Fighters that shouldn´t have become champion but did

Leonard against Hagler.Stretched credibility by getting an instant title shot at a long running undisputed champion, after so long out imo.regardless of previous prestige, he was outright undeserving of the fight.

 

Now Im not a big Willard fan mind you, and I think he milked the war years to his benefit. BUT, he did make the most of his shot against Johnson and then defended the title against a dangerous and pretty decent HW contender in Moran.

 

While I agree in principle he did win the fight, and whether you believe he deserved the decision (I am a much bigger fan of Haglers but think Leonard won) it was certainly close and competetive, more so than the vast majority of Hagler's defenses, so Leonard kind of redeemed himself there. Had he come in and been blown away or buried under an insurmountable points loss then yes, that would have been a sham.

 

:dealsorry boggle, leonard won

 

Amir Khan..... blown away in 54 secs by a journeyman.....fights a school teacher...and a shot fat barrera...then moves up to get an instant title shot in a division hes never fought at against the weakest world champ in boxing at the time (Khans words)

 

errr.... you shouldn't win the championship after knocking out a long-reigning champion.

i guess i am perplexed.

unless you are going to start about a fix at which point you will expose yourself as fairly ill-informed.

 

it's a fair point that he wasn't SKILLED enough to hold the lineal belt. he earned it but willard sucked. he just outlasted an old man through benefit of a decent chin

 

You need to watch a bit more Willard. He had a nice jab, excellent uppercut and tons of power. He was even quite light on his feet. His biggest strike against him was dis-interest in the fight game.

 

Arturo Frias,

He had no punch.
The friggin guy Knocks-Out Claude Noel.

 

Valid point. :good

It's like when Tyson came back after 4 years 2 months of rotting, & got an unearned title shot at Bruno, from a mere 10 minutes in the ring against McNeeley & Mathis jr. :-(

 

true enough and i've read these before...but in any way shape or form, was he REALLY on johnson's level?

johnson dominated the best black contenders before his title win. willand is nowhere near the likes of landford, mcvey or jeanette

 

Sang-Hyun Kim,

Upset Saensak Muangsurin (One hell of a fighter in both boxing and Muay Thai).

I posted this without checking the spelling.

 

At that time he was very much on Johnson's level, seeing as how he knocked him out, and frankly Im not sure the 1915 version of Langford beats the same Willard of the Johnson fight, given the massive, almost comical size advantage and durability that Willard possessed over Langford.

 

that's the thing i guess. willard was ONLY size and a jab. would anyone be talking about him without the johnson win? of course not. he was a tall farmer who caught an old, undertrained johnson at the right time

 

That's an excellent shout.

I then will play add-on and say Claude Noel.

How Jorge Vaca ever got within sniffing range of a title shot amazes me.