Your most over-rated boxer

It is really something that can only be proven after a fighter has retired. That way you can assess who they missed and what side of the hill their opponents were on when they met. Sometimes a career can look more credible when in fact the matchmaking has been timed to perfection. One thing for sure, all fighters struggle at the elite level unless they are a phenomenon in which case they only get beat once they decline. Phenomenal fighters are about one in a generation so all fighters ARE over rated compared to them.

Then again what is an over rated fighter? A fighter who mainstream sports fans buy into are often over rated because to make a splash they are undefeated. All the general public understand is undefeated. Any one with one loss is terrible in the eyes of the general public. Yet the general public is the largest audience. What the public dont know is that by and large in most cases undefeated just means untested.

In most cases fighters are signed and invested in because they already have proved themselves as amatuers. They already sell tickets, have had write ups so technically once a fighter has become known he has some substance. It is never based on nothing.

It is only once comparisons are made that I become irritated. I can accept things the way they are. I know that all new kids that are getting noticed and being matched to look better than they are for Tv, this is how they are groomed. Learning fights, blow outs, title shots, etc etc. It is how it is for all champions up to a level. It is just when the public, not boxing people, start to make comparisons with phenomenal fighters at the wrong stage of a career when it sticks in my throat.

In the grand scheme of things I don't think there was much wrong with Ricky Hatton. He was not a phenomenon, he was very very popular and had a very good career. He paid his dues with a d-list belt. The public bought into his WBU reighn but boxing people saw it for what it was. He could have retired undefeated with that belt because he was fortunate to make elite money with a bogus belt but to be fair to him he sought elite recognition and real champions. Ok he got found out by the best two of a generation. No shame in that. He was not a phenomenal fighter after all. So what? Neither were 90% of champions.

Klitschko? He is not to my taste but he kept winning, works to the same safety first, boring blue print, takes every advantage and liberty he can but his longevitie and resume must count for something. Historically he would be hard to beat. Historically he will be remembered as being less of a phenomenon and more for being simply hard to beat. The estate car/station wagon of champions. Not very exciting but got the job done.

 

HW : Muhammad Ali

Joe Louis , William Harrisson , Charley Liston & Larry Holmes worthy mentions as well

below HW : Ray Leonard

Roy Jones Jr. , Pernell Whitaker & Floyd Jr. worthy mentions as well

 

LOL

Anyone who says Wlad understands **** about boxing, or is letting their racial bias cloud their opinions. Quite sad really.


Anyway for me.

Roid Jones Jr

Muhammed Ali


Mayweather is underated if anything. He's proved time and time again that he's an excellent boxer by making everybody else look ordinary. Yet for some reason, people hate him?

 

Roy Jones. Sometimes he's described like a new Ali....

 

Muhammad Ali, by far.

 

Fair assessment of Klitschko, sometimes I think what if Vitali never came back and you swapped out Mormeck, Wach, Thompson II for Arreola Adamek Solis and Chisora people would definitely look more appreciative of his resume

but its his style that turns people off and he has had his chances on big TV stages to be impressive and hasnt. I mean vs Ibragimov and Haye they fought him in ways that helped make those ugly fights but Povetkin was done after round 7 he was falling down on his own barely finished the fight and Wlad never really put together an attack to finish the fight

Ive been a fan of his for quite awhile now but even I was pretty pissed off watching that fight

 

Blasphemous!

Packey McFarland
Heavyweight Roy Jones Jr

 

Dempsey, and in turn Tunney when he is rated top ten all time.

Sullivan is not given his due for morr or less creating the sport and dominating like none before and perhaps none since.

Below heavy, Graziano at middle comes to mind.

 

Heavyweight Evander Holyfield
Jack Dempsey


I'm also a bit torn about considering Emile Griffith overrated. He seems to have always in the mix of things in the welter and middleweight divisions in his time, never out of the top ten (which should mean he's not overrated) but for every big win he had, he had an accompanying big loss (which might suggest he is).

Then again, I don't want to play the General Forum game of saying someone's a bum because they lose a fight or two; we all know that a loss doesn't necessarily mean anything terrible.

I dunno; I could be persuaded either way.

 

Salvador Sanchez, Jack Dempsey, Aaron Pryor, and Carlos Zarate.

Don't hurt me.

Sanchez because I don't think he achieved enough in the time frame he was alive to considered the second best Mexican fighter of all time. He beat a Gomez above his best weight, Danny Lopez, Juan LaPorte, Ruben Castillo, and Pat Cowdell. Don't get me wrong, that's astounding to do in such a short period of time, but it's not fair to base a man's greatness on what he might have done, and I believe that's what people must be doing to consider his career to have been greater than other Mexican fighters, who were fighting and defeating other great fighters for decades.

Jack Dempsey because I don't think he looks all that fantastic on film and the majority of his best wins come against opposition that were past their best. To what extent these fighters were past it can be debated, but the fact they were past their best can't.

Aaron Pryor was a good fighter. A difficult fighter to beat. But he's routinely ranked among the top 50 best fighters of all time on these forums, a forum that is supposedly jam-packed full of well educated, knowledgeable fight fans. Well, some of you have got Pryor all wrong. He didn't have a long time at the top, and his best scalp was against an aged Alexis Arguello who was fighting at 140lbs. Great fight, good win, but he didn't achieve enough to be considered an exceptionally great fighter imo.

Zarate's resume was once known as being sub-standard. This was common knowledge. Until a couple of years ago at least when someone decided it was underrated and that the likes of Rodolfo Martinez, Danilo Batista, and Alberto Davila were, instead of being just useful scalps, were supposedly great fighters that would have beaten the latest crop of Mexican greats up at 126lbs. Mega yawn. Bull****. I've watched all of those fights and at no point did any of them strike me as being particularly noteworthy. Zarate dominated a barren wasteland for most part, and he doesn't deserved to be ranked among the top 5 Mexicans of all time. Imo.