Michael Bentt vs Charles Martin

nonsense.

 

Martin was better. That says how bad Tommy Morrison's chin was.

 

Watch the last round of the Martin vs Love fight. It has to be the most embarrassing performance I have ever seen, those pathetic arm punches from Martin. Martin was only ranked 34th in the world by Boxrec before his fight with Glazkov, I don't know many people that remember that fact. Then he wins the fight, because of an injury. It's like someone wrote a boxing comedy script that was funny but also tragic.

 

They'd have to have the fight take place inside a secure mental asylum unit

 

Cool thread, two of the weakest hw belt holders of all time. Bentt had a much better resume, but had a vulnerable chin and would be greatly outsized by Martin. I'd slightly favor Martin h2h, but Bentt was the much more legit belt holder. Morrison was a vastly better win than Glazkov, both in legitimacy of win and in accomplishments of the fighter.

 

You're full of ****. Bentt had no resume other than landing a bomb with his eyes closed on a glass chinned and poorly focused Morrison. Other than that, he never even beat a fighter with 15 wins or more. And he proved it was a fluke by losing to the equally (or more) glass chinned Hide. His record was 11-2.

Martin at least took the zero of a couple prospects and beat some known journeymen and minor belt holders. His team wasn't scared to match him against winning fighters. He also showed good poise against Glazkov and was on his way to beating him. Bentt showed nothing of the sort.

Morrison and Glazkov were similar level fighters. At the time of their loses, they were both mediocre guys to have cracked the top ten. Morrison deserves no pedestal. He drew with Purrity and got ****ed up by Hipp and notably went to sleep while standing up against Mercer. If Glazkov could beat older versions of Cunningham and Adamek, he was no worse.

 

Bentt was a better fighter even if he had a paper mache chin. Jab better, punch technique better, far better foot work.

Martin is just plain awful, said it before Joshua KO'ed him and nothing I have seen since makes me think Martin is anything close to world class. He does so many thing wrong and badly, also he's hardly the best conditioned athlete. Did anyone see some of his training prior to the Joshua fight, there plenty of casual gym goers who are not pro athletes who are in better shape, his core strength was laughable.

 

There's something to be said for Neon Leon in that regard, but Briggs' incredible power (although at least part of it out of a bottle) and ability to take a punch puts him above guys like that.

 

Charles Martin... is he a boxer?

 

I agree Page is far better than Bentt. But, Martin was definitely not better than Bey. Bey may have fallen short of championship level (at least at a time when that meant something), but he was tough, and he could punch. He would have beaten Martin.

 

Wow, feirce defense of the worst belt holder of all time. Your welcome to your opinion. Morrison was nothing special, but he was a clear top ten hw at the time, and blasting him out decisively early warrants a top ten designation. Glazkov was at best a debatable top ten hw, and Martin got a questionable win over him. There is no question Martin's resume was poorer. So poor, he will probably remain the best example of an undeserving hw champ for the next 30 years.

 

Charles Martin is a pedestrian professional with very limited skill and movement. Michael Bentt had a bit more talent but also too short of a career to really showcase anything significant. In 13 pro fights he had a big win over Tommy Morrison and two stoppage defeats to Herbie Hide and Jerry Jones. Bentt's chin was highly questionable and Martin would have had size and power on his side. My guess is Michael Bentt takes this one, but its by no means a clear given and probably not an easy night's work.

 

After watching Joshua Vs Martin, Audley Harrison would have absolutely slaughtered King Charles.