Fighters That Have Records That Are Deceptive ?

Just one long thread of cope. Fighters get the records they deserve.

Except Maske should be undefeated.

 

Hi Buddy.
Excellent pics, especially Perkins, what a great road warrior he was, and a fine box/puncher to boot,he fought on these shores in 67 against Vic Andretti, a favourite of many in London's east end,in the early to mid 60s, after he retired, like many fighters he was the landlord of a pub, I frequented the establishment many times in my formative years, in fact I met my wife there, yea he has a lot to answer for...
stay safe FR, chat soon.
Mike.

 

One of the deceptive aspects of Robinson's record is that more than half of his wins were against novices, fighters with losing records, and C-level journeymen no-hopers who were over-matched. At a glance, 174 wins looks impressive until you see the caliber of some of his opponents. In his defense, these were stay-busy fights in between title matches. It was a different time and fighters had to earn a paycheck wherever they could get it. You'll notice the same pattern with Willie Pep's record as well among other fighters with over 100 fights.

 

On the opposite end of the spectrum from what’s been mentioned so far, LaMarr Clark was a heavyweight who retired with a 43-3 (42) record.

His final fight was a stoppage loss to Muhammad Ali (then Cassius Clay) in Ali’s sixth bout.

He was also stopped by Pete Rademacher.

Those are the only two recognizable names on Clark’s record. Of his 43 wins. 27 were against guys who were debuting. Most of the others carried records that ranged from 0-1 to like 1-5.

 

Brian Nielsen was even better than his stellar record.

 

Freddie Pendleton
Steve Robinson
Brian Nielsen
Buck Smith

 

That’s Super Brian to you!

I figure Emanuel Augustus is the best answer to this thread. The true Drunken Master was a force of nature and the most unpredictable and unorthodox guy I think I have ever seen. He was a handful for anyone … ask Floyd Mayweather.

 

Ivan Robinson deserves a shout.

 

You beat me to it, but I was going to mention Gino Gelromino (I have been waiting for years to work him into a discussion, lol) and Tyrone Jackson.

 

Before 1960 or so most ATG's had a deceptive record like Ezzard Charles. That was the norm. Louis, Tunney and Marciano were the aberration(regardless of the reason). ATG's were expected to pick up 5-10 losses by osmosis.

SRR's losses should be held against him because in his era he could have fought at HW but cut down to WW and MW. He cut down to WW when the murderers row was doing their thing then popped in at MW once they were gone. Robinson was supposed to have a prettier record than someone like Ezzard Charles.

Elmer Ray's KO record was very deceptive. In his limited sample size against top competition Ray proved he was a top HW who could have been the champ. But as a puncher he was really smokes and mirrors. 72 KOs. 1 guy of note really in Lee Savold. 2/3s of those 72 were against guys with losing records. And a lot of the other third wasn't far above .500.

 

try every 'longstanding' top contender, who performed exceptional even in defeat or worse in restriction... the history offers up a good few of them.

 

Jimmy McLarnin is typically ranked higher on ATG p4p lists than you'd imagine a fighter with a 55-11-3 record would be.

That said, yes, Mike, you've nailed it. Generally considered an ATG despite a 157-65-9 record, Zivic is the posterchild for this thread.

 

Hi Greg.
If it's rubber stamped by your good self, that's good enough for me.
stay safe buddy, chat soon.
Mike.