How Good Was (or could've/should've been) Jeff Fenech

I didn't have a lot of exposure to Jeff Fenech growing up -- the first fight I watched was Fenech-Nelson I (which I couldn't fathom how it could go anyway bur for Fenech) and then Fenech-Nelson II (where Nelson dominated). I knew he was apparently Tyson's friend (sitting with him at ringside at a Jeff Harding fight) at the time. In addition, I knew that he had hand and weight (limit) problems.

How good was Fenech? How much better could he or should he have been?

 

Now there's a guy that actually deserves a 'very good or great?' thread.

 

Good Boxer but a right ol ****.

 

Heard he was a jerk but he had amazing guts, fighting through constant hand problems and even more severe injuries on other occasions, like a fractured cheekbone against Villasana.

His style was entirely unlike his idol, Duran. The Nelson fight was a robbery, and it killed his love for boxing.

Also, he's very good as a trainer, which is rare for an elite fighter. He trained Darchinyan and the Hussein brothers, and two or three other world class fighters.

 

Fenech's weaknesses were lack of real power, average defense and an above average but still not totally fortified chin.

His strengths were incredible workrate, determination, and he was extraordinarily strong for his size, especially below featherweight.

Unlike most come forward aggressive types, Fenech also had very good handspeed, which made him an absolute nightmare for boxer types to deal with in particular.

I think he fares well with anyone at 118-122, but above that weight he'd probably only be exceptional against boxer types. I'd favour him to beat the likes of Famechon, Legra, Winstone. He'd even give the likes of Laguna, Marcel and Pep decent fights, though it'd be difficult to get the wins there.....

 

...

 

Yeah not a weakness per se, just measured against the best at say featherweight.

His chin kind of makes him vulnerable to the bigger hitters at featherweight, though I suppose you can pretty much claim that anyone's chin is vulnerable when they are fighting outside of their ideal weightclass...

 

:good

For some reason a lot of the aussies fall into that very good/great discussion:

Fenech
Rose
Famechon
Tszyu
Darcy

Probably the only definitive great the Aussies have is Young Griffo, though even with him some might question it....

 

Can't disagree much with what Sweet is saying about him.Though i'd say his power was more impressive than his speed for me, he was a heavy blunt force accumulation sort of puncher.Good combinations, but i never saw him as overly quick with his punches.

imo he was a great fighter at his peak, but probably just fell short of having that long solid title run + big win or two at any one weightclass that would have tipped him from borderline\debatable great to comfortable consensus great.

 

Although power wasn't his strongest suit, owing to his bad hands, his shots deinitely carried more kick than many assume. His knockout percentage isn't anything striking, but part of that has to do with the fact that his record is littered with guys who were known for being excetionally tough/resilient, i.e. Villasana, Martinez, Zarate, and Zaragoza.

You just need to see the way guys wince, turtle up, and retreat from his punches to know that the guy hit harder than conventional wisdom suggests.

 

The Nelson fights were confusing. When Azumah said he had malaria or some virus in the first fight in 1991,I thought it was just an excuse, but he came back and stopped Jeff in Australia. So maybe it was for real. Great win for Azumah Nelson.

 

I'd say a very good fighter teetering on great. Given how bad his hand problem was he got further than he was supposed to if anything. Awesome warrior, but like you say seems to be a **** out of the ring.

 

Plenty of footage of him on YouTube.

 

there are far, far more greats in boxing than the 'achievement based measuring stick allows for, I would say all of those fighters are greats & Darcy ATG, plus I'd add Richards & Henneberry!

I met an old guy years ago who said "those ratings are a lot of nonsense" and after meeting dozens of TOP fighters I was surprised by 2 things, they didn't seem troubled by fighters 'holding' titles and they always could tell you a different veiw from the fans perception of who's who, namely in "their toughest fight" and just how good some of the guys were they fought.

anyway, boxing has a long, long history of TOP fighters and too think you can name a handfull of 'greats' and overlook or write off some others is really not just inaccurate, but at times even foolish.

 

But you wouldn't add Carruthers?