How are guys like gatti and ward...

[thunder06]

looked upon in boxing history? are they entertaining journeyman or guys who gave it their all but could never really make that step up in competition? how do u see them as?

[McGrain]

Limited but very brave. I admire them both and have seen many of their fights but I don't take them seriously in a historical context, you know?

[emanuel_augustus]

Arturo Gatti was a world champion for two years. He fought 7 or so of the most exciting fights of the last 15 years.

Was he Floyd Mayweather or Pea Whitaker? No, assuredly not. But, "limited but brave" guys don't win world championships. Gatti was a B+ level fighter who will go down as the most exciting fighter of his generation. To call him a journeyman is an insult.

[Jack Dempsey]

Gatti is no worse than some of the fighters in the IBHOF, I agree with the above poster, he's B+ but certainly no Journeyman

[fists of fury]

I'd say both are relatively good, but limited fighters who gave us three action-packed fights.
Neither are genuine world-class, despite Gatti winning a belt. These days, any moderately talented fighter can pick up a title. Being a 'world' champion isn't a big deal these days.

Their trilogy was great though, and I don't begrudge either man a cent of their purses for those fights.

[JohnBKelly]

History is weird, some great champs disappear once they retire and some one hit wonders reputations grow far in excess of their achievements. Joe Brown was a great lightweight champ but he doesn't draw many column inches these days. Similarly Benny Leonard, Jack Britton and Jose Napoles are consistently overlooked in favour of fighters from the TV age. Meanwhile for example people wax lyrical about the qualities of fat bums like Tony Tubbs and Greg Page who threw their careers away at the dinner table.

Gatti and Ward were fun to watch but would either man have beaten Joe Brown or Leonard at lightweight or Jack Britton at welterweight? I don't think so.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by emanuel_augustus

"limited but brave" guys don't win world championships..

Happens a lot bro.

Braddock, Bruno...Gatti and Ward of the top of my head.

[Thread Stealer]

Ward: entertaining contender/fringe contender

Gatti: entertaining titlist who was on a higher level than Ward.

Both guys were very tough and entertaining, although their trilogy was overrated.

Gatti will probably be looked upon more favorably not only because he was a better fighter, but due to the HBO hype he got. Other than their trilogy together, Gatti's other exciting fights seem to be remembered more than the other entertaining bouts that Ward was in.

[joe33]

Originally Posted by Erratic Behavior

Ward: entertaining contender/fringe contender

Gatti: entertaining titlist who was on a higher level than Ward.

Both guys were very tough and entertaining, although their trilogy was overrated.

Gatti will probably be looked upon more favorably not only because he was a better fighter, but due to the HBO hype he got. Other than their trilogy together, Gatti's other exciting fights seem to be remembered more than the other entertaining bouts that Ward was in.

How was there trilogy over rated then?,most people loved it,it makes the majority of fights look boring,and is still being mentioned a lot a half a decade later,when mot people cant remember fights that happened this year.

[Thread Stealer]

Originally Posted by joe33

How was there trilogy over rated then?

Because only one of the fights was really that good, or competitive/reasonably close.

Originally Posted by joe33

most people loved it,it makes the majority of fights look boring,and is still being mentioned a lot a half a decade later,when mot people cant remember fights that happened this year.

Of course, if HBO, ESPN, and other media bring it up all the time, then people are going to remember it.

HBO and ESPN don't repeatedly bring up a superior trilogy like Barrera-Morales or Pacquiao-Morales (both of which had at least 2 excellent, competitive bouts).

The 2nd best fight of the Gatti-Ward trilogy, the 3rd fight, wouldn't even make my top 5 of Gatti fights....or Ward fights. The atmosphere and commentary made the actual fight and competition seem better than it really was.

Basically, the media and The Ring overrate it.

Toney-Jirov was better than the rubber match, and not by a little.

[Beebs]

Oddly similar to Zale and Graziano I think.

[Thread Stealer]

Originally Posted by Beebs

Oddly similar to Zale and Graziano I think.

But Zale is looked upon fairly highly among the middleweight champs. Graziano less so, as the Zale fights were past Tony's prime, and Rocky tended to pick on smaller guys.

[Amsterdam]

For me, two overhyped, glorified journeymen that produced 3 highly overrated fights.

Give me MAB-Morales over that one anyday.

[rekcutnevets]

I see and hear these guys referred to as "b level," "journeymen," "not great," etc.

The above statements may be true for both fighters, but I believe they're on two different levels. The two of them had a nice competative run against each other, especially the first time, and that is why they are mentioned as though they are in the same class.

The truth is, Gatti is a two division champion. Ward was a top notch, one division, contender. Ward may have gone above 140 at times, but 140 is where he was most effective.

Gatti may not be the most dominant champ the world has ever known, but he was still a champion. Ward was effective in his own right, but he never reached world champion stature.

Whatever level Gatti is on, Ward is beneath. You can say a,b, or c level. You can say top notch, not so good, almost there, wish they could've been, or whatever. Gatti is still one notch above.

[mightyd40]

the best answer for me is two guys who make boxing better and more respectable for being a part of its history......sure they werent great but they had something inside of them that most great fighters dont.