Why isn't Chagaev appreciated more?

His wins against Virchis and Ruiz were better than Skelton. PFP Usyk is obviously ahead of him and Haye should be too.

He had a short peak that wasn't closely watched in the US and then got hepatitis and tore his achilles. The Wlad fight was on short notice after both of those events and never really was the same again.

 

He was good fighter and had a heavyweight belt but was never the heavyweight champion. Sorry, but there is big difference between Uysk beating Joshua twice, one in England and beating Fury. Chagaev had his chance to show that he was special against Klitschko and came up short. No shame in that, it is what it is but that is why he is not talked about much.

 

He was a solid, well-rounded, but colorless fighter that lacked a singularly spectacular victory or attribute IMO, i.e. he wasn't an explosive puncher like Peter or Haye or a defensive slickster like Byrd.

Having said that, he absolutely should've been at least a poll option for a place among Wlad's top 3 wins. Big oversight IMO.

 

He was real good but he isn’t top 3 on Wlad’s resume. As others have stated his peak was short. (But he looked great for a time). He did beat Ruiz and Valuev cleanly although the judges tried to make it close for those guys. Late in his career he also beat Oquendo cleanly, who had the reputation of being a spoiler, losing the decision in what many called robberies in most of Fres’s big fights.

 

the problem here is that you can replace the first three top three that Wlad fought with another three and there will not be a big difference. Ibragimov, Chagaev, Haye, Povo, Chambers, Shulz, Byrd, Peter and a few others, you can juggle them as much as you want... Byrd was probably the best of them, but his style was very similar to Wlad's. Haye was the brightest and had a lot of potential, but he didn't use it and he didn't fight Wlad. Many of Wlad's fights were terrible failures.
I agree with the previous speakers - Chagaev was strong, solid, clever and inconvenient but he had nothing exciting in his arsenal. Nothing we would remember years later

 

He had some good qualities, but I think He wasn't all that. His resume is pretty mediocre as well. Past prime John Ruiz, Valuev who was never very good and should've lost couple fights before that already - then two solid European heavyweights in Vyrchys and Skelton.
Nothing to write home about. I would certainly not put him among the top 3 of Wladimir's opponents.

 

Chagaev was a good and underrated fighter, and I would rate him a better heavyweight over Peter or Haye. The problem with his resume is that there is no signature win. The only titlists he beat were Ruiz and Valuev. Both guys had two controversial reigns, and the former was past it when he fought Ruslan. Beating regional level fighters does not help Chagaev's cause. Chagaev had two big opportunities to beat the best fighters of his era, and he failed in both. Kubrat Pulev did the same thing and he wasn't even in his prime when he fought Joshua. Chagaev also did not have a long title run which further hurts his prospects of being rated higher. When you fight in a weak era, lose against the best fighters, have a short alphabet tile run and not beat any fighter of prominence, it is always difficult to be garner appreciation.

 

he had some good performances, he easily dominated old Holyfield and the still dangerous David Tua. But I'm not going to have a hard debate about it.

 

Ibragimov was better and wasn't a past prime, last minute replacement.

 

1. His fights were dreadful and some of them, I am thinking of Virchis here, were either way. He really left his best in the amateurs.

2. He cancelled out of several fights and had others cancelled for him.

3. Didn't fight the best of his time.

 

Chagaev was nothing if not a trier and had a fair left hand, but his prime was brief and over before he made the ratings (by the time he met Skelton, he looked pretty much a spent force) - after which injury and illness took whatever was left.

I'd also suggest that, even if one takes his size into consideration, the beating of Valuev, Skelton and Pianeta isn't especially striking and perhaps not worthy of recurrent appreciation.

For mine, he failed to make a real impression and fell into that 'also ran' bracket, not really having the tools, the physical presence or the conditioning of an elite heavyweight. Indeed, to be frank, he looked a little more like an out of shape cruiserweight.

 

He had an excellent amateur career going 81-4, beating Savon twice. He was really well schooled and had a bit of pop, tough as nails. He could have gone further but for injuries and bouncing back and forth from amateur to pro.