Top 5 most overrated boxers of All Time

At least we agree on that, every fighter Mullings beat was a bum or shot.

Yes just conveniently ignore the 3 names I mentioned. And the Lalonde fight was at SMW and Leonard did eventually TKO him and the same with Kevin Howard.

I did by mentioning he was a journeyman. And reminding you that Norris didn't retire after his lost to Mullings and got beat up in his next two fights. Leonard didn't stick around to get beat by a journey and then lose his next two fights after that so you can't say he was shot.

Norris did not just become shot due to that last barrage that Mullings put on him, he was shot coming into the fight. So I guess going by your logic, Leonard was shot as a result of the ass whooping Norris put on him but he wasn't shot going into the fight.

I say that because I mean and its not to save face.

Leonard ''almost had it all'' like Whitney Houston when he fought Norris, but fighting the prime elite version of Terry Norris his strengths were neutralized.

See above.

Put the Hopkins/Tito fight in a different predicament then I do believe people would say Tito was shot because of the way Hopkins shut him down.

Yes guys like Jones, Hopkins, Norris do.

 

I find it fascinating that a person could be so sure that everybody agrees with his position that, when several people disagree, he believes a conspiracy is afoot and the opposition is really just the same person. I wish there were a smilie that captured the kind of mentality that reflected!

The fact is that many, many people recognize that Leonard is falsely elevated by the media and its sheeple - and that number grows annually as the media spotlight fades. Even the media started to come around about the time Norris beat the snot out of Leonard. Leonard looked bad enough in the Hearns fight and his rabbit act against Duran infuriated the public (a significant proportion of the crowd actually walked out of the fight in protest). The big story in the lead up to Norris was that Leonard's image had soured among the public. The desperation of his ego was on display during his tour promoting the fight, as one of his lines was "I'm still relevant." Yes, Ray, you're still relevant, among your fanbase. Come to ESB and read how they defend your connivings and rationalize your failings on a daily basis.

 

It's simply to much of a coincidence that 3 illogical Norris huggers could be on the same forum. He barely has more than 10 fans worldwide.

 

He just showed you in the post you quoted before immediately getting off-line you ****ing bum.:rofl

 

my bad wrong thread, i thought it read most underated. atsch

 

1. Ali- not by serious boxing fans, more so by the general public
2. RJJ- not as much after the Tarver KO
3. Tommy Hearns- some people will freak out over this one
4. James Toney- the way some people talk about him, one would think he's the greatest technical fighter of all time.
5. Mike Tyson

All of these fighters are great fighters, but overrated by in some cases either fanboys (Tyson) or real boxing afficianados (Toney).

 

Looking at the thread starter's first post with Ezzard Charles, Barney Ross and Sam Langford mentioned, I can very well understand how one could be mistaken about the subject of this thread.

 

I would say that this is not correct.

I would say that a lot of Leonard haters, would also be Floyd haters (in this order).

A lot of Duran fans would also be fans of nice guys like Hearns and Mosley.

 

People don't like the businessman who makes all the right moves in his career and gloats about it. It's still a sport after all and people want to see the best fight the best, not to safely handpick their opposition. But there's no need to come up with any false statements about Leonard ducking everybody without fighting anybody and being at his peak against Norris while a younger Norris was shot against Mullings.

 

High on my list is James Toney.

I'm a huge Toney fan, but I recognize that, despite his good wins, he's had some dodgy decisions (Tiberi, Oquendo) and at HW he is not that good. Lack of commitment, which is shameful. I would like to know how good he could have been at HW.

But that's the Toney argument, isn't it? "IF he committed himself..." Well, he hasn't.

 

:huh

I was referring to Jennings, not Mullings.

You mean the way you had conveniently ignored the names I just mentioned? :deal

You didn't answer my question.

No, mentioning that he was a journeyman doesn't prove his opponents were shot. PROVING HIS OPPONENTS WERE SHOT will prove his opponents were shot.

Yes I can. A fighter doesn't need to "stick around" longer to prove he's shot once he's already clearly shown it.

No, he was still showing good form in his fights coming into the fight, and even in the early rounds of the fight itself. Hence he was still favored to beat Rosenblatt even after that fight.

No, by my logic he was shot from his fights with Hearns and Duran two years earlier and from being inactive for over a year in between.

No, he didn't even "almost had it all" when he fought Hearns and Duran two years earlier. He'd only gotten two years older since then.

No they won't. You could put it in a million different "predicaments" and people will say exactly what it was: that Tito was still in his prime but simply got owned anyway.

When?

 

I JUST SHOWED YOU where. I gave you the link to your own post. atsch

Again:
http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5975658&postcount=342

 

:rofl

 

They both beat bums to earn there abc rankings.

I didn't and I addressed those three names by mentioning the results of them.

They were not top elite fighters but were world class and as I mentioned in my post Lalonde was a super middleweight so of course Leonard is not going to easily blitz him.

Opinions on if a opponent is shot is all subjective anyway. And I said they were either shot or bums to begin no matter what there record is.

He has to show he is shot against a shitty opponent.

I have seened every Norris fight and the man was clearly way past his best in the Nick Rupa fight and in the post fight interview he was slurring his words. And he was showing okay form against bums.

You never said that and now your just trying to add on reasoning's that you didn't put forth before because you got caught contradicting yourself. Your saying Mullings made Norris shot, but that's not the case cause he was shot going into the fight. And Leonard won a UD against Duran who was coming off his best win against Barkley and got a draw over Hearns at the super middleweight range so how was either performance an indication of being shot, he showed good form against two ATG.

See above. And no it was not a whole two years from the third Duran fight to the Norris fight, it was 14 months.

If Tito had some losses and was past his prime but not shot, and then the Hopkins fight takes place and it comes off exactly as it did then yeah people would have assumed that Tito was shot.

Buy some DVD career sets.