Do you think a dominant champ often removes them from being able to beat a HOFer?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by bailey, Jan 26, 2015.


  1. VG_Addict

    VG_Addict Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,727
    3,935
    Jun 13, 2012
    I think the problem is that we don't really know how good the other HWs are. What was Pulev's best win before Wlad? Old Thompson, who he struggled with at first? What was Povetkin's best win before Wlad? Wlad's leftovers in Chagaev? Granted, he's looked good since then, beating Takam and Charr.
     
  2. Rock0052

    Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

    34,221
    5,875
    Apr 30, 2006
    Look at it this way- every time there's a long term, dominant champ, the first criticism is of the era

    Happened with Louis. Happened with Holmes.
    Happened with Wlad.
    It even happened with Marciano, and he wasn't on top that long (his entire career was shorter than those guys' title reigns).

    Liston came up in a weaker era than the ones those guys won in, and won in a dominant fashion routinelu, but you never really hear that same knock to the same extent. Had Sonny ruled longer instead of losing his title immediately, I bet you would hear the same criticism.
     
  3. bailey

    bailey Loyal Member Full Member

    39,980
    3,110
    Dec 11, 2009
    Some fighters do pick themselves up. Froch is a good example of this and seems a different animal when challenging more than defending, but D Curry was P4P #1.
    Look at how a loss affected J Toney. He lost to Jones and then lost straight after to a novice and didnt seem to get back on track for a long time.
    Bute may not be a HOFer, but he was a top SMW and hasnt been the same after a loss.
    G Johnson after losing to Hopkins went 7-8-2 before getting his career more on track
    J Taylor, was an undefeated world champ who had been in the ring with Hopkins, Wright, Spinks, but after the Pavlik loss went 1-3 in his next 4 fights
    Look at how it went for M Taylor after his loss to Chavez