............Name a superfight you think was a dud. Could be for whatever reason; maybe the action was subpar........maybe the result didn't catapult one into further heights of fame and popularity, maybe the thing had an odor about it (like Whitaker-Chavez; that fight left a stink in everone's nostrils and was an all-around black eye for boxing). Think about any criteria that left you ultimately dissatisfied with the superfight attached to it.
De la Hoya vs. Trinidad. De la Hoya made Trinidad look like he had been playing in the minors, then just quit fighting. The decision was bad, and the fight never appeared to be competitive. So much for that next Leonard vs. Hearns idea.
Its happening alot more recently mainly because every big fight is having the word superfight attached to it. And now due to this, the fights that should really be termed superfights (Mayweather-De La Hoya or Mayweather-Hatton) are being termed 'mega-fights' or some crap like that. Sorry lol, just a little something I wanted to get off my chest. In answer to your question, Calzaghe-Kessler was a pretty big flop. In Europe it was big, it was a unification match everyone had been wait for, 2 undefeated fighters andthe stadium sold out I think, but in the U.S the fight attracted the lowest viewing numbers of the year for a HBO fight.
Tyson/Spinks without question. The hype was quite high for that one. I was'nt sure how long Spinks would last but less than a round? sigh
Spinks vs Qawi was kinda a letdown. All my beer drinking buds & I thought Spinks would duke it out with Qawi, but instead he hit Dwight with that one big right hand early...just to get his attention......then boxed with that herky - jerky style the rest of the way to earn a decision.
Yes I definitely agree with this Longhorn. Spinks Braxton was the biggest letdown EVER!! Hagler-Duran is up there too.
That's because no casual boxing fans in American know (or knew) who Kessler and Calzaghe are (or were). The fight itself was pretty damn good.
For me Duran v Leonard 3 was a total flop. We all eagerly anticipated a great match between a rejuvenated 'hands of stone' and Leonard who had just fought Hearns. Duran landed one meaningful punch in the 9th, and that was it. Leonard deserved the decision but he didn't exactly tax himself either. Horrible fight.
lewis vs tyson is my pick, guys like ali, duran, jones jr, chavez just have this ability to bend the rules of a fighters career in creating a aura of interest that just maybe they are still in their prime when really there not. to me i foolishly thought tyson was the same way and after round 1, tyson was never really in it, only his incredable chin and huge legs and unfortunatly not his great defesive skills kept him untill round 8 or 9. hopkins-jones 2 was the biggest superfight let down. it was such a great match with each fighter making so much money but they both pushed the envelope so much that it just couldent stay on its feet.
Without being too cynical, but post Leonard/DuranIII I would say there has not been a Superfight outside of the Heavies.... Maybe de la Hoya/Mayweather.... but it was not like the 80s. I had friends who had heard of de la Hoya and Mayweather but they would not be able to give a educated opinion on who was going to win unlike say a fight between the fab four in the 80s.... I would say Hagler/Leonard was a huge let down; I wanted to see Leonard Legally killed!
Hagler-Duran a flop? RR! The crowd was loving it. I thought it was a fascinating chess match... though it blew the expecations to smithereens. I'd go with Holyfield-Tyson II. Mike was an absolute disgrace not only to himself but to the sport. It was worse (WORSE!) than no mas. Leonard-Duran III disgusted me as well.
That was a very good fight, enjoyed it a lot. I've never liked Hagler v Leonard, I thought that was a very boring fight.