Top 5 most overrated boxers of All Time

Floyd is one of those fighters who will be appreciated more when he's gone. People will look back on his career in 10-20 years time, and say yeah, Floyd truly was one of the greatest, at 130 he looked invincible!

 

Wills or Blackburn I could understand as they don't get much play, but Gans is considered an ATG lock, and is on just about every list ever made.

 

I won't.

Although I agree he's the best H2H 130lber, I can't think of anyone bar Armstrong who I'd confidently pick to beat him. I'd pick him to beat Arguello hands down (poor styles clash for Alexis) although El Flaco Explosivo remains the 'greatest' super feather IMO.

 

Yeah those are fair comments, Floyd's stay at 130 was short but sweet. Between 130-140 he ranks very high H2H, top 5 in all divisions. How many JWW's can compete with the Floyd that destroyed Gatti? My dream match ups for Floyd would be Duran at 135, Aaron Pryor at 140. Floyd-Whitaker would be a boring fight!

 

1)floyd is consistent and maybe reigned at the best longer. if you're criteria relies heavily on longevity, i can appreciate that. Floyds wins though and his ability to demonstrate his skills against the best are nowhere near sweat pea in my opinion

i don't hate floyd and i won't micro criticize his resume, it's solid. whitaker's is amazing, especially for the length of his career. he was simply flawless for so many years against legitimate hall of fame opposition (nelson, chavez). his skill set on film imo is superior to floyds overall, specifically in defense, combination punching, and body work.

floyd really doesn't bring anything to the table other than longevity and near comparable ability.

2)roy is a slightly tougher argument but skill wise (not technical wise) he's a safe distance better than floyd. defensively nearly untouchable and offensively amazing. he did both, floyd doesn't. even at his 130 best floyd was too sparse with his punches. roy wasn't

roy's resume can and will always be a source of criticism. i accept and agree. however, he beat 2 legit hall of famers in their primes (toney and hopkins) which floyd hasn't. did i say beat? dominated completely from bell to bell.

roy was a beast at 160 and beat an all time great in hopkins at that stage but didn't stayl long

roy was the best at 168 when he was there and the h2h best in divison history

roy dominated 175 for years and was the man in the division. he didn't need to beat the man, it was him. **** DM and the bull**** lineage

skill wise, it's roy. resume wise, it's an argument. overall, roy will always be rated higher than floyd imo. and i don't feel griffin outboxed, he was just awkward with a great game plan by futch. johnson and tarver were years past his prime and don't factor in whatsoever.

 

You can hardly hold it against him for Liston quitting on his stool.Not like Liston left that fight unmarked,either.

 

The Gatti fight is the most overrated performance of recent memory.

Punch perfect, but against Gatti? No thanks.

 

Please it easy to look unbeatable against somebody of the level of Gatti, thats not a fight that should be used as argument how he would do against the elite

at 140

Pernell Whitaker, Aaron Pryor,Wilfred Benitez would be big favourites to beat him.

Tony Canzoneri, Duilio Loi, Eddie Perkins, Carlos Ortiz, Julio Cesar Chavez would also have a great chances of beating him.

Floyds not the unhittable fighter that a lot claim him to be when the opposition does'nt play into to his strenghts

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q191D_1RENQ&feature=channel&list=UL[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Evm562QLq2M&feature=relmfu[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NdZeR924-0&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73XuWChg_sI&feature=relmfu[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwlprOiJKmc&feature=relmfu[/ame]

 

Robinson had wins over 2 hall famers (Angott, Zivic) in only his first year as a pro and should of been lightweight champion by rights,

In the next year 2 he added another win each over Zivic and Angott and 2 Wins over LaMotta while only weighing 144 Ibs and a win over Henry Armstrong ( past his best but still a world class fighter )

So in only 3 years as a pro that means he had already 7 wins over 4 hall famers going with a record ( 45 - 1 - 0 )

In the following 8 years he add another 3 wins against LaMotta, 2 against Kid Gavilan, 1 against Carl Olson, Georgie Abrams, and Angott,

So thats another 8 wins over 5 different hall famers
While amassing a 90 fight unbeaten streak and winning both the undisputed Welterweight and Middleweight titles

with his record being ( 128 - 1 - 2 ).

