How is Roy severely overrated? His technique was flawless. He had incredible technique, timing and accuracy. It’s his style that let him down as he aged. It left him vulnerable at first, before then leaving him defenceless as he continued and refused to quit. His resume could and should have been stronger, but it’s not poor.
Willie Pep Extremelly padded record. Moreover, I don't think his defense would be so good vs other atgs. Unpopular opinion, I know. I will be executed at dawn for writing this post, but.... that's it, that's what I think. I think he's good, but overrated.
Joe is massively overrated by many. He was a great fighter, but he spent the majority of his career fighting low level guys in the defence of a low level belt. He had zero ambition for the majority of his career, where he was just content to fight whoever Frank Warren and the WBO lined up for him. He once fought 3 non world level fighters in a row, before then rematching Veit, who he’d already beaten in a single round the first time they met. Also, Veit was a Euro level fighter for 90% of his career. His decade long WBO reign was very poor. The WBO were also very poor. They sanctioned world title fights against about a dozen guys who literally weren’t world level fighters. He had the opportunity to go to the U.S. to raise his profile, but he wasn’t interested. He even cited a fear of flying. He embarrassed Jones? A Jones who he’d said would be a pointless fight, as he was shot and had been for years?? A Jones who he wouldn’t go near whilst he was great? Again, Joe was a great fighter, but one who never believed in himself as much as what he should have done, who never pushed himself to the max. He was very unambitious, but he finished his career strongly, with wins over an overhyped Lacy, a very good fighter in Kessler, a great win over Hopkins, and a retirement fight against a shot legend. Overall, a very poor resume. Out of 45 opponents, only around 10/11 of them were world level fighters. A HOF fighter, but nothing more.
Everyone’s circumstances are different. The thing with Marvin, is that it took him about 50 fights in order to become the champion at MW. That’s simply unheard of today. He then had his best and most famous opposition at MW. And after he’d beaten them, he was winding down his career. As we know, he retired after Leonard. The other things to consider, are that there was no SMW division back then, and Marvin often used to weigh-in well below the MW limit in a number of his fights. Sometimes he was 157 pounds at the weigh-in. So LHW was a big jump for him. Personally, I criticise fighters if they remain in a weak division, where there’s significantly better competition at the division above, where they’d also likely to be comfortable. Basically, it has to depend on the circumstances. So I can’t criticise Marvin for not having moved up. I’d only have criticised him had the MW division have been weak, where he’d have remained and refused to have moved up to SMW to fight quality opposition. But considering that SMW didn’t exist, and he had such a long wait to gain his MW belt, I can’t blame him for fighting big money fights against the rest of the Fab Four, instead of going up to LHW, which would have been a 2 division jump today, where those guys would naturally have been a good 20 pounds heavier than him.
There’s no doubt that he waited out Marvin. But at the same time, he was a prime WW, who moved up to MW after he’d been inactive for 3 years. So he was faded himself. It’s not like he was in his prime against Marvin. He showed huge heart against Hearns, by turning a chess match into a shootout. He admits himself that he lost the rematch. Marvin blew the fight by showing him too much respect and going with the wrong tactics, most notably not fighting southpaw and not pressuring him enough. Yes, he was calculated. Yes, he was a diva. But he was a tremendous fighter, and with a heart of a lion when needed.
You do have to consider that Hearns was out-boxing Ray before getting hurt in their first match and I feel Hagler beat Leonard too pllus he was a lot bigger than Duran and had a reach advantage too.
Mike’s horribly overrated by many. But he’s also underrated by many too. He deserves credit for Holmes and Spinks. Spinks had proven himself to be a credible HW. Mike was the only person to ever knock out Holmes in his entire career, and Holmes was still a world level fighter in the early part of the following decade, where he gave Evander a great fight, as well as beating Ray Mercer. It’s also a myth that Holmes was just rolled off of the couch. Holmes and his team had negotiated for a fight with Mike through most of 1987, where Holmes had had a full camp as well as an exhibition fight. His weight was also on point. Yes, of course he was past his best his best. But he hadn’t been eating pizza for 2 years, before suddenly getting a last minute call. He’d been physically and mentally prepared for the fight, and was still a world level fighter.
Hearns outboxed everybody. Ray was getting outboxed in a chess match, before turning the boxing match into a shootout.
Roy was a great athlete with poor fundamentals, the first fight v Griffin exposed him, his power won him the rematch, he was bigger than 90% of his opponents.
He had an highly unorthodox style. But he was still tremendously skilled. He wasn’t just an athlete. Technique, timing and accuracy are all skills. Griffin didn’t expose him. He just caused him issues due to his style. Griffin was a very skilled fighter himself. Yes, his power won him the rematch. But you also need the technique/skill in order to be able to land your power shots. You can’t just say that his power bailed him out. He hit him with an amazing lead left uppercut to take him out. What do you mean that he was bigger than 90% of his opponents?
