Fighters that you (controversially) think are overrated

[marbleheadmaui]

Carlos Zarate

Interesting one that. I guess most people would have him as the greatest Bantam of all time?? Maybe Olivires?

To be honest im not all that knowledgable on the lower weightclasses, but you could also make an argument Ruben Olivares was overrated aswell. He had some great performances against Rose, Castillo, but he was beaten in his prime at his prime weight against Rafael Herrera twice, and did only make 6 title defenses at Bantamweight.

And he wasn't all that successful moving up at Featherweight either, i think other Bantamweights like Jeff Chander get overlooked.

I think one thing that matters in looking at Olivares is that it is like looking at a 1970's heavyweight. What I mean is Olivares fought in the best era for bantams the sport has ever seen (in my view anyway). From about 1965-1972 or so that division had so many exceptional fighters it isn't funny. Being the top dog in THAT era at 118 is like being the top welter of the late 1970's or the top lightweight of post WWI. It's an extraordinary feat.

He was very good fighter but i do think he gets overrated, he wasn't at the top long enough. And as i said he was beaten twice at his prime weight in his prime, i know he liked party lifestyle but that's he's fault, you got to stay dedicated to stay at the top see Hagler, Hopkins, two great fighters who were never out of shape.

No question the losses to Chucho and Hererra count (and Olivares' partying means zilch as you note). But those were NOT a couple of stiffs either. Rafael beat guys like Rodolfo Martinez, Chucho and Venice Bhorkasor. Three terriffic 118's. Chucho beat Pimintel and Medel and Caraballo. Three other terriffic 118's. Like I said that division was absolutely loaded in those years.

Saying he wasn't at the top long enough in that era is a little like saying Ali wasn't at the top long enough at heavy in the 1970's. About three years IIRC for each guy, right?

And how long was Jeff Chandler (a GREAT fighter) on top anyway? Wasn't his run three years or so also?

Chandler-Olivares. THAT would have been something.

Oh yea i know Rafael Herrera is very good, i actually found out about him awhile ago. After people on youtube said he wasn't that great, i looked at his record and see his fight with Ruben Olivares and was shocked cause he was very good indeed.

Muhammad Ali also had a great career in the 60's though, his fights in the 70's was just the cherry on the cake.

But Jeff Chandler isn't seen in the same light though is he ? he's very underrated by most boxing fans and he's never talked about. I loved his fight vs Gaby Canizales.

As for your other comment about Orlando Canizales, he did beat some very solid opponents. Im not saying he had the greatest era, but he was never beaten convincingly, i mean he deserved the nod against Wilfredo Vasquez and was denied winning a title above his peak weightclass.

Also the angles he created were a thing of beauty, in the 1st fight against Kelvin Seabrooks he looked like one of the greatest Bantamweights.

The thing on the HOF is it oughtta be a pretty select group. I'm not saying Canizales wasn't a fine fighter. I'm saying that facing ZERO top five guys in a title reign of sixteen fights isn't enough to get you access. Looking impressive against fringe contenders isn't the same thing as merely beating the best available opposition. Kelvin Seabrooks was a good pro. But he won a vacant strap against an unranked guy from a new organization and defended it against three unranked guys before O fought him.

Maybe it's because I was living in Philly when Jeff Chandler was doing his thing, but I've always thought Chandler was a top ten all-time 118 and would have been a handful for any 118 who ever laced'em up.