Just how good a MW was Herol "Bomber" Graham in the latter half of the 1980s?

Especially on the form during his brief EBU title reign. How does that version of him stack up h2h against historical elites at 160?

 

He just turned 66 today, and posted this, likely tongue-in-cheek:

This content is protected

Although with all the geezer-circuit exhibitions these days, who knows...

 

A souped-up Willie Monroe Jr.

 

All due respect to the Bomber but he stacks up no better against the historic elites than he did to the upper crust of his time.

In the latter half of the 1980s he was a rising contender/prospect but he always found a way to cone up a dollar short and a day late against tip-top opposition: Sumbu and McCallum, and I’ll throw in a blind Julian Jackson in 1990 for good measure.

His style definitely would give some people trouble, but not enough to overcome the very best. His best wins in this span are over a junior middle (Ayub Kalule) and a high-level but second-tier domestic B-level guy (Mark Kaylor), right? He beat a few journeymen of note but no results that make me say ‘wow, he was just around at the wrong time.’ He couldn’t catch a break because he wasn’t quite good enough to get over and make his own breaks.

 

Extremely awkward. And sharp. Should’ve had a 154lb title shot in 83. Unlucky. Very unlucky.

Better than Hamed, by a good margin. Just without the power.

 

Nah he has had a rough time over the years. Met in a gym in Rotherham (yes that infamous grooming town) which he was running at the time. Seemed a nice bloke although a little reserved. He was liked around these parts. Shame he walked into Julian Jackson

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...#:~:text=(Getty (Getty),to say they have done.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/b...mpion-Herol-Graham-opens-daily-struggles.html

https://boxingnewsonline.net/the-unrewarded-genius-of-herol-graham/

 

Would have got a draw possibly if he didn't have a point deducted vs McCallum. Sambu had his number and was absolutely foolish against Jackson, he should have stayed out of the way, it would have been his best win. Ultimately a competent domestic and continental fighter but not top tier.

 

Even if his style matched up well against some top-tier opposition, the sheer recklessness of it meant he'd obviously always be susceptible to losing via a counter right hand. It wasn't only the Jackson fight - he was almost KTFO in similar fashion by Kalambay.

Any fans of his would have to watch via peeking through their hands.

 

I think he was very good.

He schooled McCallum for the first 6 rounds and on my card deserved a draw.

He floored Kalambay twice and most certainly deserved to win a decision against him in their 2nd fight.

Was on the verge of beating Jackson but got too aggressive and left his chin up in the air which was sometimes a fault of his.

I actually think he would've had a decent chance of dethroning Hagler in 1987.

 

I think he gets overpraised and overcriticized. He was extremely fast, which by itself was enough to make him hard to hit, but he ended up getting tagged more than he should have because of technical deficiencies and carelessness. His punches had little power and the three best guys he faced all beat him. I don't think that there's any reason to pit him in fantasy fights with the elite middleweights.

On the other hand, he gets ripped as something of a born loser who was destined to always blow the big ones, and I don't agree with that either. Losing to Kalambay, McCallum, and Jackson is no mark of shame. That's two hall of famers and a guy who has plenty of hall of fame support. He put up good efforts in his four fights with those guys. I can't think of another fighter where giving four hard fights to boxers of that quality is used as an argument against his ability. Look at some of the other middle champs of the '80s and '90s. Reggie Johnson, Steve Collins, John David Jackson, Jorge Castro, Antuofermo, Minter. I think that's Graham's level of fighter. Put the best version of Graham in against the best version of those guys, and he wins some and loses some. Those weren't the chances he got, though. Instead he got two world title shots against hall of famers, plus one more when he was almost forty (and, again, fought very well in that contest).

That's where I am on Graham. Very good fighter, good enough to have been a world champion, but it didn't happen. Sometimes people just fall through the cracks. He wasn't the first and he wasn't the last. I'm very glad to hear that he seems to be in good spirits. I don't think I've heard a bad word about him as a person.

 

I don’t think it’s uncommon at all for someone who lost to all the top-tier guys he faced to have that brought up when considering how he’d do against the best all-timers in his division.

He,obviously (at least to me), had a ceiling. So I can say he might trouble some all-timers but I cannot see him beating the best middleweights of all time.

 

a good fighter obviously, over rated and over excused, he got 3 chances at a Title, which is of course 3 Chances More than MOST TOP Fighters get... so the Recorded History is clear.

 

‘You have to take your opportunity with both hands, like I did last week (stopping Nigel Benn), because you don’t know if you’ll get another.’
-Eubank directly following the Julian-Herol bout in Spain

 

Can’t say I agree with you on him deserving a title shot at 154 in 1983 — he did hold British, Commonwealth and Euro titles, which is all well and good, but he hadn’t faced or beaten any contenders. He won a vacant Euro title and defended it once.

If he was seeking a title shot, he should have faced a contender or two.

In 1984 he moved up to middle to face Lindell Holmes and never looked back.

Kind of funny on the ‘better than Naz except for the power,’ as that’s the thing that most separated Hamed from his betters, most of whom he beat (until Barrera came calling).

 

He was WBC #1 contender in 83.
(WBA middleweight #1 in 86)