Fighters that you (controversially) think are overrated

[eagle]

Should be a good topic for discussion. Been done before, but still fun nonetheless.

I'll start with

Kostya Tszyu

Best win? Judah?
Duffed up by Vince Philips! (who was coming off a loss and 2 losses in 4)
Duffed up by Hatton!

Very very good fighter and the best of his time, but in all time terms I don't think he belongs with Aaron Pryor, Barney Ross, Wilfredo Benitez, PBF, Pac and maybe Cervantes and Canzoneri.

I think this is shit. First of all who really overrates him? How is he overrated? He was probably ranked 4 or 5 P4P at his absolute best which was fair. His weakness was always pressure guys like Hatton, Philips and Hector Lopez. He blitzed speed guys tho. Gotta keep in mind that almost all his major fights were in foreign countries. To say he shouldnt be up there with Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri is stupid. What did they do that was so much more impressive? Who ever said he should be named with PBF and Pac, they are clearly superior.
15 or so title defenses, won all the major belts, more than half career was title fights. 75% KO percentage.

What a urprise another Aussie doesn't agree

It aint 'Shit' mate, it's an opinion that I have.

Well back up your opinion. Who overrates him? Why are Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri so much better than Tszyu that he shouldnt be mentioned with them. Who overrates him? Its all well and good to have an opinion but atleast back it up. Did I say anything in my post that was false?

Look I'm a great Kostya respector but you REALLY need this question answered? OK.

Ross-An undisputed champion in three divisions. Five wins over HOFers. Over twenty five wins over ranked fighters. Over 70 wins.

Canzoneri-An undisputed champion in three divisions and fought a draw for the undisputed champion in a fourth division. Defeated over 30 ranked fighters, Defeated HOFers over ten times. Over 130 wins

Benitez-The youngest lineal champion in history. Three wins over HOFers. Ten wins over ranked fighters.

Cervantes-Beat HOFers on two occasions, had a draw with one on a third, defeated ranked fighters over ten times. Over 90 wins.

Pryor-Defeated HOFers on three occasions. A dozen wins over ranked guys. Over 30 wins.

Kostya-One win over a HOFer, a dozen wins over ranked guys and over thirty wins.

What exactly are you trying to say? Pryor and Tszyu have very similiar records. Lots of dominant defenses against ranked opponents yet never got their shot at the big guys. Kostya had more defenses, but one more loss. Kostya unified too. Why shouldnt Kostya be named with Pryor?

Its very hard to compare records with the earlier guys, they had a lot more fights, more wins, more losses. Cervantes title run was also similiar to Tszyu. Not a lot of big names. I never stated that Tszyu was better than all those games but to say he doesnt deserve to be mentioned with these guys is ridiculous. Your post really confirmed this more than proving me wrong.

[laughing] Yeah because THREE division undisputed champions is the same as one, 70+ wins is the same as 30, 25 wins over ranked fighters is the same as a dozen and 3+ wins over HOFers is the same as one.

Kostya is deficient to EVERY ONE of those guys in a major category and superior in nearly none isn't he?

Again, I have great respect for Kostya, but putting him in the above's league seems overrating him to me.

It's no insult to not be as accomplished as men like this. It really isn't.

This!


+ you've saved me talking about the guys that I originally mentioned him in comparison to

So your saying Pryor who did not unify, and had less defenses, has a record so much better than Tszyus that he should not be mentioned together. Makes sense. Good reasoning.

[Fenster]

Alphabet unifications are meaningless (apart from almost certainly recognising a top world ranked fighter) once you can claim to be the lineal/undisputed/man who beat the man champion.

Pryor was the first ever IBF champ after being stripped by the WBA. The WBO didn't even exist in his time. I'm not sure whether Pryor was considered THE man from 1980 or 1983-1986 but he was certainly considered the top guy through this period.

Kostya wasn't THE man until the Zab win. This fight created a new linage.

[Fenster]

[laughing]. By this ridiculous standard, a military historian can make no assessment of Julius Cesar or Alexander the great or Napoleon as a general. After all, there is no footage! Nobody cvan make a judgement on Shakespeare's plays either as we have no footage of them being performed the way he wanted them performed.

It is a world class DUMB point of view. How the hell do you think history gets studied exactly?

[Laughing]. Of course they can make an educated assessment. However, they can form an even more ACCURATE educated assessment based on actual modern events they have witnessed. Fact.

It's a world-class DUMB point of view to suggest we can KNOW more about something we HAVE NOT seen compared with something we have. Madness.

You can read all you want about fighters - you will ALWAYS be putting FAITH in the writers OPINION. How can you possibly believe that is superior to something you've seen with your own eyes? Utter madness.

[marbleheadmaui]

Should be a good topic for discussion. Been done before, but still fun nonetheless.

I'll start with

Kostya Tszyu

Best win? Judah?
Duffed up by Vince Philips! (who was coming off a loss and 2 losses in 4)
Duffed up by Hatton!

Very very good fighter and the best of his time, but in all time terms I don't think he belongs with Aaron Pryor, Barney Ross, Wilfredo Benitez, PBF, Pac and maybe Cervantes and Canzoneri.

I think this is shit. First of all who really overrates him? How is he overrated? He was probably ranked 4 or 5 P4P at his absolute best which was fair. His weakness was always pressure guys like Hatton, Philips and Hector Lopez. He blitzed speed guys tho. Gotta keep in mind that almost all his major fights were in foreign countries. To say he shouldnt be up there with Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri is stupid. What did they do that was so much more impressive? Who ever said he should be named with PBF and Pac, they are clearly superior.
15 or so title defenses, won all the major belts, more than half career was title fights. 75% KO percentage.

What a urprise another Aussie doesn't agree

It aint 'Shit' mate, it's an opinion that I have.

