Fighters Who Had No True Prime Losses

Orlando Canizales
Jung-Koo Chang
Marvin Hagler.

I wouldn't inlcude ali because I think, his prime ran from 64-74 (but I'm open to persuasion)

Tyson? not a chance.
Louis? not a chance.
Duran? not a chance.
Leonard? not a chance

Each of those guys lost within their best years and it can't really be argued.

You could argue types like bob Foster who never lost at their prime weight during their prime but then it gets complicated imo.

 

Naseem Hamed

 

I could put my house on it that you would have posted this ****:deal

When i was on the 1st page I thought MAG's got to have lumped this deluded green/non-prime Leonard fantasy crap on here, he never fails:yep

 

Chavez

 

Huh?

He was 26-7 years old, his prime years with next to no ring wear and tear when Barrera humiliated him.

Barrera had had more fights,had lost a few,was older and arguably peaked a few years earlier before meeting Junior Jones.

People crap on about Hamed not having Brendon Ingle in his corner anymore but don't mention he had Emmanuel ****ing Steward there instead who is 20x the trainer Ingle ever was.

 

You could argue Nigel Benn was still pretty green and unrefined when Eubank did him, didnt lose again for years afterwards.He had a lot of fights by then though and some say his best years were at MW.

 

Besides the obvious guys who retired early and undefeated then I'd have to say Roy Jones Jr. since the DQ loss to Griffin should have an asterisk by it.

 

I don't know man, Leonard looked pretty prime to me. Duran just took it to him.

 

Marciano, Lopez, Calzaghe, Mayweather, Wilde, Jeffries, Chavez, and Ali come to mind.

Almost jokingly you could include Joe Mesi, Jamal Hinton, or even Mickey Rourke, Too Tall Jones, and a few others

 

Yeah, I think we can say he was raw and pre-prime against Watson*, undoubtedly. But I think he hit his prime soon after (wins over proper fighters like DeWitt and Barkley suggest that) and it would be a stretch to say he wasn't in his prime yet for Eubank.


*Having said that, I'd pick Watson to beat any version of Benn.

 

Arguably Bubi Scholz, since his sole prime loss was probably a fix to get a shot at the European mw title against the same opponent. In that match he completly dominated and stopped the same fighter: Charles Humez.

 

There are plenty of guys you could simply say something like... he was green when he lost to.... and he was washed up when he lost to...

In the case of Evander Holyfield you could say he went undefeated for 8 years and did not lose until he was 30... he was still awesome but not quite prime.

With Ray Robinson you could say he was better after the loss to Lamotta (Robinson's 41st fight... he did go 5-1 (1) vs. Lamotta lifetime)... he did not lose again until his 133rd fight.

With Ezzard Charles you could say his prime was from 1946-1951 (just prior to his first loss to Walcott... he went 2-2 vs. Walcott and many felt he deserved the win in their 4th fight). Sure, he had the one loss to Ray but many felt Charles deserved the win... he also went 1-1 (1) vs. Ray lifetime. He went 39-1 overall and 9-0 in HW World Title Fights during this stretch.

 

the issue with tyson was that he WAS in his prime when he faced Buster, but he didnt have the mental strength to deliver.

Jeez, Ali had the mental ability to come back after three years off and a spell in jail and the whole of america hating him, and he won, and nearly beat Frazier. Tyson just didnt have that mental strength, so he cant be included - he would have buckled mentally at some point even without the Tokyo fight, once the going got really tough anyway.

 

A case can be made that Erik Morales beat Barrera x3. Combine that with the win over Pac... what an awesome prime. Clearly not at his best vs. Pac in fight 2 and 3 or vs. Raheem.

 

Yeah on reflection it is a stretch to say he wasnt prime against Eubank. Bad shout.