Hasim Rahman is so under rated.

Your right, but all i'm saying is 100% Lewis vs 100% Rahman - Lennox win's anyday of the week. Rahman was a hard puncher, but he could not cut it at the top level. The Lewis fight is seen by many as a fluke.

If Rahman had been distracted, then he kept it well hidden. Lewis had been filming Ocean's eleven when he should have been training and focusing, as well as turning up in South Africa with a few week's to go before the fight. You could tell Lewis was under-prepared, by his lack of focus and poor stamina - he was exhausted after about 4 rounds.

I don't mean to take anything away from Rahman, he caught the champion at his weakest and capitalised on it fully and he deserves credit for that. But when it was him vs a top-level opponent who was fully prepared, he just couldn't cut it. He is a good B-level fighter but nothing more.

 

That was LL's own fault and the usual arrogance that generally led to both his losses. Rahman dealt with business that night. There are no excuses or luck. Rahman intended to land that punch. ATG's dont get knocked out with one punch KO's.

 

I rate him higher than Briggs. Rahman is not under rated though, he had his fame and was given many fights he did not deserve later on, based solely on that one win against Lewis. Rahman is a wildly inconsistent fighter who has problems with keeping his weight down. He should be remembered as a solid contender, and a temp title holder nothing more.

 

I thought he had a lot of talent , but cracked under pressure , and not always physically fit either. The last US linear champion and what a right hand he hit Lewis with . Not lucky , you have to be in the right position and know what to do which he did.

 

One hit miracle. Not versatile enough as a boxer to remain on the top level.

 

It's my personal view, but I don't consider someone a champ until the first successful defense. As someone put it here, Rahman was a temporary title holder, nothing more.

 

If that is the case then Bustomer Douglas also fits into that category. Which in my opinion is a bit of a shame considering he is a part of boxing folk law.

 

Ok, he was "THE MAN" (for 6 months). Granted his first failed defense was tough, but what makes people think that a guy who lost to Ruiz, Maskaev x2, Holyfield and Wlad would have any other successful defenses against any top competitor of that time. The weight of the evidence suggests Rahman's victory over Lewis was a bit of a fluke and he would not be able to sustain his championship status even if he faced other people besides Lewis.

 

So with your reasoning then Carlos Baldomir must be an all time great too.

Rahman was decent for quite a while and a fighter you had to take serious or end up like Lewis in their first fight. But other than that one shot what did he do that makes him so underrated? Get Knocked out by Maskaev twice?

You can't discredit those KO's because if you do you have to descredit Rahman's over Lewis as well.

 

With Lewis it was a fluke win. Lewis was dominating him in that fight in every rund before a lucky punch KO. In the rematch Lewis owned him totally.

He did well with Tua and thats his best accomplishment.

But on the other hand he got beat by John Ruiz and totally destroyed by Maskaev twice. Also Holyfield was beating him on scorecards.

 

tua was in his prime against rahman. he was not prime against barrett.

plus, barrett took some heavy shots that night and remained standing. a lot of fighters would of been stopped by those.

 

Exactly. The TS only wants to focus on that one (admittedly very big) win, while totally discounting Rahman's considerable number of losses. How most people rate Rahman is proportional to what he did in his career imo.

 

becoming undisputed champ that night was a great achievement for rahman, but we all know why he beat lewis that night.

don't we?