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.

[armyash]

Joe Calzaghe for me

[marbleheadmaui]

Joe Calzaghe for me

Is BHOP's continued success moving you at all? How about if Kessler gets another big win?

[armyash]

Joe Calzaghe for me

Is BHOP's continued success moving you at all? How about if Kessler gets another big win?

Calzaghe does deserve respect for those 2 wins especially for Kessler in my eyes. He was the other top fighter at the weight and Calzaghe beat him fair and square.

The win against Bhop was contentious (i had JC winning for what it's worth) it wasn't a clear victory and will be one that people will argue about but i agree it does look better the more Hopkins goes on to achieve. Call me crazy but he could have gone for a rematch and beat him more convincingly which would have done him wonders. I think there was time on his side for a couple more fights too but he chose to retire i think the hunger was dwindling fast as the money rolled in.

The biggest names on his record are Kessler (good win), Hopkins (good but contentious), Roy jones (shell), Reid (people still argue about it), Eubank (on his way out, took fight at short notice), Jeff Lacy (did JC ruin him or was he just a hype job in the first place?)

There are other good names on his record but not good enough to call him a great for beating them.

He could have gone over to Germany beat Ottke even if it meant taking the short end on the pay cheque.

It's not all his own fault, injuries can't be helped and he can only fight what is put in front of him 1 of the greatest British boxers of all time and will be in the IBHOF as he is more qualified than some who are already in there, good for him but yes for me overrated.

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

Carlos Monzon is actually unerrated by way of not being overrated enough

[JazMerkin]

I agree with Tszyu to a point (& what a shock to see The Third Man straight into defend ), however H, I think you're wrong about the wear & tear. The man had nearly 300 amateur fights, not to mention all those years of sparring, that all catches up, hence his shorter pro career. I think he had a good career, just not a great one. What is his defining win? Old Roger Mayweather & Julio Cesar Chavez? Zab Judah? Everyone tries to go on about guys 'ducking' him, but the fact is he was a win away from bouts with Oscar & Floyd & on both occasions blew the opportunity by losing to guys he shouldn't have (really shouldn't have in the case of Phillips). I think he had all the ingredients to be a great fighter especially looking at him as an amateur, but I think he falls slightly short for me.

My unpopular choice is going to be Aaron Pryor. An incredibly exciting fighter? Yes for sure. An ATG? Not for me. Don't get me wrong the Cervantes win is a good one, but in truth he'd seen better days & I think he was some way from the guy who beat up Locche & De Jesus as evidenced by some of his pedestrian defences of the title prior to that.

The Arguello wins were very impressive, but was he really a force at Light-Welter? I mean he'd come up some way already. They were great fights, but I've always found that this idea that everyone was ducking Pryor slightly laughable. Why didn't he force the issue & chase them like Duran did? If he wanted Leonard, Benitez or Duran, why didn't he give them no alternative but to face him? Or instead of taking a year between defences, why not go up & get into the mix with the likes of Starling & Curry? He's a guy who always gets mentioned as loving the glory, but to me he didn't really chase it.

I've clearly got a beef with Light-Welters

On those mentioned, I think saying Johnson & Louis is pure madness, if anything they don't get rated enough by people, although admittedly all great HWs get overrated in the greater scheme of boxing history. I also disagree with Jim on Dempsey, he had some nice things to his game & he was called the Manassa Mauler, he wasn't going to be the most technically astute, but he did provide a blueprint for many of the great infighters of the future so gets praise there from me.

[marbleheadmaui]

I agree with Tszyu to a point (& what a shock to see The Third Man straight into defend ), however H, I think you're wrong about the wear & tear. The man had nearly 300 amateur fights, not to mention all those years of sparring, that all catches up, hence his shorter pro career. I think he had a good career, just not a great one. What is his defining win? Old Roger Mayweather & Julio Cesar Chavez? Zab Judah? Everyone tries to go on about guys 'ducking' him, but the fact is he was a win away from bouts with Oscar & Floyd & on both occasions blew the opportunity by losing to guys he shouldn't have (really shouldn't have in the case of Phillips). I think he had all the ingredients to be a great fighter especially looking at him as an amateur, but I think he falls slightly short for me.

My unpopular choice is going to be Aaron Pryor. An incredibly exciting fighter? Yes for sure. An ATG? Not for me. Don't get me wrong the Cervantes win is a good one, but in truth he'd seen better days & I think he was some way from the guy who beat up Locche & De Jesus as evidenced by some of his pedestrian defences of the title prior to that.

The Arguello wins were very impressive, but was he really a force at Light-Welter? I mean he'd come up some way already. They were great fights, but I've always found that this idea that everyone was ducking Pryor slightly laughable. Why didn't he force the issue & chase them like Duran did? If he wanted Leonard, Benitez or Duran, why didn't he give them no alternative but to face him? Or instead of taking a year between defences, why not go up & get into the mix with the likes of Starling & Curry? He's a guy who always gets mentioned as loving the glory, but to me he didn't really chase it.

