Re: Mediocre fighters with great one-punch-power
I recently visited the Webster's online dictionary to look up the term mediocre. The entry read as follows " To be of moderate or low qualtity in ability
Personally, I think that this is a bad term to describe the career performance of Earnie Shavers. No, he was not an all time great, and of course never became a world champion, but not being great doesn't automatically drop someone below the ranks of good, decent or average right into the realm of being low in quality, which is how Webster describes mediocre.
Earnie Shavers had a relatively successful amateur career becoming the 1969 AAU champion. Upon turning pro, he fought on average anywhere between 7-12 times per year, knocking out almost anyone who entered the ring with him. He suffered Early losses to men like Ron Stander, Bon Stallings, Jerry Quarry and a few others, however it should be taken into consideration that his high volume of frequent ring appearances could have made him vulnerable to being cought on an off night. Shavers compiled impressive victories over such names as Ken Norton, Joe Bugner, Jimmy Ellis and Roy Williams. He also gained the testimonies of two of the most durable champions of all time in Larry Holmes and Muhammad Ali as the hardest puncher they had ever fought. Numerous boxing analysts, authors and experts including Al Bernstein, Burt Sugar, and many others have repeatedly proffessed that Earnie was in a category of his own when it came to power. Shavers has often been criticised as lacking in skill, speed, stamina, chin and other typical qualities that make great fighters. Keep in mind however, that I'm not making an argument for Shavers being great, only better than mediocre.