I saw Graziano mentioned in a thread here, and I never rated him as highly as some. He gets a lot of mileage out of his exciting fights with Zale, but lost two of those three, and Zale was relatively old at the time. Because of this I tend to think his legend weighs more than his accomplishments. Who are some others? I know one or two will say Ali, but try to be creative.
Interesting. I don't know all that much about him except he didn't have a lot of fights, beat Fitzsimmons twice, and came back to be Johnson's tether ball for a while. Why do you say he's overrated?
Well, according to people like Janitor, Jeffries was a big, mean, athletic, hard hitting fighter who would beat Lennox Lewis, Sonny Liston and the like. No. A young, healthy Jeffries had his bones broken by a super middleweight (Fitzsimmons; the second most overrated fighter) and was clearly losing until he got lucky.
I hear you. Personally, I find it difficult to rate fighters with so few fights. There's just not a lot to go on.
Alas, Fitzsimmons was somewhat 'loaded' that night and managed to break his own hands on Jeffries noggin'.
Jeffries should be proud of the fact his defence was **** poor? You're right. I forgot about all the following fights where Jeffries improved. All eight of them :dead
Fitzsimmons was a scientist when it came to punching and he sported weighted gloves in this fight. Jeffries did not march into his opponents until he won, he kept his distance and then pounced. Contrary to the fabled belief of Jeffries blood-n-guts way winning the day, these bouts were full of skill - quick, feinting movements by Jeffries while looking to maul, and Fitzsimmons anticipating and spearing his larger adversary to keep him away. They were high-octaine fights.
I suppose you think he fought out of a crouch as well? And carried a grizzly bear on his back from British Columbia to New York?
I would say Dempsey. Too many rate him high 'because everyone does' (just like they did in the 50's) or merely on his brutal destruction of Willard. Some have him in the top3 or top5 which is higher than his accomplishments allow him to be in my opinion. Unless you're ranking on historical standing, first million dollar gate, record for avoiding a challenger for the longest period of time, etc etc.
Big thing that. I understand it too. Those few minutes are absolutley thrilling. The guy from the first round....is there anything even romotely comparable on film? I have him at 12 or 13, I don't feel the least bit bad about it. But maybe unlike you Chris, i'm a bit of a Dempsey fan. I do understand why people get so into it. I do understand why he's overated. But I feel that he is, and I think the Willard film is his main reason for this.
