antonio Tarver was terrible against Eric Harding in there 1st fight, he basically quit in the last round looking for a way out. He's lucky he lost that fight and didn't go on to fight RJJ at that point in RJJ's career.
There's many Light Heavyweight's who were better than Antonio Tarver.
I like Tarver far better as an announcer then I ever have as a fighter. His main claim to fame was knocking out RJJ, but other than that, his career has been fairly unremarkable. In re: All-time, just for beating Jones Jr. he should make the top 25 somewhere as a light-heavyweight, but overall I don't see him getting close to the top 100.
How the fuck ANYONE can think Tarver won the first fight with Roy is confounding, and utterly puzzling.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboTarver was better than McCall.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
He was consistently one of the very best at 175lbs. He beat Jones Jr 3 times in my book. He avenged his losses to Johnson and Harding and beat Clinton Woods and Griffin.
He was the unisputed champ, I think he won about 5 world titles in that weight class in all, a 3 time world champ.
He's far above Oliver McCall. He ranks with Coralles, Castillo and Hatton imo, at his best, was the number 1 in his weight class, and even after losing, went back and regained hist title.
Roy won the fight CLEARLY.
It was just the first time anyone had gotten Roy against the ropes and done some work.
Tarver won 4 rounds and it was surprising, but he faded in the last two rounds like he always does and Roy outgutted him and beat him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NamelessSure, but still not enough to come close to the top 100 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by No ContestHe's not done yet, if he beats Green, thats a nice little win. He could pull some George Foreman type second career out, you never know. ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Nameless
AT 175>?? The division isn;'t that deep?
Tell me that this is really not a comparison you think their might be between them...Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxer4life
Tarvers a good boxer. I personally don't like him...
All time list wow! it's really hard to tell.
For starters he's still active.
I would guess all time somewhere between 250-300. ???
well caparison as being the GUY that beat the GUY, buster douglas was that guy, but he sucked, duran was that guy but he is one of the greats, so what i am saying is, is tarver just a guy that sucks that beat the guy, or is he the guy that beat the guy and goes down ranked, at least at lhw, but i see majority agree he doesn'tQuote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMickTell me that this is really not a comparison you think their might be between them...Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxer4life
Tarvers a good boxer. I personally don't like him...
All time list wow! it's really hard to tell.
For starters he's still active.
I would guess all time somewhere between 250-300. ???
Do you think he's a borderline HOF candidate Mick?Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMickTell me that this is really not a comparison you think their might be between them...Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxer4life
Tarvers a good boxer. I personally don't like him...
All time list wow! it's really hard to tell.
For starters he's still active.
I would guess all time somewhere between 250-300. ???
I think a lot of people hate on him and so underestimate him. But he was a slick, tough fighter in his prime. Avenged all of his losses, won world titles 3 times, never been stopped. Even gave Chad Dawson some decent tests at age 38 or something.
I think he's a good example of someone who came back from early adversity and carved out a successful career that looked very unlikely indeed a few years earlier.
He really didn't have long at the top though Bilbo, and he's not even ranked in the top 20 in the Light Heavyweight division.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboDo you think he's a borderline HOF candidate Mick?Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMickTell me that this is really not a comparison you think their might be between them...Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxer4life
Tarvers a good boxer. I personally don't like him...
All time list wow! it's really hard to tell.
For starters he's still active.
I would guess all time somewhere between 250-300. ???
I think a lot of people hate on him and so underestimate him. But he was a slick, tough fighter in his prime. Avenged all of his losses, won world titles 3 times, never been stopped. Even gave Chad Dawson some decent tests at age 38 or something.
I think he's a good example of someone who came back from early adversity and carved out a successful career that looked very unlikely indeed a few years earlier.
But then again there has been some questionable, fighters in the HOF so who knows.
He's not fighting at light heavy any more though. I think he's done as much as guys like Castillo, Coralles and Hatton. Some of them might be fringe HOF considerations, Hatton most likely I'd guess considering Maguigan got in.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBHe really didn't have long at the top though Bilbo, and he's not even ranked in the top 20 in the Light Heavyweight division.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboDo you think he's a borderline HOF candidate Mick?Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMickTell me that this is really not a comparison you think their might be between them...Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxer4life
Tarvers a good boxer. I personally don't like him...
All time list wow! it's really hard to tell.
For starters he's still active.
I would guess all time somewhere between 250-300. ???
I think a lot of people hate on him and so underestimate him. But he was a slick, tough fighter in his prime. Avenged all of his losses, won world titles 3 times, never been stopped. Even gave Chad Dawson some decent tests at age 38 or something.
I think he's a good example of someone who came back from early adversity and carved out a successful career that looked very unlikely indeed a few years earlier.
But then again there has been some questionable, fighters in the HOF so who knows.
I can't rank Tarver as a top LH compared to past champs, he is just lacking the credentials to even be considered a top fighter let alone a fringe Hall Of Fame Candidate as a fighter.
I think he's a great commentator though and it's early in that career and he will only get better if they keep him around.
There are some announcers in the Hall Of Fame who never laced up a glove, I don't feel he has a chance as a fighter alone but down the road some years he could get in for announcing plus he has some titles under his belt to help.