Well he lost to Eubank fair and square twice, so he couldn't beat him. He deserved to lose twice/Eubank deserved to win twice, because he ****ing did lose them (/Eubank win them), it is what it is. And he's not beating Graham, terrible terrible match for him. And McClellan was just a novice at the time, so that doesn't really make sense. He'd of possibly, even probably, beaten McCallum when it was initially scheduled for Nov 89, or in a rematch, with better tactics than just moving forward methodically to be turned with hooks around the guard or stopping to statically jab to be countered downstairs with McCallum's long body shots.
At the moment I'd say Joyce. Had a really strong argument for Gold at the Olympics, handily out boxed Hrgovic in the amateurs who's a hipsters favourite now. His style is ugly but It works, he's got great work rate, heavy hands seems durable and is a genuinely huge man. Backed up with a lot of amateur experience, I rate him tbh. I don't understand at all why Dubois is seen as like basically a guaranteed winner against him, I could REALLY easily see Joyce winning that if Dubois doesn't chin him early. It reeks to me of a fight where after it everyone is talking about Dubois lack of amateur experience etc, like I can literally hear the post fight discussion in my head lol. On the flip side if Dubois does do him early ill be really impressed.
No offence, but how can the Eubank rematch be more impressive when he got stopped? He didn't see it over the line, tragically, so whilst it was great he still conclusively lost. My pick would be Ricky Burns. Had a fantastic career and still mixing it at a good level, but does t usually get the props he deserves.
I should've put for 10.99 rounds. It's a very strange situation for a guy to get up before the count of one, walk straight in after spitting some blood, clear-eyed and call you in with a few seconds left of the round. You're not taught that a guy you've battered all night and just legitimately dropped for the first time in his career can do that.
I respect your opinion. But personally, I wouldn’t say he was underrated. I think he was probably more overrated than underrated. He used to hype the fights with his mouth, but was then so cautious when it came to them. Although Wlad was a great HW, Haye’s showing was very poor. He could have given a better account of himself. Valuev was huge but so limited. An ancient Evander should have beaten him and we know that Chagaev beat him. Again, he was so overly cautious. Despite Valuev’s huge size, Haye should have beaten him much easier than what he did. He had great hand speed and movement. He was so over cautious, Adam Booth trained with a pair of stilts in his camp. He was overthinking everything. He should have gone out and just let his hands go. I think his early defeat to Carl Thompson had a big psychological affect on him. I agree that he was finished against Bellew. I think that he’d have beaten Bellew in his prime.
Have a look at his Insta and Twitter, it's truly bizarre at times, I thought he was just messing about at first and becoming a parody of himself but I think he genuinely believes the rubbish he posts.
Watson was nowhee near McCallum`s level, he out-smarted Watson eassily, his body attack was too much.
Yeah hard to argue with that tbh bud. Totally agree they overthought it up at heavyweight. Although it is part of the whole cruiserweight to heavyweight jump being a lot harder than people think. Haye and booth both had good boxing brains.... from the outside it probably looks like overthinking things....from the inside its probably because a guy giving away five or six stone plus of natural weight would struggle any other way. Haye went for the money up at heavyweight....to the demise of his legacy tbh. But as a fighter on eastside anyway for me hes underrated. He was great in his day....big, strong, fast, powerful and probably the best skill he had was that he made opponents scared to throw. Not many british guys are good enough to do that. Very very few infact. He did have his weaknesses which we,re possibly more down to the style more than anything else. Booth style is a great style imo...but like a lot of styles it does have its flaws. Haye had them...but his strengths we,re so good it didnt really matter all that much till he got to the real big guys at heavyweight they,d have caused him massive problems regardless of his strengths and weaknesses tho imo...they we,re just a bit too big for him. Still think people underestimate how hard it is to fight a guy like klitchko with a good length and size advantage over you....he was a master at judging distance when he had the advantage. But looking back at haye at cruiser....even momeck who was a great fighter....was battered round the ring by haye. Momeck put him over and had his moments but he was beaten up badly by haye from the first round as was carl thompson...haye was just too inexperienced to realise thompson wouldnt just fold like the rest at that stage.