Chisora: Would he be champ in previous eras?

dunno...maybe he has been around at the right time to allow him to compete at very top level as it is at the moment.

 

I'll go along with that.

 

It's an unusual question really. Usually it's asked the other way round. Would so and so, a top contender from a past era when there was one champ be a champ today?
If you can't win a "title" these days there's not much chance you would get one back then. Have you got any particular era in mind yourself.

 

NO, he would get clobbered

 

It is a prety hard and fast rule that people who get to the top in any era, have a good training ethic at least at some point.

 

I think he's probably come up short. Some people might think his best chance would be back in the days of the small heavies. When you look at it though his wmost conclusive defeat was against probably one of the smallest heavies he fought.

 

Dominant long-term champ? Probably never.

Right there in the midst of a pack of contenders with a chance to hit the jackpot and hot-potato a belt on a given night with the right circumstances? Yes, in many eras.

You have to remember that weak/lucky titlists are perennial in the sport - always have been and will be. You only have to be good enough to be top 15 in an era to conceivably be within arm's reach (especially with the proper management/political connections)

 

:rofl

 

If he had legitimate power, then maybe. But he is slow, predictable, has only marginal skill and has not much power at all.
He has been beaten by every name guy he has fought, so I have a hard time seeing him being a champion in any era against a prepared champion.

Funny thing is, is that I could see him taking an off-form Tommy Morrison, who never had any stamina and often fell to pieces in later rounds.

 

To be fair to Chisora, he did beat Helinius in all but name, and he would have been ranked if the decision had been fair.

He should at least be judged against that mark in this era.

 

I suppose this begs the question of whether Robbe was ever a "big name" in the division. He was certainly on his way to becoming one, at least most thought so.

While technically it went down in Chisora's loss column, it does serve as the exception to your rule there.

...and Williams is a name (always will be, kayoing Tyson) even if he wasn't a serviceable heavyweight at that point. Conversely, both Scott and Pala (and to a lesser extent ***ton and Gerber) were serviceable heavyweights (fringe world contenders, while ***ton and Gerber are European level) even if neither is a name.