Chuck Wepner

Because he fought in the Ali-era, simply because of that. He fought there so he was automatically better than most of the fighters in other eras... :hey

 

He was character, something that has been lacking in boxing in general since the mid 90s.

Sure it is cliche, but I do not see Lil Floyd inspiring the biggest boxing film franchise going.

 

Of course he was a character, and I like him because he had heart and was sympathic, but mr magoo criticized the Louis-era indirectly with his "Wepner fought in the best era and he would give fighters like Carnera, Braddock or Baer close fights",-things, which isn´t true IMO... Wepner would never win a title, whether in which era he would be...

 

If what you say is true, then that means that he lost to all good fighters because those good fighters would've been more than good fighters (great fighters?) in other eras.


Were guys like Jose "King" Roman, Jerry Tomasetti, Joe Bugner, Jerry Judge, Randy Neumann and Duane Bobick fighters who were good and would've been great in other eras?

I don't believe they are and frankly i'm suprised that you do (as witnessed by your statement).

The 70's had a lot of great fighters, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, but the below that, the contenders were no more special than contenders from any other era. The only difference is that everyone knows them and has seen them because they are on Ali's resume.

 

Not true, few could bleed like the Bayonne Bleeder, he deserved that title.:yep

I know what you mean though mate:good

 

:thumbsup

 

Why knock chuck,its got to be better then yet another tyson or ali thread(and i love them guys,but you know what i mean),it makes a change,all i know about the man,was his knock down of ali(stood on his foot,yes or no?),and that sly stallone was there and got his rocky story from the fight.

 

An of course from there, did Sly live up to his ego/name and shag Pryor's (Aaron's) misses in 82/83?.... Allegedly

 

Ali fought Liston,Foreman,Frazier and some solid guys like Quarry,Bonavena,Lyle,Ellis and less so Bugner,Foster,Shavers and he also fought a lot of nobodys and never heard ofs and never would be knowns Blin,Dunn,Evangelista,etc. BY the way I really dont know if ANY of the 70's fighters would be DOMINANT champs today, even Ali

 

Wasn't "Chariots of Fire" based on PBF's boxing career?

 

Well, he did star in a porn-flick as "The Italian Stallion" back in the 1970s.

 

Why should i? I'm not claiming that journeymen from the 30's would be contenders in the 70's.

I don't think he's claimed that, but i could be wrong. At any rate, this discussion is about whether or not Wepner would be a contender in the 30's, which i doubt.



And how often does it need to be repeated that the Terrel fight was a robbery by all accounts?
Wepners notable wins? Zero, none. He's the ultimate journeyman. I would not completely exclude the possibility of him getting a lucky win and breaching the top10 briefly (anything is possible in boxing), but we're looking at very long odds here. You won't get a ranking in the 30's from a win over Neumann.

 

Wepner was a tough game fighter and a nice guy from what I hear.

But he was not a good fighter.

I might rank him a step above Scrap Iron Johnson.

But beating Baer and all of them? Doubtful. Maybe Carnera.