Michael Olajide is someone I went way overboard on. KO Magazine asked in 1986 if he was the "Cassius Clay" of the 1980"s and Ring called him "A look at the future ". At that point I figured his boy band looks and well spoken image ,decent power,jab,boxing ability would take him far . But pretty boys generally don't last too long in this game unless they can fight and Michael could fight. He was pretty much ruined from the damaged eye even before his career started to take off. A shame the kid had real heart.He was rushed and burnt out. Its easy to say in retrospect but 1987/88 should have been years when he fought lesser guys with an occasional Doug De Witt thrown in and took on an Eddie Futch as his trainer. By late 89 he would have been ready to grab a WBO belt..
I was just thinking, since there is so much free footage on so many fighters, that makes one poster as informed as the next now, we can all quality as "experts"
I had Dempsey at #3 all time. (I now believe that was too high.) Jack was so revered in my family, especially by my Dad and Uncle, that it was hard for me to put him much lower on my list. My Dad had him at #1, and he lived to see Ali in both of his careers. I now have Jack at #6 on my all-time list, but sometimes I'm still tempted to lift him to #5. (Dad and my Uncle never saw Evander Holyfield or Lennox Lewis. I doubt if they would have moved either of them ahead of Jack if they had seen them. If Ali or Louis couldn't bump Dempsey off #1 then nobody would, in their eyes. What has stuck with me is that they thought Dempsey's prime was very short, basically in the run up to, and defeat of, Willard. My Dad and Uncle were definitely not alone in their thinking, in their generation - the people, who actually saw Jack Dempsey fight - as adults.)
I am guilty of overrating The Rock ( or have been ) now the scales have slipped from my eyes, and I realized he is a short, squat, clumsy, Cruiser Weight, that any half decent HW could beat, why did it take me so long ??? keep well.
I've had my share of overrating fighters like Ricardo Lopez and Orlando Canizales in the past. Big fan of them but I had to open my eyes and realize that they're not the greatest smaller weight fighters. Having a clean aesthetically pleasing fighting style just isn't enough to be considered the greatest.
On a H2H standpoint I feel like I've overrated Harold Johnson and Salvador Sanchez in the past as well. Both of them are superb fighters and great technicians but I've come to acknowledge some of their flaws and limitations recently, especially Johnson. Sanchez is also starting to get overrated to the point that many believe that he would have beaten JCC or Arguello. He was definitely NOT unbeatable.
I have a tendency to rate Joltin’ Jeff Chandler about 3-5 spots higher than the consensus at BW. Not sure if there are any others. I am sure there are several that I pick in hypotheticals that go against the grain in over or underrating h2h...but those are arbitrary. I don’t believe I drastically overrate or underrate any others in terms of greatness?
yeah, I would not favor Sal over JCC or Arguello...but I wouldn’t dismiss him either lol. He would be a live dog and a guy they would both need to take serious...but they should both beat him by my estimation. I think a Pedroza fight would be 50/50 (if forced I favor Sal) type of fight that would reveal a lot about both of them.
nope as usual he would be wrong. Chandler would win perhaps by KO 13-15 perhaps by a 9-6 margin....but make no mistake Chandler wins that fight. If not for Don King we would probably know the answer today. Oh well