Fighters that you (controversially) think are overrated

[marbleheadmaui]

I agree with all so far (just to what degree still tbc).

What about Jack Dempsey? Huge draw, shit boxer.

Sort of like your brain?

Drop the grudge. What are you, a teenage girl? Seriously... The title of the thread suggests I should be contraversial..? So...

Anyway, yeah Dempsey was a massive hype job. He was like Americas Ricky Hatton... Or Juio Cesar Chavez?

REALLY? I mean other than Harry Wills? Who the hell should Dempsey have fought that he didn't? I mean he beat EVERYBODY and he did so with a level of aggression, speed and technique never before seen in a heavy!

I thought you wee a Tyson guy? As near as I can figure one cannot logically be a rabid fan of one without the other.

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

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

[marbleheadmaui]

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.

Fair play mate, but I don't buy the argument about his opposition. I really don't see who was operating at SMW during his reign that he should've fought and didn't - except perhaps Ottke and JC would've outclassed him very comfortably imo. I'm not saying JC's oppoistion was great, but I wanna know who he should've fought and didn't - remembering it takes 2 to tango.

Ottke, Jones (earlier), Frankie Liles and Antwun Echols would sure have spiced up that resume.

How many times to I/We have to explain about Echols and Liles I mentioned Ottke and RJJ was not ever at SMW during Calzgahe's reign.

Let's try the actual, ya know, FACTS.

1996 Jones was still at 168. He moved up in 1997 the same year Calzaghe wins a strap.
1998 Liles is ranked #1, Calzaghe #2
1999 Calzaghe #1, Liles #7
2001 Calzaghe #2, Echols #4
2002 Calzaghe #1, Echols #3
2003 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4
2004 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4

Now do you NOT think those names would have improved Calzaghe's resume?

No, not at all!! And I will now explain why.....

Liles only fought a couple of times after 97, one of which he got Koed by Mitchell, whom Calzaghe took out in less than 9 minutes, begs the question why would Liles even have been on the radar. Echols: He probably had one decent win around that time (Brewer) after having already lost he then went on to lose to world beating Anthony Mundine and Kingsley Ikeke. Echols never deserved a shot and doesn't belong in the same breath.

P.S As I said RJJ was never a SMW during JCs reign. He was LHW champion from 96. Let's face it, if they had've fought Jones would've one pretty handily

I don't buy ANY of it!!!!!!!!! NONE! (Stubborn? Not me)

It's funny, I think Calzaghe had a real toughness to him and that the athletic gap between Jones and Calzaghe is smaller than most think. I think by say 1998? That's a competitive fight. I think Jones wins, but I don't think it's a walkover.

[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.

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.

Fair play mate, but I don't buy the argument about his opposition. I really don't see who was operating at SMW during his reign that he should've fought and didn't - except perhaps Ottke and JC would've outclassed him very comfortably imo. I'm not saying JC's oppoistion was great, but I wanna know who he should've fought and didn't - remembering it takes 2 to tango.

Ottke, Jones (earlier), Frankie Liles and Antwun Echols would sure have spiced up that resume.

How many times to I/We have to explain about Echols and Liles I mentioned Ottke and RJJ was not ever at SMW during Calzgahe's reign.

Let's try the actual, ya know, FACTS.

1996 Jones was still at 168. He moved up in 1997 the same year Calzaghe wins a strap.
1998 Liles is ranked #1, Calzaghe #2
1999 Calzaghe #1, Liles #7
2001 Calzaghe #2, Echols #4
2002 Calzaghe #1, Echols #3
2003 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4
2004 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4

Now do you NOT think those names would have improved Calzaghe's resume?

No, not at all!! And I will now explain why.....

Liles only fought a couple of times after 97, one of which he got Koed by Mitchell, whom Calzaghe took out in less than 9 minutes, begs the question why would Liles even have been on the radar. Echols: He probably had one decent win around that time (Brewer) after having already lost he then went on to lose to world beating Anthony Mundine and Kingsley Ikeke. Echols never deserved a shot and doesn't belong in the same breath.