Well back up your opinion. Who overrates him? Why are Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri so much better than Tszyu that he shouldnt be mentioned with them. Who overrates him? Its all well and good to have an opinion but atleast back it up. Did I say anything in my post that was false?

Look I'm a great Kostya respector but you REALLY need this question answered? OK.

Ross-An undisputed champion in three divisions. Five wins over HOFers. Over twenty five wins over ranked fighters. Over 70 wins.

Canzoneri-An undisputed champion in three divisions and fought a draw for the undisputed champion in a fourth division. Defeated over 30 ranked fighters, Defeated HOFers over ten times. Over 130 wins

Benitez-The youngest lineal champion in history. Three wins over HOFers. Ten wins over ranked fighters.

Cervantes-Beat HOFers on two occasions, had a draw with one on a third, defeated ranked fighters over ten times. Over 90 wins.

Pryor-Defeated HOFers on three occasions. A dozen wins over ranked guys. Over 30 wins.

Kostya-One win over a HOFer, a dozen wins over ranked guys and over thirty wins.

What exactly are you trying to say? Pryor and Tszyu have very similiar records. Lots of dominant defenses against ranked opponents yet never got their shot at the big guys. Kostya had more defenses, but one more loss. Kostya unified too. Why shouldnt Kostya be named with Pryor?

Its very hard to compare records with the earlier guys, they had a lot more fights, more wins, more losses. Cervantes title run was also similiar to Tszyu. Not a lot of big names. I never stated that Tszyu was better than all those games but to say he doesnt deserve to be mentioned with these guys is ridiculous. Your post really confirmed this more than proving me wrong.

[laughing] Yeah because THREE division undisputed champions is the same as one, 70+ wins is the same as 30, 25 wins over ranked fighters is the same as a dozen and 3+ wins over HOFers is the same as one.

Kostya is deficient to EVERY ONE of those guys in a major category and superior in nearly none isn't he?

Again, I have great respect for Kostya, but putting him in the above's league seems overrating him to me.

It's no insult to not be as accomplished as men like this. It really isn't.

Again I bring up Pryor. He did not unify the belts so Pryor is deficient in that respect. Tszyu had 5 more defenses than Pryor. Pryor is deficient there. I dunno who would have won between the 2 and i honestly think Aaron may have cos his style would have troubled Tszyu. But to say Kostya does not deserve to be mentioned with him is ludicrous. Its a similar argument with Calvacante. Similiar amount of title defenses as Tszyu. A lot more fights, a lot more losses. Never unified the belts but had one or two more notable wins. There are arguments for and against Calvacante and Tszyu, but to say Kostya shouldnt be mentioned with him again is stupid.
As for the whole 70 wins is better than 30, thats just stupid. Kostya fought 1 person with a losing record. The older guys fought dozens. Tszyu had fought 2 ex champs by his tenth fight, and won a title by his 14th. To show how ridiculous that argument is, Tszyu had more title fights than Ross but about 50 fewer fights. If its all about wins i guess u could add Tszyus amateur career of 259-11.

UNIFYING belts means NOTHING. Pryor was the LINEAL champion! Don't confuse straps with true championships.

Who the hell is Calcavante

[marbleheadmaui]

[laughing]. By this ridiculous standard, a military historian can make no assessment of Julius Cesar or Alexander the great or Napoleon as a general. After all, there is no footage! Nobody cvan make a judgement on Shakespeare's plays either as we have no footage of them being performed the way he wanted them performed.

It is a world class DUMB point of view. How the hell do you think history gets studied exactly?

[Laughing]. Of course they can make an educated assessment. However, they can form an even more ACCURATE educated assessment based on actual modern events they have witnessed. Fact.

It's a world-class DUMB point of view to suggest we can KNOW more about something we HAVE NOT seen compared with something we have. Madness.

You can read all you want about fighters - you will ALWAYS be putting FAITH in the writers OPINION. How can you possibly believe that is superior to something you've seen with your own eyes? Utter madness.

It's simply not true! If it were history would NEVER be studied beyond the lifetime of witnesses.

I mean let's face it, there's nothing more to learn beyond what you experience right? The angle from which your viewed was the perfect one, your mind wasn't distracted by other things, right?

You ever hear the story of the blind men and the elephant?

The idea that one set of eyes watching something reveals "truth" is incredibly wrong. Especially in boxing. You ever hear of a split decision?

And no, when you read a SINGLE writer on something you are forced to simply accept or reject an opinion. When you read MANY writers, as well as trainers, fighters themselves, judges, you are forced to do no such thing. Instead you can do what historians do always and everywhere. Sift, compare, contrast, recheck etc. Then one make's one's own judgement.

It is far superior to being lazy and simply saying "It can't be known."

Of course for everyone but Greb the point is moot as plenty of footage exists...if you're willing to do the work.

[Taffturner]

Got to be the klitchko brothers!! Yes there technically good boxers ie jabbing to tko's but does anyone honestly think they'd of stood a chance with a prime ali,forman or tyson? Think there two good heavy wieghts amongst loads of bad ones!!

[JazMerkin]

Let me at least try to make a case on the Hawk. Wins over ATG's on three occasions (we'll come back to that) and he defeated five top five ranked guys (three of whome were the HOFers) and a total of six top ten ranked guys.

Cervantes was clearly long in the tooth. But he still had enough left in the tank to go on to beat Lennox Blackmoore who prior to losing to the Hawk was ranked number 2. So Cervantes wasn't shot. it was more of a passing of the torch thing like we see so often in the sport.

Alexis had been talked about as having been on the decline since the Jim Watt fight eighteen months before. But he kept winning, getting up against Ganigan to do so. There is no question he was reaching for the stars that night. There is also no question (in my mind anyway) Alexis Arguello was a GREAT, GREAT, GREAT fighter that night. Full credit to Pryor.

