Great fighters who were TERRIBLE at...

Possibly Wilfredo Gomez. He wasn't much cop at super featherweight, although age may have been catching up with him at that point.

Don Cockell was ironically a better heavyweight than light-heavyweight.

Although it's pure assumption, I don't think Hagler would have been nearly as great at super middleweight.

Can't really think of anyone else right now...

 

To be honest Gomez wasn't spectacular at featherweight either. He was really in a league of his own at super-bantamweight though.

 

True.

 

Hatton Comes To Mind. Oscar At Middleweight Wasnt Pleasent Viewing Though He Give Hopkins A Good Fight For 9 Rounds.

chavez never shined at welter.

 

herbie hide is the reverse of don cockell. better at cruiser than heavy

hagler had the skills to be better at a better weight. he could really well

 

Diego Corrales wasn't as effective after 130.

 

Freddie Cochrane against Rocky Graziano.

 

He wasn't bad at lightweight.

 

Iran Barkley at HW

 

I'd cut Gomez a bit of slack at featherweight. I mean, look at whom he had to fight there. Bit of a steep hill for any featherweight. I do agree he was much better at 122, but I also think a lot of that had to do with age and his lifestyle. By the time rolled around for him to be a full-fledged feather, he loved the nightlife.......he liked to bewgie. :hat

 

Intruiging thread ,I think the problem here is that many of the candidates went up the divisions as they aged ,and their abilities eroded so its hard to diffentiate between their optimum weight class,and the fact that age and ring wear was catching up to them,Foster is a good shout.

 

Actually James Toney wouldnt suck at HW if he actually got in shape he would be very good. The James Toney of 2004 was a top3 HW

 

Hide is a china chinned nobody at any weight and he got ko'd by a nobody cruser