Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-20-2007, 05:00 AM   #16
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Quote:
Originally Posted by fists of fury
Iran "the blade" Barkley.
Let's face it, how many men can claim two legitimate victories over Thomas Hearns? We can make all the excuses we like, but at the end of the day, Barkley was 2-0 against a guy who is probably several hundred positons above him in the p4p stakes. He also managed to break Hearns' nose in the second fight.
He also managed to give Duran one of his toughest fights ever. Okay, it was an 37 year old Duran but Duran looked spectacular that night. The Blade had a career-best performance in that losing effort. He looked so good that night, and rocked Duran to his boots with a hellacious left hook in the 8th.

Barkley was not the most skilled of champions, but he made the most of what he had. When all is said and done, he won titles in three weight divisons, and gave two legends the fight of their lives.

Great to see Barkley given his dues on this forum for once. There's a ton of love for Tommy Hearns around here but very little praise for Barkley, I've noticed.

I agree with all the comments on this thread about Carlos Monzon. He looks decidedly unspectacular for a fighter who achieved such great results.

I kind of disagree with the whole gist of what we might think we are doing in this thread though, - we aren't actually identifying "Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful". We are really admitting our limitations in understanding the sport.
Rather than view this just as fighters who were apparently too limited to achieved as much as they did, I think it's us who have limitations in understanding what makes a fighter successful at the highest level.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 07-20-2007, 05:25 AM   #17
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,311
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Tommy Loughran.

No punch, physicaly frail. The guy esentialy had nothing except outstanding technique.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 05:25 AM   #18
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,311
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Quote:
Originally Posted by karmazon
Let me say that I love George Foreman, but seriously, how the **** did he manage to achieve all that.
I have often found myself wondering the same thing.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 05:58 AM   #19
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

I dont really see any mystery about George Foreman's success.
He had immense strength and power, and was matched against a lot of fighters who were complete set-ups.
He had a lot of heart and dedication, but really most of his matches were basically foregone conclusions because the match-making was so weighted towards him.

His KOs for the championship against Frazier and Moorer were upsets but I dont think they were unfathomable. Frazier was a weakening champion in decline who played straight into Foreman's strengths. Moorer was a good boxer but had scraped past an ordinary performance from Holyfield and had not shown great punch resistance. Foreman landed a "miracle punch" to save the day in a fairytale sort of way, but for a puncher with 75 fights that's not so unfathomable.

Foreman's comeback was great because no one expects that sort of dedication from a 40 year old who has been retired for 10 years. But if you analyse it his success was as much a result of brilliant match-making and marketing rather than him fighting his way into contention. Holyfield gave him a beating, to be fair, and Alex Stewart was unlucky to lose the decision, and Tommy Morrison outboxed him. Foreman didn't earn the shot at Moorer. And then he got a gift over Axel Schulz.

Foreman's sheer strength, presence and power, and dedication, are the reasons he was so successful. But he didn't exactly take many risky fights to get his shots at the title.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 06:03 AM   #20
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Marciano is a great shout here, and none other than Angelo Dundee agree's 100%.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 07:52 AM   #21
bigG
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: wherever my mind takes me
Posts: 789
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny's jab

Great to see Barkley given his dues on this forum for once. There's a ton of love for Tommy Hearns around here but very little praise for Barkley, I've noticed.

I agree with all the comments on this thread about Carlos Monzon. He looks decidedly unspectacular for a fighter who achieved such great results.

I kind of disagree with the whole gist of what we might think we are doing in this thread though, - we aren't actually identifying "Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful". We are really admitting our limitations in understanding the sport.
Rather than view this just as fighters who were apparently too limited to achieved as much as they did, I think it's us who have limitations in understanding what makes a fighter successful at the highest level.
im a huge barkley fan.....the ko over hearns is one of the best iv seen, tommy's eyes are in different orbits!!.....i always marvelled at ray mercers success...he didnt start boxing till late in his life, and only to get out of army exercises in freezing cold germany...he wasnt fast, wasnt tremendously athletic, never possesed nullifying power...but he was competitive with the very best heavyweights of his generation....id have loved to see mercer fight tyson....!!
bigG is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 09:51 AM   #22
red cobra
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Sea of Tranquility
Posts: 13,246
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweet Pea
Well Mayorga. You'd assume a brawler/street fighter's style like that wouldn't be able to compete with world-class boxers. That's the point of boxing, to be able to deal with and embarass guys like that by using technique, but for some reason he had success.
Yeah, but Mayorga was NOT, by any stretch of the imagination, a great fighter. A fairly good fighter who was more successful than he should have been.
red cobra is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 09:57 AM   #23
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 22,302
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dempsey1238
Marciano was beating the young black fighters on his way up to the contender ranks, which was taking over by the Laynes, Matthews ete. Once he won the title, only 2 of his title fights were against white guys. Marciano was BEATING the top black fighters of his era. Just because there black does not mean they can beat Rocky. Marciano be even money vs any one. And he would have beating Patterson imo. There relly was NO one imo that could have beating Marciano from 1952-1958 guessing he did not retire. I give Liston a good chance when he came on the scene in 58. Because Rocky would be past it, not because Liston was black. Trust me Marciano would have beating many a great black fighter, and be 50 50 vs the likes of Ali base on styles.
Which young black fighters of any status did Rocky beat?
mcvey is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 09:58 AM   #24
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Ali was expected to do good, the guy won a gold medal for crying out loud. The one reason there was some feeling he would not go far was because Liston was view as a God of the ring. Hell 20 or so rich guys put there investments in Ali before he turn pro. That never happen to say a Louis or Marciano. Ali was expected to go far, and perhaps become champ when Liston either left or got way 2 old.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 10:00 AM   #25
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Charles was 33, Also we the many journman like Tiger Jones, Keene Simmons was other. Now they were not great contenders, but good jouyman.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 11:33 AM   #26
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,311
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvey
Which young black fighters of any status did Rocky beat?
Look at it another way.

Which young black fighters of any status were there at the time?
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 11:57 AM   #27
MrSmall
Journeyman
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 73
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Ali dancing around - how many 200 pound men managed to pull this off and beat the crap out of people for 15 rounds?

Then, he defies the odds again:
Ali rope-a-dope - TAKES a beating to dish an even bigger one out over the stretch. That's some shit.

Tyson - Short stocky 5"10 dude knocking out 6"5+ mother****ers.

Lots more - that's all that come to mind.
Toney at heavyweight, too.
MrSmall is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 09:18 AM   #28
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Ali did not weight 200 pounds in the 1960's. He was a 190 pounder for most of the 60's. And yes there were MANY guys before Ali that dance and bounch around the ring, Jack Johnson, Gene Tunney, Jim Corbett, Roland LarSarza, Ezzard Charles, Joe Walcott, and others. Its not like Ali was invented a new style for the heavyweights. He is great, but dont try and make it out Ali was inventing a new style of fighting.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 09:21 AM   #29
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dempsey1238
Ali did not weight 200 pounds in the 1960's. He was a 190 pounder for most of the 60's.
Which fights in the 1960s did he weigh under 200 pounds ?
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 09:25 AM   #30
GazOC
Guest Star for Team Taff
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Spion Kop
Posts: 30,799
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Great fighter who SHOULDN'T have been successful

Ali was mid 190s until 62-63, I think he even came in under 190???
GazOC is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013