I certainly depends on criteria. Take Camacho as the example. I think it's rather easy to rate him higher h2h than on resume because of the almost otherworldly talent that he had. He didn't maybe get the results to match the talent, but there was incredible talent there that matches up well with many great fighters better than his resume does. I actually think most agree with me on my view of Canelo. Like you're saying above, it all depends on how Green in defined. Do you think Canelo was as good as he was for May as he was for GGG or even Khan as an example? I think it's crystal clear he's improved and has more confidence in his abilities to go looking for opportunities. If he's still in his physical prime (now) and has clearly improved mentally now... how is his prime not right? If he wasn't prime for May, for whatever reason, how can he not be green? Green doesn't have to mean this is his first fight or 10th fight. That is green green. But if you're not in your prime technically and mentally (as canelo clearly wasn't for May), you tell me Philly.. what word would you use to describe the obvious fact that he's improved and still in his physical prime?
Interesting question and difficult to give a concise answer. I might try later when I have more time. Was Hopkins green when he lost to pre prime RJJ? To me they were both pre prime but had less experience both in general and in championship fights than Canelo vs FMJ? I hear SRL fans say he was green prior to Duran? Not in my mind but he certainly improved by my mind afterwards. I use words prime and peak differently not sure if you do? I would say RJJ-Hopkins were both pre prime (but creating a dividing line that is fair and consistent is no easy task) when they met with RJJ closer to his prime. To me a prime can be 3-10+ years depending upon the fighter. Whereas peak would be a 1-3 fight (maybe more for older fighters who had 100+ fights etc.) window where they were at the pinnacle of their game. So I would not say by my criteria that Canelo was green, rather in the early stages of his prime. I think the 2 GGG fights may have shown him at his peak? And I think he still has some prime fights/years left in him, but time will tell. Fighters age quickly and in unseen ways and not always by age or amount of fights. But the end can come quickly as in the case of RJJ who after Tarver/Johnson is no longer even tail end of his prime for me, but post prime. I don’t credit Hopkins ir Calzaghe a lot for those wins. Good question and perhaps deserves its own thread to try and narrow down these terms and definitions and where fighters stood at various parts of their career
Then we're just talking semantics at this point. You agree that Canelo is more prime now than he was vs. May. That can't really be disputed. So if we see a fighter, who's markedly improved since a fight, both technically and mentally.... it should be safe to not call them prime prior to said improvements. He's Prime right now, you choose the term peak, so you can somehow describe Canelo as prime when he fought May. It's like you agree he's more prime now than before, but just don't like the word green, so now it's "early stages of prime" which could be what someone uses to call someone green. As far as championship fights, at that level, he was unquestionably green. I don't count the number of fights or weak championship fights he had before May, when my eyes tell me he's shown clear improvement since. So if I see a fighter show great improvement both mentally and physically... I wouldn't call him before that improvement prime. I might if he was in his physical prime then, but now past that prime and now just mentally prime. Maybe then. Here we have Canelo still in his physical prime, and clearly improved since May on many levels, yet we're still going to call him prime for the May fight? That just doesn't work for me. To each their own though, and I appreciate hearing your view because I respect it. So it's good, I just prefer to call a spade a spade in this instance... and you prefer a little grey area in there.
Bob Foster is among the most overrated. He failed miserably whenever he fought anyone with a pulse slightly over 175 and his wins at 175 were pretty limited. Someone like Juan Carlos Gomez would probably smoke Bob Foster.
Duran Marciano Louis Wilder (on General) Dempsey Roy Jones Jr GGG Callum Smith Vitali Klitschko Ike Ibeabuci David Tua David Haye Andre Ward Canelo Alverez And the list would keep going so I'll leave it there
Could it be argued that Roy relied more on reflexes while the other two more on actual skill? As for Mark, after your initial exasperation you do get used to him!
David Tua - I've seen him favoured over many ATG's on this forum despite the fact he doesn't have the wins, skills or achievements to back this up Vitali Klitschko - Because he won 3 or 4 rounds against the worst version of Lewis that ever stepped in a pro ring his fans think that makes him a H2H monster.
I'll second Vitali, the guy's lauded by many as a monster in H2H's and capable of beating anyone yet even a quick look at his actual real life resume reveals that the two best fighters he faced (Chris Byrd and the absolute worst version of Lennox Lewis) he lost to and quit against.
Bowe. His only notable accomplishment was going life and death (and losing) to a much smaller Holyfield. Yeah, he was dangerous if you came right at him and got stuck on an inside brawl with him. But the moment somebody as big and strong as him with some technical ability came along, he crumbled.