Your points on Duran and the rest are ENTIRELY Pryor's fault. The drugs got him VERY early and by the end of 1983 he was a shadow. He was presented with a contract for a $700k contract to fight Duran but because of the drugs, the paranoia that went with it and trouble with his team (gee I wonder why) he threw it away.

Now having said all that he beat as many great fighters, at at least a good a point in their careers, as Lennox Lewis or Larry Holmes or Mike Tyson or Roy Jones or Floyd Mayweather.

Pryor is one of those guys for the "You have to see him with your eyes" crew who in my view is a strong choice in the theoretical "who beats who at 140" games, but in terms of what we know isn't a top 50 and maybe not a top hundred kind of guy. And in my view it is all his own fault.

Anyway, that's the fanboy's case

I won't be convinced on Pryor. Are we really calling Cervantes an ATG? I mean he was a good fighter, probably a hall of famer, but an ATG? If we are then let's add him to my list of heavily overrated 140lbers. I mean look at Cervantes defences, was there any good reason for him to fight the mighty Carlos Gimenez twice? A guy who made Pongsaklek look like Ray Robinson when it comes to comp. I also think Cervantes was past his sell-by date by then. A win over Blackmoore doesn't convince me of anything. For me, Cervantes is probably a step below Tszyu & I think his best days went in his effort against Benitez.

Arguello was a great fighter, but he'd seen better days & a win over Kevin Rooney (admittedly was a great win) doesn't convince me that he was a light-welter.

I can definitely see the comparison with Tyson in fact it is apt with a win over a faded fighter (Holmes/Cervantes) & another over a smaller guy (Spinks/Arguello). I almost made that point earlier, but I thought I'd gone on enough as it is. Lewis & Holmes have slightly better resumes for me based on their overall opp being better, but their top wins are comparable & Arguello was a better fighter than Vitali or Norton.

But, I think Roy Jones & Floyd Mayweather have much better resumes. Roy has wins over a prime James Toney & Bernard Hopkins, while I think Mayweather has the most underrated resume in the sport & I personally feel it shits all over Pryor's. Not to mention that for me, both guys beat their opposition far more dominantly. Pryor is by far the most exciting of the three, but his achievements are very weak in comparison.

Don't get me wrong, Pryor is great to just chill back & watch & he'd just about make the borderline of greatness for me, but I think when people talk about him beating up guys who are real ATGs for me, I think their letting their admiration for the excitement he created cloud their judgement. Like I said, he's a mini-Tyson

[ICB]

Let me at least try to make a case on the Hawk. Wins over ATG's on three occasions (we'll come back to that) and he defeated five top five ranked guys (three of whome were the HOFers) and a total of six top ten ranked guys.

Cervantes was clearly long in the tooth. But he still had enough left in the tank to go on to beat Lennox Blackmoore who prior to losing to the Hawk was ranked number 2. So Cervantes wasn't shot. it was more of a passing of the torch thing like we see so often in the sport.

Alexis had been talked about as having been on the decline since the Jim Watt fight eighteen months before. But he kept winning, getting up against Ganigan to do so. There is no question he was reaching for the stars that night. There is also no question (in my mind anyway) Alexis Arguello was a GREAT, GREAT, GREAT fighter that night. Full credit to Pryor.

Your points on Duran and the rest are ENTIRELY Pryor's fault. The drugs got him VERY early and by the end of 1983 he was a shadow. He was presented with a contract for a $700k contract to fight Duran but because of the drugs, the paranoia that went with it and trouble with his team (gee I wonder why) he threw it away.

Now having said all that he beat as many great fighters, at at least a good a point in their careers, as Lennox Lewis or Larry Holmes or Mike Tyson or Roy Jones or Floyd Mayweather.

Pryor is one of those guys for the "You have to see him with your eyes" crew who in my view is a strong choice in the theoretical "who beats who at 140" games, but in terms of what we know isn't a top 50 and maybe not a top hundred kind of guy. And in my view it is all his own fault.

Anyway, that's the fanboy's case

I won't be convinced on Pryor. Are we really calling Cervantes an ATG? I mean he was a good fighter, probably a hall of famer, but an ATG? If we are then let's add him to my list of heavily overrated 140lbers. I mean look at Cervantes defences, was there any good reason for him to fight the mighty Carlos Gimenez twice? A guy who made Pongsaklek look like Ray Robinson when it comes to comp. I also think Cervantes was past his sell-by date by then. A win over Blackmoore doesn't convince me of anything. For me, Cervantes is probably a step below Tszyu & I think his best days went in his effort against Benitez.

Arguello was a great fighter, but he'd seen better days & a win over Kevin Rooney (admittedly was a great win) doesn't convince me that he was a light-welter.

I can definitely see the comparison with Tyson in fact it is apt with a win over a faded fighter (Holmes/Cervantes) & another over a smaller guy (Spinks/Arguello). I almost made that point earlier, but I thought I'd gone on enough as it is. Lewis & Holmes have slightly better resumes for me based on their overall opp being better, but their top wins are comparable & Arguello was a better fighter than Vitali or Norton.

But, I think Roy Jones & Floyd Mayweather have much better resumes. Roy has wins over a prime James Toney & Bernard Hopkins, while I think Mayweather has the most underrated resume in the sport & I personally feel it shits all over Pryor's. Not to mention that for me, both guys beat their opposition far more dominantly. Pryor is by far the most exciting of the three, but his achievements are very weak in comparison.

Don't get me wrong, Pryor is great to just chill back & watch & he'd just about make the borderline of greatness for me, but I think when people talk about him beating up guys who are real ATGs for me, I think their letting their admiration for the excitement he created cloud their judgement. Like I said, he's a mini-Tyson

I love RJJ he is one of my favourite fighters of all time, but B-Hop was not in his prime. Phyiscally maybe but he certainly hadn't learnt his craft the way he had when he destroyed Felix Trinidad.

