Which is more likely: That Wlad is overrated, or that Bowe is underrated?

You may only pick one.

 

Both are rated where they should be imo

 

As for Riddick Bowe, I saw a tremendous amount of potential there, the key word being "potential." I'm very skeptical of any rating list that ranks any fighter high (on an all-time list) when the most impressive parts of his resume are all against one other fighter.

 

Wlad is overrated !!!

 

Wlad is definatelly overrated by the "casual entertainment consument guys". Although the fight vs. Lewis never happened, the victories over a prime Holyfield and Golota weigh as much as Wlad's many title defenses vs those poor helpless short guys. Unlike Wlad, Bowe fought bravely for his victories and didn't wear down his opponents by pushing down, leaning on them, jab and grab, stiffarming, etc.

 

Depends on who's doing the rating. These two seem to generate a fairly broad range of opinions.

 

Neither. Wlad is underrated and Bowe is overrated

 

I think BOTH are overrated!

 

Wlad is criminally underrated and Bowe is sorta underrated.

 

I don't accept these weird parameters. I don't agree with either one.

Wladmir is usually rated where he should be within the top 10 for his longevity and formidable h2h abilities. At first he was severely underestimated by old boxing fans who exaggerated his weaknesses and acted as if any half-decent puncher would splatter him in 1 round, but for the most part those days are over. Occasionally he gets overrated but not nearly to the extent of other boxers. Top 5 you can make a case for him but that's really pushing it.

Bowe is definitely overrated. You see all sorts of mental gymnastics and excuses for why his resume is so thin. He gets an insane amount of mileage for h2h discussions based almost entirely on his trilogy with Hoylfield and his sheer size. He might be one of the most glaring examples of a boxer failing to live up to his full potential.

 

I have Wlad at #5 based on his longevity and his success against a wide array of opponents, often unbeaten. I do not have Bowe in my top ten HW although some people might make a case for him based on his success against Holyfield. But if Holyfield is that good, why not have him in the top ten instead? As Djanders so acutely said, one should not be an ATG based on beating one guy. Bowe trashing the WBC belt instead of fighing Lewis was a huge mistake, imho.

 

I think both are a bit underrated, especially Klitschko who will be thought of more highly 30 years from now than he is today. Since the only underrated choice is Bowe, he was my choice

 

Uh, Bowe hit people after the bell and when they were on the canvas. He should have at least two DQ loses. A dirtier fighter there never was.

 

I don’t know. For as many people who rate Wladimir highly there are just as many who can’t seem to get past his earlier losses. To some of them it’s as if those defeats define his whole career which clearly isn’t the case.

As for Riddick Bowe I enjoyed watching him fight and his pro record is indeed very good. He was never stopped and lost only once to an ATG who he beat twice. But he gets a lot more props in head to head matchups than he probably should. While the Holyfield wins were excellent victories, his resume is somewhat thin in depth and there were a few nights where he looked less than impressive against average opposition.

so in conclusion: Wlad is not overrated and Bowe is not underrated.

 

Which is totally compatible with picking one. For posters who agree with neither option, the thread is essentially asking which one you reject more emphatically.

(That aside, I think your subsequent analysis of both is quite good.)