Fighters that you (controversially) think are overrated

[marbleheadmaui]

I MUCH prefer vacant championships to multiple ones. They should be hard to win, not participation certificates (No hyperbole there huh?)

There is no prefect answer. But whilst sport is about money there will always be coruption and having a lineal champion 'crowned' by virtue of a judging decision in a fight he clearly hasn't won, negates the 'function of what happens in the ring' part[/QUOTE]

Not in a million years it doesn't. It detracts from it. But it hardly negates it. Boxing is a subjectively judged sport. I don't know what can be done about that. Attempts to make the amateurs more objective have caused more harm than good as far as the pro sport goes.

I agree there is no perfect answer. But it is IMPOSSIBLE for the alphabet gangs to be part of a good one

[El Kabong]

Muhamad Ali - Yes yes I know, "The G.O.A.T" beat Frazier, beat Foreman, fought anyone and everyone and was no doubt one of the most skilled boxers (not just heavyweights) in the history of the sport. He alone changed how big men fought (don't know now if that's so great but still).

The reason I say he's overrated (and I assure you it won't get more controversial than calling Ali out) is that long ago he became a caricature of himself, he's an idol, and people only look at him through the prism of how great he was, they don't see his flaws (not that those flaws ended up costing him much) but they don't view him as a MAN they view him as a boxing God, infallible, perfect, and capable of inhuman feats! To me as a boxing fan I think it does a disservice to the man because it certainly took a lot of hard work and skill to be considered "The G.O.A.T" and Ali deserves the respect of being judged as a boxer and not as some perfect icon.

Every other great is remembered for their flaws (maybe bar Ray Robinson or maybe Joe Louis). Lennox had a glass chin (not true but that's the argument), Tyson's flaws get glossed over a lot too, Holyfield and Rocky were too small and Evander couldn't punch, Holmes had a weak era and little power, etc etc. Ali had flaws...overcoming them and being as great as he was is amazing, but Ali the idol is beyond overrated!

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

Muhamad Ali - Yes yes I know, "The G.O.A.T" beat Frazier, beat Foreman, fought anyone and everyone and was no doubt one of the most skilled boxers (not just heavyweights) in the history of the sport. He alone changed how big men fought (don't know now if that's so great but still).

The reason I say he's overrated (and I assure you it won't get more controversial than calling Ali out) is that long ago he became a caricature of himself, he's an idol, and people only look at him through the prism of how great he was, they don't see his flaws (not that those flaws ended up costing him much) but they don't view him as a MAN they view him as a boxing God, infallible, perfect, and capable of inhuman feats! To me as a boxing fan I think it does a disservice to the man because it certainly took a lot of hard work and skill to be considered "The G.O.A.T" and Ali deserves the respect of being judged as a boxer and not as some perfect icon.

Every other great is remembered for their flaws (maybe bar Ray Robinson or maybe Joe Louis). Lennox had a glass chin (not true but that's the argument), Tyson's flaws get glossed over a lot too, Holyfield and Rocky were too small and Evander couldn't punch, Holmes had a weak era and little power, etc etc. Ali had flaws...overcoming them and being as great as he was is amazing, but Ali the idol is beyond overrated!

You yourself have even managed to overrate him, just know when you said he ''was no doubt one of the most skilled boxers (not just heavyweights)''.

You really think Ali was that skilful?

[El Kabong]

Ali had fast hands, great footwork, and a phenomenal chin. His flaws come more from using an unorthodox style much like a Roy Jones Jr. Ali was so gifted as an athlete he didn't need to "box" perfectly his athletic ability more than made up for his flaws as a boxer.

Meanwhile you look at someone like Marciano and his skill set and athletic ability and you wonder how he got to 49-0, its all the more amazing IMO.

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

Ali had fast hands, great footwork, and a phenomenal chin. His flaws come more from using an unorthodox style much like a Roy Jones Jr. Ali was so gifted as an athlete he didn't need to "box" perfectly his athletic ability more than made up for his flaws as a boxer.

Meanwhile you look at someone like Marciano and his skill set and athletic ability and you wonder how he got to 49-0, its all the more amazing IMO.

As an example... Floyd Mayweather & Roy Jones' athletic ability allowed them to NOT get hit with repeated left hooks through out a fight, let alone their careers though.

Muhammad Ali was more hittable than he's elusiveness gets credit for.