[BIG H]

Let me at least try to make a case on the Hawk. Wins over ATG's on three occasions (we'll come back to that) and he defeated five top five ranked guys (three of whome were the HOFers) and a total of six top ten ranked guys.

Cervantes was clearly long in the tooth. But he still had enough left in the tank to go on to beat Lennox Blackmoore who prior to losing to the Hawk was ranked number 2. So Cervantes wasn't shot. it was more of a passing of the torch thing like we see so often in the sport.

Alexis had been talked about as having been on the decline since the Jim Watt fight eighteen months before. But he kept winning, getting up against Ganigan to do so. There is no question he was reaching for the stars that night. There is also no question (in my mind anyway) Alexis Arguello was a GREAT, GREAT, GREAT fighter that night. Full credit to Pryor.

Your points on Duran and the rest are ENTIRELY Pryor's fault. The drugs got him VERY early and by the end of 1983 he was a shadow. He was presented with a contract for a $700k contract to fight Duran but because of the drugs, the paranoia that went with it and trouble with his team (gee I wonder why) he threw it away.

Now having said all that he beat as many great fighters, at at least a good a point in their careers, as Lennox Lewis or Larry Holmes or Mike Tyson or Roy Jones or Floyd Mayweather.

Pryor is one of those guys for the "You have to see him with your eyes" crew who in my view is a strong choice in the theoretical "who beats who at 140" games, but in terms of what we know isn't a top 50 and maybe not a top hundred kind of guy. And in my view it is all his own fault.

Anyway, that's the fanboy's case

I won't be convinced on Pryor. Are we really calling Cervantes an ATG? I mean he was a good fighter, probably a hall of famer, but an ATG? If we are then let's add him to my list of heavily overrated 140lbers. I mean look at Cervantes defences, was there any good reason for him to fight the mighty Carlos Gimenez twice? A guy who made Pongsaklek look like Ray Robinson when it comes to comp. I also think Cervantes was past his sell-by date by then. A win over Blackmoore doesn't convince me of anything. For me, Cervantes is probably a step below Tszyu & I think his best days went in his effort against Benitez.

Arguello was a great fighter, but he'd seen better days & a win over Kevin Rooney (admittedly was a great win) doesn't convince me that he was a light-welter.

I can definitely see the comparison with Tyson in fact it is apt with a win over a faded fighter (Holmes/Cervantes) & another over a smaller guy (Spinks/Arguello). I almost made that point earlier, but I thought I'd gone on enough as it is. Lewis & Holmes have slightly better resumes for me based on their overall opp being better, but their top wins are comparable & Arguello was a better fighter than Vitali or Norton.

But, I think Roy Jones & Floyd Mayweather have much better resumes. Roy has wins over a prime James Toney & Bernard Hopkins, while I think Mayweather has the most underrated resume in the sport & I personally feel it shits all over Pryor's. Not to mention that for me, both guys beat their opposition far more dominantly. Pryor is by far the most exciting of the three, but his achievements are very weak in comparison.

Don't get me wrong, Pryor is great to just chill back & watch & he'd just about make the borderline of greatness for me, but I think when people talk about him beating up guys who are real ATGs for me, I think their letting their admiration for the excitement he created cloud their judgement. Like I said, he's a mini-Tyson

I just found this......


Junior Welterweight Fighter of Century as chosen by a five-member panel for The Associated Press in 1999:

1. Aaron Pryor
2. Barney Ross
3. Tony Canzoneri
4. Wilfred Benitez
5. Antonio Cervantes

[eagle]

Should be a good topic for discussion. Been done before, but still fun nonetheless.

I'll start with

Kostya Tszyu

Best win? Judah?
Duffed up by Vince Philips! (who was coming off a loss and 2 losses in 4)
Duffed up by Hatton!

Very very good fighter and the best of his time, but in all time terms I don't think he belongs with Aaron Pryor, Barney Ross, Wilfredo Benitez, PBF, Pac and maybe Cervantes and Canzoneri.

I think this is shit. First of all who really overrates him? How is he overrated? He was probably ranked 4 or 5 P4P at his absolute best which was fair. His weakness was always pressure guys like Hatton, Philips and Hector Lopez. He blitzed speed guys tho. Gotta keep in mind that almost all his major fights were in foreign countries. To say he shouldnt be up there with Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri is stupid. What did they do that was so much more impressive? Who ever said he should be named with PBF and Pac, they are clearly superior.
15 or so title defenses, won all the major belts, more than half career was title fights. 75% KO percentage.

What a urprise another Aussie doesn't agree

It aint 'Shit' mate, it's an opinion that I have.

Well back up your opinion. Who overrates him? Why are Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri so much better than Tszyu that he shouldnt be mentioned with them. Who overrates him? Its all well and good to have an opinion but atleast back it up. Did I say anything in my post that was false?

Look I'm a great Kostya respector but you REALLY need this question answered? OK.

Ross-An undisputed champion in three divisions. Five wins over HOFers. Over twenty five wins over ranked fighters. Over 70 wins.

Canzoneri-An undisputed champion in three divisions and fought a draw for the undisputed champion in a fourth division. Defeated over 30 ranked fighters, Defeated HOFers over ten times. Over 130 wins

Benitez-The youngest lineal champion in history. Three wins over HOFers. Ten wins over ranked fighters.

Cervantes-Beat HOFers on two occasions, had a draw with one on a third, defeated ranked fighters over ten times. Over 90 wins.

Pryor-Defeated HOFers on three occasions. A dozen wins over ranked guys. Over 30 wins.