He would lose and regain his title to Randy Turpin beat Rocky Graziano and then lose to Joey Maxim for Light Heavy title ( which he was dominating and would in my opinion won if he had paced himself better).

Retires in 1952 at the age of 31 with with his record against hall famers being
( 17 - 3 - 0 ) and a record of ( 131 - 3 - 2 )

Then comes back and get 2 wins over Olson, 1 over Fullmer at age 35 and Basilio when 37 years,
that amazing to be able to fight let alone beat hall famers at that age and after having a 146 fights as a pro and 80 as a amature and 16 years a pro.

He'd go on for another 9 years after the 2nd Basilio fight winning 33 and losing 13 fights and drawing 4

So over all Robinsons Record stands at 173 - 19 - 6, 108 KOs, with 21 wins over hall of famers and 6 undisputed World titles over a 25 year pro career spanning what today would be 7 weight divisons

This doesn't even mention all the top ten contenders he faced year upon year,

Its an insult to Robinson to even compare Floyd to him let alone say he's better.

 

Does Robinson have more wins over ranked fighters than Floyd has had pro' fights? :think

 

Defiantly,

I could'nt tell you of the top of my head the exact number, but he's defiantly got more than 43 top ten ranked fighter beat on his resume.

I'm positive of that

 

Hi Sugarsean, fantastic post, I enjoyed reading it. Maybe I didn't make myself clear earlier, I fully appreciate Robinson is the Greatest ever. my point in comparing Floyd to Sugar Ray was to say that whilst many are so dismissive of his achievements, they actually do stack up well against the greats. Surely you appreciate that, going from 130-154 and remaining dominant is impressive. Personally I think in Robinsons era, Floyd still would have amassed a fantastic record. His skills hold up in any era

 

He would not be thought of as highly if he fought in Robbo's era IMO.

 

at was 130 he was dominant in the division, yes that impressed me, although he did miss out Casmayor and Freitas.

at 135 he was at his least impressive, two best wins were against Castillo and both were unimpressive

140 he picked the worst of the champion to fight he never fought Kostya Tsyzu, Miguel Cotto, Ricky Hatton

147 his best opponent was a 38 year old Shane Mosley, who was alway overrated, and he failed to make Cotto in 2008 and Pacquioa 2009 - 2012

154 at he has De La Hoya, and Cotto, the De La Hoya victory is one of the most unimpressive wins I've ever seen in a so called mega fight between two of the greatest, Cotto was already totally beaten to a pulp by Pacquioa and Margarito.

I believe his skill hold up in any era but he would have many lose's and would'nt be as sucessfull, In the 1940's for example at 135 - 147 He would of have to competed with

Armstrong, Angott, Joyce, Jack, Montgomery, Williams, Zivic, Basilio, Graham,Turner, Saxton, Bell, Gavilan, Robinson to name a few

 

Bear in mind that in the first fight, he had a shoulder injury and he was ill. Every fighter has an off night, but for some suspect refereeing the great Sugar Ray Robinson himself might have been stopped by Artie Levine.

In the Castillo rematch, I thought he won clearly. Remember, Castillo was the lineal champ, and outweighed Floyd significantly on fight night. Not an easy choice for your first fight moving up in weight!

He didn't accomplish a lot at 140 really, but H2H he's a monster there.

Floyd is not a natural WW. I don't rank Floyd that high H2H at WW. However, to remain dominant there, whilst undefeated beating the top fighters in the division (bar Pacquiao) is impressive. It was Cotto who refused the fight with Floyd, likewise with Pacquaio, refusing to submit to testing in 2009 (which as we've recently seen with Berto and Peterson, these big fights should have extensive testing!).

Floyd is not nearly as effective at 154, it's not his natural weight. DLH had every conceivable advantage, yet Floyd still clearly won by 8 rounds on my card.


I believe his skill hold up in any era but he would have many lose's and would'nt be as sucessfull, In the 1940's for example at 135 - 147 He would of have to competed with

Armstrong, Angott, Joyce, Jack, Montgomery, Williams, Zivic, Basilio, Graham,Turner, Saxton, Bell, Gavilan, Robinson to name a few[/QUOTE]


He would have been competitive with most of those guys, guys like Robinson and Basilio are too big for Floyd. I think Floyd would do better against most of these guys than he gets credit for.