Khaosai Galaxy - How Fair Is It...

His resume is poor any way you look at it, compared to the other top 115 pounders of the time anyway, and compared to pretty much any ATG outside of Lopez. Add to the fact that he simply wasn't that impressive on film aside from his power. I wouldn't favor him over any of the top 115 pounders I rate ahead of him on resume, though a slug-out with Moon would be interesting. Based on resume and ability I feel he's very overrated, shouldn't rank ahead of any of the other top fighters around his weight, and definitely can't be called great.

 

How many of Galaxy's opponents have you actually seen Russell.Consider that some people may not actually just be "lightly skimming over his record" when they pass judgement.From your post i get the feel a quick skim over his record was all you did to decide your own opinion btw.

Zapata had no power; he was strictly a pure boxer.Almost everyone of decent durability went the distance with him.Comparing the fact someone went the distance with him and was stopped by Galaxy is hardly a big deal.

Yong-Kang Kim, Orono and Contreras were probably his best opponents.Pical if you are generous, though he was a hopeless splinter champion that even managed to lose to his awful comp.

Orono was a shot fighter at the time and Kim started at junior fly.He was just too small for Galaxy, who was a big superfly.

Anyway i think the real issue with Galaxy is not his mostly poor opponents per se.It's that he's put up on a massive pedestal by ring magazine and a lot of fans in the west that a strong argument can be made he doesn't deserve in relation to his contemporaries.

 

The only thing that is poor is the knowledge of certain people of the lighter weight fighters.

It appears that certain people apply the assumption that lack of knowledge about challengers means that those challengers must have been poor opponents.

If all that Galaxy had was power one would think that he could easily have been outboxed and thus would have been behind on the scorecards in many of his fights before KOing his opponents. Of course that wasn't the case.:huh

Perhaps there was more to Galaxy than just power?:yep

I get the impression that not too many people actually saw him fight. Or perhaps they saw one or two of his fights and have based their entire opinions on that? Who knows, who cares.

Khaosai Galaxy is an ATG and history will remember him as so.:happy

 

Ted Sares, (one of the most respected writers on this site) in his book, "Boxing Is My Sanctury", rates Galaxy number 14 on a list of the best 100 fighters since 1950.

His reasons are in his book. For those who don't understand why Galaxy is considered an ATG, I suggest that they buy his book. It's very educational.:good

 

I sure used to look forward to getting his fights in the mail > reading the results in Flash.

A southpaw slugger is the rarest style in boxing and to be able to pull it off for so long is incredible. The only other left hand Slugger the last 30 years was probably Limon--and look how often he lost. I always wanted to see a Tapia matchup & that was one of those bouts that just never transpired.

 

He wasn't being outboxed by his opponents because they were third rate fighters for the most part.

 

So why does he rate Galaxy above the fighters of that era and the same weight class who faced better opposition, fought outside of their hometown, and fought the best of the rest? Not to mention all of them appeared much better on film than the very crude Galaxy. Where does he rate them, and what are his justifications for rating Galaxy above them? Guys like Gilberto Roman, Jiro Watanabe, Nana Konadu, Sung-Kil Moon, Johnny Tapia, etc.

 

Yeah, but none of them had nicknames comparing them to Tyson.

 

Galaxy is being called overrated so often here that I think he is starting to get underrated in the process. His resume gets attacked a lot as does his lack of boxing skills, but how about we look at his positives for a moment instead of the negatives? For starters the man was always in peak physical condition for his fights and could go fifteen rounds at a high pace if required.

He also carried his power into the later rounds and was always coming forward looking to take his man`s head off and threw each punch with the intention of doing just that. Add to that his solid chin and iron will and you have yourself a tough opponent for just about anyone. Galaxy could be outboxed and likely would be by most of the top guys at 115, but they wouldn`t have an easy time of it in my opinion.

 

Just how good a fighter is will always have an element of subjectivity attached to the final opinion of the judge. I know Khaosai fairly well and I'm in the process of writing his biography along with a book on the top Thai fighters. While he may not have fought the best, his record is certainly decent and to fight as often and as long as he did without a loss is nothing to sneeze at.

Personally, I think he's as good or better than many of those in the Boxing Hall of Fame - he's certainly more deserving than someone like Sulaiman or Leroy Neiman. What people now fail to realize, and have so far have never realized, is that Thailand has a completely different manner of going about getting things done. That goes for boxing too. As a fighter, Galaxy (and all the rest for that matter) basically do what their promoter tells them and hopes to make the most money possible without getting screwed.

Galaxy is by no means rich - he's comfortable at best. Money comes first, unfortunately, and I say that because from a fans perspective the sport is more important to them than how much a fighter makes. He was the champion and thus people are expected to come to him - not vice versa - regardless of whether or not Las Vegas is the Mecca of boxing. This is an explanation, not an excuse, but at the end of the day, if a fighter is only going to make 10 grand more for fighting a tough opponent, who do you think the promoter is going to match him against, the easy win which continues the cash flow or the tough fight which may threaten his future earning power? This isn't my own view, it's the view of many a Thai promoter - they don't care what the public thinks, they care how much money they make...it's all about the moolah.

 

Not to intrude on the discussion, a lot of fair points, just want to observe that there's a severe difference between being in boxings Hall of Fame and being a p4p All Time Great boxer.

 

Point taken but supposedly, the purpose of having a HOF is to enshrine the great ones - not let in riff-raff like Mafai boss Sulaiman.

That said, Galaxy is up there in the P4P rankings IMO but more like in the top 20 or 30, not the top ten.

Chartchai Chionoi is rarely thought of in the same light as Pone Kingpetch. Kingpetch lost often and IMO is considered by most Thais and boxing folk to be better than Chionoi. Personally, I don't think so - Thais view Kingpetch as the top or number two Thai fighter ever because he was the first champion from Thailand. They never forget "the first."

Galaxy on the other hand was champion for a long span of time (longest of all the Thais), didn't suffer the string of losses many other Thais seem to suffer, knocked people out regularly, took punishment well, and thus, at least in the Thai view, ranks as the greatest Thai fighter ever. Doesn't make him a top ten P4P fighter but he's surely in the top 20 or 30.