Kostya-One win over a HOFer, a dozen wins over ranked guys and over thirty wins.

What exactly are you trying to say? Pryor and Tszyu have very similiar records. Lots of dominant defenses against ranked opponents yet never got their shot at the big guys. Kostya had more defenses, but one more loss. Kostya unified too. Why shouldnt Kostya be named with Pryor?

Its very hard to compare records with the earlier guys, they had a lot more fights, more wins, more losses. Cervantes title run was also similiar to Tszyu. Not a lot of big names. I never stated that Tszyu was better than all those games but to say he doesnt deserve to be mentioned with these guys is ridiculous. Your post really confirmed this more than proving me wrong.

[laughing] Yeah because THREE division undisputed champions is the same as one, 70+ wins is the same as 30, 25 wins over ranked fighters is the same as a dozen and 3+ wins over HOFers is the same as one.

Kostya is deficient to EVERY ONE of those guys in a major category and superior in nearly none isn't he?

Again, I have great respect for Kostya, but putting him in the above's league seems overrating him to me.

It's no insult to not be as accomplished as men like this. It really isn't.

Again I bring up Pryor. He did not unify the belts so Pryor is deficient in that respect. Tszyu had 5 more defenses than Pryor. Pryor is deficient there. I dunno who would have won between the 2 and i honestly think Aaron may have cos his style would have troubled Tszyu. But to say Kostya does not deserve to be mentioned with him is ludicrous. Its a similar argument with Calvacante. Similiar amount of title defenses as Tszyu. A lot more fights, a lot more losses. Never unified the belts but had one or two more notable wins. There are arguments for and against Calvacante and Tszyu, but to say Kostya shouldnt be mentioned with him again is stupid.
As for the whole 70 wins is better than 30, thats just stupid. Kostya fought 1 person with a losing record. The older guys fought dozens. Tszyu had fought 2 ex champs by his tenth fight, and won a title by his 14th. To show how ridiculous that argument is, Tszyu had more title fights than Ross but about 50 fewer fights. If its all about wins i guess u could add Tszyus amateur career of 259-11.

UNIFYING belts means NOTHING. Pryor was the LINEAL champion! Don't confuse straps with true championships.

Who the hell is Calcavante

Sorry i meant Cervantes. Unifying belts means nothing? Are you serious? Nothing? Correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't unifying the belts make you lineal champ? You are a very hard man to please if yout think unifying a division means nothing. another piss weak and stupid argument. My point is to say Kostya doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as these guys is ridiculous. Sure you may be able to argue that they are all better, but there are many cases to be made that suggest Kostya was better than some of them as well. He deserves to be mentioned with and compared to all of them.

[BIG H]

Should be a good topic for discussion. Been done before, but still fun nonetheless.

I'll start with

Kostya Tszyu

Best win? Judah?
Duffed up by Vince Philips! (who was coming off a loss and 2 losses in 4)
Duffed up by Hatton!

Very very good fighter and the best of his time, but in all time terms I don't think he belongs with Aaron Pryor, Barney Ross, Wilfredo Benitez, PBF, Pac and maybe Cervantes and Canzoneri.

I think this is shit. First of all who really overrates him? How is he overrated? He was probably ranked 4 or 5 P4P at his absolute best which was fair. His weakness was always pressure guys like Hatton, Philips and Hector Lopez. He blitzed speed guys tho. Gotta keep in mind that almost all his major fights were in foreign countries. To say he shouldnt be up there with Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri is stupid. What did they do that was so much more impressive? Who ever said he should be named with PBF and Pac, they are clearly superior.
15 or so title defenses, won all the major belts, more than half career was title fights. 75% KO percentage.

What a urprise another Aussie doesn't agree

It aint 'Shit' mate, it's an opinion that I have.

Well back up your opinion. Who overrates him? Why are Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri so much better than Tszyu that he shouldnt be mentioned with them. Who overrates him? Its all well and good to have an opinion but atleast back it up. Did I say anything in my post that was false?

Look I'm a great Kostya respector but you REALLY need this question answered? OK.

Ross-An undisputed champion in three divisions. Five wins over HOFers. Over twenty five wins over ranked fighters. Over 70 wins.

Canzoneri-An undisputed champion in three divisions and fought a draw for the undisputed champion in a fourth division. Defeated over 30 ranked fighters, Defeated HOFers over ten times. Over 130 wins

Benitez-The youngest lineal champion in history. Three wins over HOFers. Ten wins over ranked fighters.

Cervantes-Beat HOFers on two occasions, had a draw with one on a third, defeated ranked fighters over ten times. Over 90 wins.

Pryor-Defeated HOFers on three occasions. A dozen wins over ranked guys. Over 30 wins.

Kostya-One win over a HOFer, a dozen wins over ranked guys and over thirty wins.

What exactly are you trying to say? Pryor and Tszyu have very similiar records. Lots of dominant defenses against ranked opponents yet never got their shot at the big guys. Kostya had more defenses, but one more loss. Kostya unified too. Why shouldnt Kostya be named with Pryor?

Its very hard to compare records with the earlier guys, they had a lot more fights, more wins, more losses. Cervantes title run was also similiar to Tszyu. Not a lot of big names. I never stated that Tszyu was better than all those games but to say he doesnt deserve to be mentioned with these guys is ridiculous. Your post really confirmed this more than proving me wrong.

[laughing] Yeah because THREE division undisputed champions is the same as one, 70+ wins is the same as 30, 25 wins over ranked fighters is the same as a dozen and 3+ wins over HOFers is the same as one.

Kostya is deficient to EVERY ONE of those guys in a major category and superior in nearly none isn't he?

Again, I have great respect for Kostya, but putting him in the above's league seems overrating him to me.

It's no insult to not be as accomplished as men like this. It really isn't.