P.S As I said RJJ was never a SMW during JCs reign. He was LHW champion from 96. Let's face it, if they had've fought Jones would've one pretty handily

I don't buy ANY of it!!!!!!!!! NONE! (Stubborn? Not me)

It's funny, I think Calzaghe had a real toughness to him and that the athletic gap between Jones and Calzaghe is smaller than most think. I think by say 1998? That's a competitive fight. I think Jones wins, but I don't think it's a walkover.

I think JC would've been the toughest fight Jones had had at that stage, but let's be honest he'd hardly lost a round at that point.

[marbleheadmaui]

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.

Fair play mate, but I don't buy the argument about his opposition. I really don't see who was operating at SMW during his reign that he should've fought and didn't - except perhaps Ottke and JC would've outclassed him very comfortably imo. I'm not saying JC's oppoistion was great, but I wanna know who he should've fought and didn't - remembering it takes 2 to tango.

Ottke, Jones (earlier), Frankie Liles and Antwun Echols would sure have spiced up that resume.

How many times to I/We have to explain about Echols and Liles I mentioned Ottke and RJJ was not ever at SMW during Calzgahe's reign.

Let's try the actual, ya know, FACTS.

1996 Jones was still at 168. He moved up in 1997 the same year Calzaghe wins a strap.
1998 Liles is ranked #1, Calzaghe #2
1999 Calzaghe #1, Liles #7
2001 Calzaghe #2, Echols #4
2002 Calzaghe #1, Echols #3
2003 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4
2004 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4

Now do you NOT think those names would have improved Calzaghe's resume?

No, not at all!! And I will now explain why.....

Liles only fought a couple of times after 97, one of which he got Koed by Mitchell, whom Calzaghe took out in less than 9 minutes, begs the question why would Liles even have been on the radar. Echols: He probably had one decent win around that time (Brewer) after having already lost he then went on to lose to world beating Anthony Mundine and Kingsley Ikeke. Echols never deserved a shot and doesn't belong in the same breath.

P.S As I said RJJ was never a SMW during JCs reign. He was LHW champion from 96. Let's face it, if they had've fought Jones would've one pretty handily

I don't buy ANY of it!!!!!!!!! NONE! (Stubborn? Not me)

It's funny, I think Calzaghe had a real toughness to him and that the athletic gap between Jones and Calzaghe is smaller than most think. I think by say 1998? That's a competitive fight. I think Jones wins, but I don't think it's a walkover.

I think JC would've been the toughest fight Jones had had at that stage, but let's be honest he'd hardly lost a round at that point.

Yeah but except for James Toney ( a MONSTER win and performance) he wasn't exaclty facing studs. IIRC the only name was the Bodysnatcher and he was 137 years old and two divisions above his best weight. Maybe it's me but I find a tough, close win over a high quality foe far more meaningful and impressive than shutting out a clearly inferior guy.

When did he break Virgil Hill's ribs? 1999?

[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.

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.

Fair play mate, but I don't buy the argument about his opposition. I really don't see who was operating at SMW during his reign that he should've fought and didn't - except perhaps Ottke and JC would've outclassed him very comfortably imo. I'm not saying JC's oppoistion was great, but I wanna know who he should've fought and didn't - remembering it takes 2 to tango.

Ottke, Jones (earlier), Frankie Liles and Antwun Echols would sure have spiced up that resume.

How many times to I/We have to explain about Echols and Liles I mentioned Ottke and RJJ was not ever at SMW during Calzgahe's reign.

Let's try the actual, ya know, FACTS.

1996 Jones was still at 168. He moved up in 1997 the same year Calzaghe wins a strap.
1998 Liles is ranked #1, Calzaghe #2
1999 Calzaghe #1, Liles #7
2001 Calzaghe #2, Echols #4
2002 Calzaghe #1, Echols #3
2003 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4
2004 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4

Now do you NOT think those names would have improved Calzaghe's resume?

No, not at all!! And I will now explain why.....

