I wouldn't say a lot he only has about 3 losses! more proof you are wrong so often! Two of those Three loses were fights he was winning,and fight he would still be favored to win even after the loss..only Lewis actually dominated him,that it,and that was the best champion of the 90's! When someone chooses to box its running away...when someone of your liking runs ,its boxing ...typical newb way of thinking! :roll:
Definatly a great punch,but lets be real bentt did nothing but cover up and hope to land something while using the ropes to bounce off of while Morrison jumped on him,Bentt himself knows this ,hard to see why you guys don't! :-(
I say he didn't have the talent to be what you think he could have been. Bentt didn't have the power. He's a loser vs many in the 1990's
This is a presumptuous post on a lot of different levels.. How do you know what he might or might not have become under the right circumstances? Is punching power really the be all end all of boxing and what's your reason for thinking he couldn't hit anyway? And how do you know he'd fail against all the top heavys had he been given comparable management and training teams? Even if he did manage to fall short against Holyfield, Lewis and Bowe who incidentally happen to be three of the greatest fighters of all time, would that really say anything bad about him? As it was he had a stellar amateur career and defeated a top 10 contender while giving another a good fight despite having a dozen or less pro fights at the time of those meetings. I think his biggest problem was pushy management who ushered him into he ring with the wrong people too soon.. Sometimes he was able to make the best of it and sometimes he wasn't.
He was a decent lop 20 type. He was a very good amateur He caught Morrison cold went right after him. That was a great win, but then he got a head injury shortly after that fight It's hard to guess how exactly he would have done if the head injury had not occurred, but I think he could have been a perennial fringe contender but wouldn't have won any more titles than the WBO.
I don't know if I agree.. You had all kinds of belts being branded as "world titles" ie, the WBO, WBA, WBE, WBC, IBO, IBF, etc, etc... And you had all kinds of guys holding them in the 90's.. Bruce seldon, Oliver, McCall, John Ruiz, Fran's Botha and a few others all had belts that they acquired in one way or another weather it be by upsetting someone big, winning it vacantly or made a champion through some sort of bullshlt political stunt. Michael Bentt if truth be told wasn't any worse than a lot of those guys. His career just took a hard turn for the worse.
Well if you cant see a fighter getting in close with the better punching gets caught well....how can you say you are not winning the fight? tReally this is dumb to suggest Morrison wasn't winning before he was caught...is that what you are saying ,just to clarify before I go on a tear AGAIN?:roll:
Staying calm under fire and throwing punches inside those of your opponent shows a decent ring IQ, good technique and strong mental attributes which all make for a dangerous opponent for anyone fighting at that time. I think Bentt was capable of doing that to a few of the titlists in the 90's and it's just a crying shame that he never had the chance to go on and prove it and there was nothing lucky about that win over Morrison.
You watch the Morrison fight and Morrison rocks him and tries to go for the finish and catches one. Morrison if he'd been a bit less cavalier would have won that no problem. Bentt was nothing special as Hide soon showed.
Exactly. That's why I tell people that Sonny Liston was close to beating Ali in the second fight, and not just by DQ.