Again I bring up Pryor. He did not unify the belts so Pryor is deficient in that respect. Tszyu had 5 more defenses than Pryor. Pryor is deficient there. I dunno who would have won between the 2 and i honestly think Aaron may have cos his style would have troubled Tszyu. But to say Kostya does not deserve to be mentioned with him is ludicrous. Its a similar argument with Calvacante. Similiar amount of title defenses as Tszyu. A lot more fights, a lot more losses. Never unified the belts but had one or two more notable wins. There are arguments for and against Calvacante and Tszyu, but to say Kostya shouldnt be mentioned with him again is stupid.
As for the whole 70 wins is better than 30, thats just stupid. Kostya fought 1 person with a losing record. The older guys fought dozens. Tszyu had fought 2 ex champs by his tenth fight, and won a title by his 14th. To show how ridiculous that argument is, Tszyu had more title fights than Ross but about 50 fewer fights. If its all about wins i guess u could add Tszyus amateur career of 259-11.

UNIFYING belts means NOTHING. Pryor was the LINEAL champion! Don't confuse straps with true championships.

Who the hell is Calcavante

Sorry i meant Cervantes. Unifying belts means nothing? Are you serious? Nothing? Correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't unifying the belts make you lineal champ? You are a very hard man to please if yout think unifying a division means nothing. another piss weak and stupid argument.

By lineal champ, he means 'beating the man that beat the man' Winning all the belts wouldn't necessarily make this the case. i.e Lewis didn't become champion until he beat Biggs, Tyson wasn't champion until he beat Spinks etc. In terms of having any bearing on how good a fighter is, I agree that it doesn't necessarily have any bearing. I mean Shannon Briggs being lineal champ in the 1st place for example.

[eagle]

Should be a good topic for discussion. Been done before, but still fun nonetheless.

I'll start with

Kostya Tszyu

Best win? Judah?
Duffed up by Vince Philips! (who was coming off a loss and 2 losses in 4)
Duffed up by Hatton!

Very very good fighter and the best of his time, but in all time terms I don't think he belongs with Aaron Pryor, Barney Ross, Wilfredo Benitez, PBF, Pac and maybe Cervantes and Canzoneri.

I think this is shit. First of all who really overrates him? How is he overrated? He was probably ranked 4 or 5 P4P at his absolute best which was fair. His weakness was always pressure guys like Hatton, Philips and Hector Lopez. He blitzed speed guys tho. Gotta keep in mind that almost all his major fights were in foreign countries. To say he shouldnt be up there with Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri is stupid. What did they do that was so much more impressive? Who ever said he should be named with PBF and Pac, they are clearly superior.
15 or so title defenses, won all the major belts, more than half career was title fights. 75% KO percentage.

What a urprise another Aussie doesn't agree

It aint 'Shit' mate, it's an opinion that I have.

Well back up your opinion. Who overrates him? Why are Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri so much better than Tszyu that he shouldnt be mentioned with them. Who overrates him? Its all well and good to have an opinion but atleast back it up. Did I say anything in my post that was false?

Look I'm a great Kostya respector but you REALLY need this question answered? OK.

Ross-An undisputed champion in three divisions. Five wins over HOFers. Over twenty five wins over ranked fighters. Over 70 wins.

Canzoneri-An undisputed champion in three divisions and fought a draw for the undisputed champion in a fourth division. Defeated over 30 ranked fighters, Defeated HOFers over ten times. Over 130 wins

Benitez-The youngest lineal champion in history. Three wins over HOFers. Ten wins over ranked fighters.

Cervantes-Beat HOFers on two occasions, had a draw with one on a third, defeated ranked fighters over ten times. Over 90 wins.

Pryor-Defeated HOFers on three occasions. A dozen wins over ranked guys. Over 30 wins.

Kostya-One win over a HOFer, a dozen wins over ranked guys and over thirty wins.

What exactly are you trying to say? Pryor and Tszyu have very similiar records. Lots of dominant defenses against ranked opponents yet never got their shot at the big guys. Kostya had more defenses, but one more loss. Kostya unified too. Why shouldnt Kostya be named with Pryor?

Its very hard to compare records with the earlier guys, they had a lot more fights, more wins, more losses. Cervantes title run was also similiar to Tszyu. Not a lot of big names. I never stated that Tszyu was better than all those games but to say he doesnt deserve to be mentioned with these guys is ridiculous. Your post really confirmed this more than proving me wrong.

[laughing] Yeah because THREE division undisputed champions is the same as one, 70+ wins is the same as 30, 25 wins over ranked fighters is the same as a dozen and 3+ wins over HOFers is the same as one.

Kostya is deficient to EVERY ONE of those guys in a major category and superior in nearly none isn't he?

Again, I have great respect for Kostya, but putting him in the above's league seems overrating him to me.

It's no insult to not be as accomplished as men like this. It really isn't.

Again I bring up Pryor. He did not unify the belts so Pryor is deficient in that respect. Tszyu had 5 more defenses than Pryor. Pryor is deficient there. I dunno who would have won between the 2 and i honestly think Aaron may have cos his style would have troubled Tszyu. But to say Kostya does not deserve to be mentioned with him is ludicrous. Its a similar argument with Calvacante. Similiar amount of title defenses as Tszyu. A lot more fights, a lot more losses. Never unified the belts but had one or two more notable wins. There are arguments for and against Calvacante and Tszyu, but to say Kostya shouldnt be mentioned with him again is stupid.
As for the whole 70 wins is better than 30, thats just stupid. Kostya fought 1 person with a losing record. The older guys fought dozens. Tszyu had fought 2 ex champs by his tenth fight, and won a title by his 14th. To show how ridiculous that argument is, Tszyu had more title fights than Ross but about 50 fewer fights. If its all about wins i guess u could add Tszyus amateur career of 259-11.