Liles only fought a couple of times after 97, one of which he got Koed by Mitchell, whom Calzaghe took out in less than 9 minutes, begs the question why would Liles even have been on the radar. Echols: He probably had one decent win around that time (Brewer) after having already lost he then went on to lose to world beating Anthony Mundine and Kingsley Ikeke. Echols never deserved a shot and doesn't belong in the same breath.

P.S As I said RJJ was never a SMW during JCs reign. He was LHW champion from 96. Let's face it, if they had've fought Jones would've one pretty handily

I don't buy ANY of it!!!!!!!!! NONE! (Stubborn? Not me)

It's funny, I think Calzaghe had a real toughness to him and that the athletic gap between Jones and Calzaghe is smaller than most think. I think by say 1998? That's a competitive fight. I think Jones wins, but I don't think it's a walkover.

I think JC would've been the toughest fight Jones had had at that stage, but let's be honest he'd hardly lost a round at that point.

Yeah but except for James Toney ( a MONSTER win and performance) he wasn't exaclty facing studs. IIRC the only name was the Bodysnatcher and he was 137 years old and two divisions above his best weight. Maybe it's me but I find a tough, close win over a high quality foe far more meaningful and impressive than shutting out a clearly inferior guy.

When did he break Virgil Hill's ribs? 1999?

Agreed. I don't like RJJ's resume at all and I don't like Hopkins 20 defences at MW either. Both resumes have no right to be called anything other than OK. I still think both fighters were great and would've beaten whomever was put infront of them though.

[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]

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.

Fair play mate, but I don't buy the argument about his opposition. I really don't see who was operating at SMW during his reign that he should've fought and didn't - except perhaps Ottke and JC would've outclassed him very comfortably imo. I'm not saying JC's oppoistion was great, but I wanna know who he should've fought and didn't - remembering it takes 2 to tango.

Ottke, Jones (earlier), Frankie Liles and Antwun Echols would sure have spiced up that resume.

How many times to I/We have to explain about Echols and Liles I mentioned Ottke and RJJ was not ever at SMW during Calzgahe's reign.

Let's try the actual, ya know, FACTS.

1996 Jones was still at 168. He moved up in 1997 the same year Calzaghe wins a strap.
1998 Liles is ranked #1, Calzaghe #2
1999 Calzaghe #1, Liles #7
2001 Calzaghe #2, Echols #4
2002 Calzaghe #1, Echols #3
2003 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4
2004 Calzaghe #1, Echols #4

Now do you NOT think those names would have improved Calzaghe's resume?

No, not at all!! And I will now explain why.....

Liles only fought a couple of times after 97, one of which he got Koed by Mitchell, whom Calzaghe took out in less than 9 minutes, begs the question why would Liles even have been on the radar. Echols: He probably had one decent win around that time (Brewer) after having already lost he then went on to lose to world beating Anthony Mundine and Kingsley Ikeke. Echols never deserved a shot and doesn't belong in the same breath.

P.S As I said RJJ was never a SMW during JCs reign. He was LHW champion from 96. Let's face it, if they had've fought Jones would've one pretty handily

I don't buy ANY of it!!!!!!!!! NONE! (Stubborn? Not me)

It's funny, I think Calzaghe had a real toughness to him and that the athletic gap between Jones and Calzaghe is smaller than most think. I think by say 1998? That's a competitive fight. I think Jones wins, but I don't think it's a walkover.

I think JC would've been the toughest fight Jones had had at that stage, but let's be honest he'd hardly lost a round at that point.

Yeah but except for James Toney ( a MONSTER win and performance) he wasn't exaclty facing studs. IIRC the only name was the Bodysnatcher and he was 137 years old and two divisions above his best weight. Maybe it's me but I find a tough, close win over a high quality foe far more meaningful and impressive than shutting out a clearly inferior guy.

When did he break Virgil Hill's ribs? 1999?

Agreed. I don't like RJJ's resume at all and I don't like Hopkins 20 defences at MW either. Both resumes have no right to be called anything other than OK. I still think both fighters were great and would've beaten whomever was put infront of them though.

