Anyone feel Mr. Bonavena is underrated? The man was only stopped once in his career - gave everyone hell and was as tough as they came. He arguably beat a Young Frazier and an Old Patterson and has some decent wins on his ledger. I hear so much more about guys like Lyle, Shavers, and Quarry but I think Ringo was as good as any of them. Thoughts?
Yes, I've always though he was underrated. He was back in the 60's, and that remains so today...what with some uninformed posters rating him about equal to Ron Stander in some H2H match ups. He was awkwardly clever in a Gene Fullmerish sort of way...and though not as good as Fullmer, who was an accomplished champion, they both had a somewhat effective Plan B type of style which was a crude "boxer" style...like in Oscar's fight with Chuvalo. It was the Frazier fights where Oscar impressed me, even in defeat. Of course in the first fight with the 2 kd's, but also in the rematch, where Ringo showed a surprisingly sense of distance, toughness and defensive prowess going 15 rounds with Frazier, whereas the seemingly more sophisticated Jerry Quarry, and others, like Chuvalo, Ellis, Ramos, Foster, etc were getting beat up,chewed up and spit out by Smoke.
The fact is he did not beat Frazier or Patterson. If he was more diclipined and less crazy he would have been someone else!
The crowds booed both decisions and in the case of Frazier had the bout been scored with the system in place today the 10 point must system he would of scored the win on Frazier. He did better against Frazier than any fighter not named Foreman or Ali and it’s close with Ali. I don’t believe many people realize that. Guy was durable and energetic and as one poster rightfully put clumsy in a difficult cagey way just like Gene Fulmer. Seriously underrated
The question being asked was is Oscar Bonavena underrated? The fact that there is some controversy surroundings his losses to Joe Frazier and Floyd Patterson are well-known. Also If there had been different scoring systems in place it is still unknown what the actual decisions would have been.Perhaps the fighters in question would have fought differently differently. The fact remains is that the crowd is not the final arbiter nor decisions questionable decisions unknown in boxing today. Overall, I think Ringo gets adequate recognition for his accomplishments but is one of those for whom we wonder “what could have been?”.
I don’t think his losses to Frazier and Patterson get nearly the attention many other fighters do with close and controversial losses. I see many fighters in the division whom were stopped more than him, had more chances wasted than him and get much more coverage than Ringo. I’m not saying he was great - i’m Just pointing out I see the Lyles and Quarry’s and Shavers always mentioned and put into hypothetical matchups and no one ever mentions Ringo.
Perhaps I Underestimate stimate how others evaluate him. I think he fits well in the group and I would put him at number two in that pack at his peak.
Too bad that Shaver's bout didn't take place. That had the makings of a good fight with the loser taking a big step back.
Nah, he was at least as strong as Chuvalo,...smarter, as he proved in their 1966 bout, and a better puncher, as he proved vs Frazier.