UNIFYING belts means NOTHING. Pryor was the LINEAL champion! Don't confuse straps with true championships.

Who the hell is Calcavante

Sorry i meant Cervantes. Unifying belts means nothing? Are you serious? Nothing? Correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't unifying the belts make you lineal champ? You are a very hard man to please if yout think unifying a division means nothing. another piss weak and stupid argument.

By lineal champ, he means 'beating the man that beat the man' Winning all the belts wouldn't necessarily make this the case. i.e Lewis didn't become champion until he beat Biggs, Tyson wasn't champion until he beat Spinks etc. In terms of having any bearing on how good a fighter is, I agree that it doesn't necessarily have any bearing. I mean Shannon Briggs being lineal champ in the 1st place for example.

I agree being lineal champ is important. But surely its a ridiculous statement to say unifying means nothing. He makes it sound like anybody could do it. If you have beaten all the other champs in your division its hard to do much more at that weightclass.

[BIG H]

Should be a good topic for discussion. Been done before, but still fun nonetheless.

I'll start with

Kostya Tszyu

Best win? Judah?
Duffed up by Vince Philips! (who was coming off a loss and 2 losses in 4)
Duffed up by Hatton!

Very very good fighter and the best of his time, but in all time terms I don't think he belongs with Aaron Pryor, Barney Ross, Wilfredo Benitez, PBF, Pac and maybe Cervantes and Canzoneri.

I think this is shit. First of all who really overrates him? How is he overrated? He was probably ranked 4 or 5 P4P at his absolute best which was fair. His weakness was always pressure guys like Hatton, Philips and Hector Lopez. He blitzed speed guys tho. Gotta keep in mind that almost all his major fights were in foreign countries. To say he shouldnt be up there with Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri is stupid. What did they do that was so much more impressive? Who ever said he should be named with PBF and Pac, they are clearly superior.
15 or so title defenses, won all the major belts, more than half career was title fights. 75% KO percentage.

What a urprise another Aussie doesn't agree

It aint 'Shit' mate, it's an opinion that I have.

Well back up your opinion. Who overrates him? Why are Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri so much better than Tszyu that he shouldnt be mentioned with them. Who overrates him? Its all well and good to have an opinion but atleast back it up. Did I say anything in my post that was false?

Look I'm a great Kostya respector but you REALLY need this question answered? OK.

Ross-An undisputed champion in three divisions. Five wins over HOFers. Over twenty five wins over ranked fighters. Over 70 wins.

Canzoneri-An undisputed champion in three divisions and fought a draw for the undisputed champion in a fourth division. Defeated over 30 ranked fighters, Defeated HOFers over ten times. Over 130 wins

Benitez-The youngest lineal champion in history. Three wins over HOFers. Ten wins over ranked fighters.

Cervantes-Beat HOFers on two occasions, had a draw with one on a third, defeated ranked fighters over ten times. Over 90 wins.

Pryor-Defeated HOFers on three occasions. A dozen wins over ranked guys. Over 30 wins.

Kostya-One win over a HOFer, a dozen wins over ranked guys and over thirty wins.

What exactly are you trying to say? Pryor and Tszyu have very similiar records. Lots of dominant defenses against ranked opponents yet never got their shot at the big guys. Kostya had more defenses, but one more loss. Kostya unified too. Why shouldnt Kostya be named with Pryor?

Its very hard to compare records with the earlier guys, they had a lot more fights, more wins, more losses. Cervantes title run was also similiar to Tszyu. Not a lot of big names. I never stated that Tszyu was better than all those games but to say he doesnt deserve to be mentioned with these guys is ridiculous. Your post really confirmed this more than proving me wrong.

[laughing] Yeah because THREE division undisputed champions is the same as one, 70+ wins is the same as 30, 25 wins over ranked fighters is the same as a dozen and 3+ wins over HOFers is the same as one.

Kostya is deficient to EVERY ONE of those guys in a major category and superior in nearly none isn't he?

Again, I have great respect for Kostya, but putting him in the above's league seems overrating him to me.

It's no insult to not be as accomplished as men like this. It really isn't.

Again I bring up Pryor. He did not unify the belts so Pryor is deficient in that respect. Tszyu had 5 more defenses than Pryor. Pryor is deficient there. I dunno who would have won between the 2 and i honestly think Aaron may have cos his style would have troubled Tszyu. But to say Kostya does not deserve to be mentioned with him is ludicrous. Its a similar argument with Calvacante. Similiar amount of title defenses as Tszyu. A lot more fights, a lot more losses. Never unified the belts but had one or two more notable wins. There are arguments for and against Calvacante and Tszyu, but to say Kostya shouldnt be mentioned with him again is stupid.
As for the whole 70 wins is better than 30, thats just stupid. Kostya fought 1 person with a losing record. The older guys fought dozens. Tszyu had fought 2 ex champs by his tenth fight, and won a title by his 14th. To show how ridiculous that argument is, Tszyu had more title fights than Ross but about 50 fewer fights. If its all about wins i guess u could add Tszyus amateur career of 259-11.

UNIFYING belts means NOTHING. Pryor was the LINEAL champion! Don't confuse straps with true championships.

Who the hell is Calcavante

Sorry i meant Cervantes. Unifying belts means nothing? Are you serious? Nothing? Correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't unifying the belts make you lineal champ? You are a very hard man to please if yout think unifying a division means nothing. another piss weak and stupid argument.

By lineal champ, he means 'beating the man that beat the man' Winning all the belts wouldn't necessarily make this the case. i.e Lewis didn't become champion until he beat Biggs, Tyson wasn't champion until he beat Spinks etc. In terms of having any bearing on how good a fighter is, I agree that it doesn't necessarily have any bearing. I mean Shannon Briggs being lineal champ in the 1st place for example.