Yeah, probably right. The difference is with Jones I can come up with names, often Brits, he should have fought. With BHOP I just can't find a name available to him at 160 that could have improved his resume. The 1990 middles were a real wasteland.

And because I'm anal (and have too much time on my hands) BHOP didn't become champ until he beat Keith Holmes so he had seven defenses

Thanks as always for your thought. I'm out.

Oh and congrats on the new TV show!

[MadboyHandsomeJR]

Ricky hatton, that punch and hold bastard.

[THE THIRD MAN]

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.

It's very hard to take a thread like this seriously when you start with a guy who was best of his time for 10 years, was undisputed champion and fought 16 world champions (50% of all opponents he faced) beating a former world champion in just his 4th pro fight!

On that logic of Tszyu losing to Phillips you might as well include Carlos Monzon who lost to a guy called Felipe Cambeiro 43-16-4 in 1964 knocking Monzon down 3 times along the way. I guess Monzon is over rated
Or Alexis Arguello who inexplicably lost to Vilomar Fernadez 30-16-2 in 1977 after stringing togther 26 consecutive wins since his previous defeat!

My point is fighters lose fights, it's how they come back from defeat that makes them real champions. Tszyu was remarkable after losing to Phillips, he dominated a division that at one time was lauded as the best in the world, it is only years later that people say it wasn't that strong? He destroys former lightweight Champion Miguel Angel Gonzalez (who defended that title 10 times) and was fresh from fights with DLH and a draw with JCC, he KO's Judah who was in his prime and a prohibitive favourite, he stops Mitchell (twice) who had not lost for 7 years prior and all this means he is overrated?

What a shame fighters such as Hamed and Hatton decided to take their bat and ball and go home after tasting defeat.

It's very hard to take a response seriously that comes from an Australian

It's just opinions mate, I think he was brillaint, but still overrated.

And a petty Tszyu didn't pick up his bat and ball after losing to Hatton He was still realtively young had had less fights than Hatton (even at that point) and had not exactly been in many wars in order to make him a worn fighter

He was 36 in 2005 and was in the ring for just 3 rounds in the preceding 36 months since January 2003! Injuries and age caught up with him and he still gave the fatboy a nice old touch up (see Hatton's face after fight) Hatton's tactics of using Tszyu's balls as earrings worked perfectly. Hatton was never the same again after this fight. I rate Tszyu 2nd only to "not that bottle" Aaron Pryor as the best 140lb champion ever. Do we say that Sugar Shane Mosley is over rated? His record since 2002 reads 17- 8-7-1 with 1 NC, hardly scintillating stuff from the sugarman? Yet, he will be forever regarded as one of the best Lightweight champions of all time, do we reassess his opponents and base our viewpoint about Mosley solely on his first win against DLH?

[El Kabong]

Riddick Bowe - thinnest resume of any true heavyweight champion...maybe in the history of boxing when you look at who he could have fought and who he chose to fight.

[marbleheadmaui]

Riddick Bowe - thinnest resume of any true heavyweight champion...maybe in the history of boxing when you look at who he could have fought and who he chose to fight.

Bowe is one of those "I saw him with my eyes" guys.

On one of his best three nights (about all he had) he gives any heavyweight in history a battle.

Any other night? eer, um, not so much

[Mars_ax]

Riddick Bowe - thinnest resume of any true heavyweight champion...maybe in the history of boxing when you look at who he could have fought and who he chose to fight.

Andrew Golota took the wind out of Bowe's sails, he never seemed to be the same after that. I always thought Bowe had tons of potential, but never lived up to it, he also seemed to have a phobia about fighting Lennox Lewis, which was hard to figure.

[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

[Mars_ax]

BTW, Holyfield was definitely not overrated at HW, he arguably fought the best competition of almost any HW, and held his own, and I can't think of a single HW in the history of boxing that had as much heart.

As for B-Hop, if anything he's underrated.

As for Tyson, a bit overrated perhaps, but it was more due to things that happened outside the ring, like being in prison for 3 years.