I've clearly got a beef with Light-Welters

On those mentioned, I think saying Johnson & Louis is pure madness, if anything they don't get rated enough by people, although admittedly all great HWs get overrated in the greater scheme of boxing history. I also disagree with Jim on Dempsey, he had some nice things to his game & he was called the Manassa Mauler, he wasn't going to be the most technically astute, but he did provide a blueprint for many of the great infighters of the future so gets praise there from me.

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

[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

[BIG H]

Joe Calzaghe for me

For somebody with the amatuer record and pedigree he had and then to hold a title for 12 years undefeated and still be very widely put down and discredited I'd say the guy is extremely underrated.

[armyash]

Joe Calzaghe for me

For somebody with the amatuer record and pedigree he had and then to hold a title for 12 years undefeated and still be very widely put down and discredited I'd say the guy is extremely underrated.

He accomplished a lot and it's a brilliant career but i just can't help but think he could have done more. How many times was there fights mentioned/pencilled in for them to be cancelled or he would fight someone we had barely heard of?

I'm not slagging him off as i said previously i am a fan but i think he was a little overrated. My view might change in years to come as i look back but for now that's my opinion. A long title reign is admirable but opponents are also taken in to consideration when judging the reign.

[Kev]

I agree with Tszyu and by association Hatton.

Currently

Segura is the most overatted currently. Ridiculous that he's p4p for beating up a 38 year old tiny tiny tiny man with no power at all.(he'll be 2012's Christian Mijares and will lose his title to a 11-3-1 phenom)
Sergio Martinez
Nonito Donaire
Frankie Gavin

[armyash]

I agree with Tszyu and by association Hatton.

Currently

Segura is the most overatted currently. Ridiculous that he's p4p for beating up a 38 year old tiny tiny tiny man with no power at all.(he'll be 2012's Christian Mijares and will lose his title to a 11-3-1 phenom)
Sergio Martinez
Nonito Donaire
Frankie Gavin

Agree Hatton was a little overrated i wonder if he ever thinks it would have been a good idea to not balloon so badly between fights, not that it would have affected the outcome of his losses greatly but maybe would have prolonged his career slightly.

Too early to say about Gavin at the moment i think he's lazy and needs a good kick up the arse and possibly a different trainer, I have a feeling he is the boss of Farnell who is just happy to have him on his books and doesn't want to rock the boat. He needs a no nonsense trainer and i dont think Farnell is that trainer.

[Mars_ax]

I agree with Tszyu and by association Hatton.

Currently

Segura is the most overatted currently. Ridiculous that he's p4p for beating up a 38 year old tiny tiny tiny man with no power at all.(he'll be 2012's Christian Mijares and will lose his title to a 11-3-1 phenom)
Sergio Martinez
Nonito Donaire
Frankie Gavin

Sergio Martinez & Nonito Donaire are overrated? I don't understand that at all, so who's rated above them?

[Kev]

I agree with Tszyu and by association Hatton.

Currently

Segura is the most overatted currently. Ridiculous that he's p4p for beating up a 38 year old tiny tiny tiny man with no power at all.(he'll be 2012's Christian Mijares and will lose his title to a 11-3-1 phenom)
Sergio Martinez
Nonito Donaire
Frankie Gavin

Sergio Martinez & Nonito Donaire are overrated? I don't understand that at all, so who's rated above them?

Well according to the Ring magazine only Manny, and thats my point.

Martinez hasn't done a great deal in my opinion to prove he's the second best fighter on the planet. Went 1-1 with Paul Williams, drew with Cintron and outpointed an out of form and alcoholic Kelly Pavlik.

I've seen nothing from him that makes me think he could have beaten a prime Hopkins at the weight, or even a prime Pavlik. He's a good fighter who has happened to make his way to the middleweight division at exactly the right time.

Donaire I believe may well prove himself to be great, he looks to have sublime skills, but he hasn't acomplished much in comparison to the other top guys, although his win over Montiel definitely propelled him up there.

Still I'm not yet convinced he's much ahead of guys like Gamboa orJuan Manuel Lopez and he may well yet get found out as he faces tougher opposition.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

I agree with Tszyu and by association Hatton.

Currently

Segura is the most overatted currently. Ridiculous that he's p4p for beating up a 38 year old tiny tiny tiny man with no power at all.(he'll be 2012's Christian Mijares and will lose his title to a 11-3-1 phenom)
Sergio Martinez
Nonito Donaire
Frankie Gavin

Funny

Add DeGale & Audley Harrison to that list would you?