I agree being lineal champ is important. But surely its a ridiculous statement to say unifying means nothing. He makes it sound like anybody could do it. If you have beaten all the other champs in your division its hard to do much more at that weightclass.

Agreed

[Spicoli]

Scroll through and try to read that string on a phone my eyes are bleeding

[marbleheadmaui]

Should be a good topic for discussion. Been done before, but still fun nonetheless.

I'll start with

Kostya Tszyu

Best win? Judah?
Duffed up by Vince Philips! (who was coming off a loss and 2 losses in 4)
Duffed up by Hatton!

Very very good fighter and the best of his time, but in all time terms I don't think he belongs with Aaron Pryor, Barney Ross, Wilfredo Benitez, PBF, Pac and maybe Cervantes and Canzoneri.

I think this is shit. First of all who really overrates him? How is he overrated? He was probably ranked 4 or 5 P4P at his absolute best which was fair. His weakness was always pressure guys like Hatton, Philips and Hector Lopez. He blitzed speed guys tho. Gotta keep in mind that almost all his major fights were in foreign countries. To say he shouldnt be up there with Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri is stupid. What did they do that was so much more impressive? Who ever said he should be named with PBF and Pac, they are clearly superior.
15 or so title defenses, won all the major belts, more than half career was title fights. 75% KO percentage.

What a urprise another Aussie doesn't agree

It aint 'Shit' mate, it's an opinion that I have.

Well back up your opinion. Who overrates him? Why are Pryor, Ross, Benitez, Cervantes and Canzoneri so much better than Tszyu that he shouldnt be mentioned with them. Who overrates him? Its all well and good to have an opinion but atleast back it up. Did I say anything in my post that was false?

Look I'm a great Kostya respector but you REALLY need this question answered? OK.

Ross-An undisputed champion in three divisions. Five wins over HOFers. Over twenty five wins over ranked fighters. Over 70 wins.

Canzoneri-An undisputed champion in three divisions and fought a draw for the undisputed champion in a fourth division. Defeated over 30 ranked fighters, Defeated HOFers over ten times. Over 130 wins

Benitez-The youngest lineal champion in history. Three wins over HOFers. Ten wins over ranked fighters.

Cervantes-Beat HOFers on two occasions, had a draw with one on a third, defeated ranked fighters over ten times. Over 90 wins.

Pryor-Defeated HOFers on three occasions. A dozen wins over ranked guys. Over 30 wins.

Kostya-One win over a HOFer, a dozen wins over ranked guys and over thirty wins.

What exactly are you trying to say? Pryor and Tszyu have very similiar records. Lots of dominant defenses against ranked opponents yet never got their shot at the big guys. Kostya had more defenses, but one more loss. Kostya unified too. Why shouldnt Kostya be named with Pryor?

Its very hard to compare records with the earlier guys, they had a lot more fights, more wins, more losses. Cervantes title run was also similiar to Tszyu. Not a lot of big names. I never stated that Tszyu was better than all those games but to say he doesnt deserve to be mentioned with these guys is ridiculous. Your post really confirmed this more than proving me wrong.

[laughing] Yeah because THREE division undisputed champions is the same as one, 70+ wins is the same as 30, 25 wins over ranked fighters is the same as a dozen and 3+ wins over HOFers is the same as one.

Kostya is deficient to EVERY ONE of those guys in a major category and superior in nearly none isn't he?

Again, I have great respect for Kostya, but putting him in the above's league seems overrating him to me.

It's no insult to not be as accomplished as men like this. It really isn't.

Again I bring up Pryor. He did not unify the belts so Pryor is deficient in that respect. Tszyu had 5 more defenses than Pryor. Pryor is deficient there. I dunno who would have won between the 2 and i honestly think Aaron may have cos his style would have troubled Tszyu. But to say Kostya does not deserve to be mentioned with him is ludicrous. Its a similar argument with Calvacante. Similiar amount of title defenses as Tszyu. A lot more fights, a lot more losses. Never unified the belts but had one or two more notable wins. There are arguments for and against Calvacante and Tszyu, but to say Kostya shouldnt be mentioned with him again is stupid.
As for the whole 70 wins is better than 30, thats just stupid. Kostya fought 1 person with a losing record. The older guys fought dozens. Tszyu had fought 2 ex champs by his tenth fight, and won a title by his 14th. To show how ridiculous that argument is, Tszyu had more title fights than Ross but about 50 fewer fights. If its all about wins i guess u could add Tszyus amateur career of 259-11.

UNIFYING belts means NOTHING. Pryor was the LINEAL champion! Don't confuse straps with true championships.

Who the hell is Calcavante

Sorry i meant Cervantes. Unifying belts means nothing? Are you serious? Nothing? Correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't unifying the belts make you lineal champ? You are a very hard man to please if yout think unifying a division means nothing. another piss weak and stupid argument.

By lineal champ, he means 'beating the man that beat the man' Winning all the belts wouldn't necessarily make this the case. i.e Lewis didn't become champion until he beat Biggs, Tyson wasn't champion until he beat Spinks etc. In terms of having any bearing on how good a fighter is, I agree that it doesn't necessarily have any bearing. I mean Shannon Briggs being lineal champ in the 1st place for example.

I agree being lineal champ is important. But surely its a ridiculous statement to say unifying means nothing. He makes it sound like anybody could do it. If you have beaten all the other champs in your division its hard to do much more at that weightclass.

It DOESN'T mean anything. Why? because it is NOT a function of just what happenes in the ring. The WBA/WBC etc basically pick and choose champions and then strip them at will.

ANYTHING driven by the alphabet gangs doesn't mean anything. Why? Their process is corrupt!