Rahman - Unappreciated

I do think he may be underrated, i dont mean to be disrespectful, but he could look really bad at times, but then could impress a lot also. Looked not good against Lewis, but split a pair with him, and he is one of the very highest tier HWs ever. Seemed to have a thing with Tua that Tua wasnt good against, and Tua was one of the era's best. The other wins you mentioned are good aswell.

Underrated, on his day though i might add. But i dont mean that he had off days and on days, i dont see it like that, he was just maybe stylistically bad for some fighters.

 

I think if Rahman had managed to linger in there with Maskaev a bit better, and stayed busier, he might have survived and perhaps taken a decision. This would have helped his legacy, given that he would have retained his title, avenged an earlier loss, and eliminated a bad defeat to a declining fighter. The loss hurt him badly though in my opinion. At this stage , there is little that I can think of that will repair the damage that has been done to Rahman's career, and beating James Toney won't do a thing for him. Rahman's wins over Sanders and Lennox, should cemment his claim to being a respectable player in this decade, but probably no more than that..

 

I think you have to rate Rahman ahead of Vitali in terms of Legacy, look at his best wins:

Lennox - KO5
Prime Sanders - KO7
David Tua - robbed
Toney - probably robbed
Barrett
Meehan

His losses do hurt him but he fought the best and his wins make him either a top30 or 40 HW

 

And reportadly got robbed against Brewster although this maybe more to do with Brews limitations than anything

 

An excellent contender. I'd say he's a bit below Witherspoon (who could be argued as clear second-best for a period), but contrary to Witherspoon, he did win the title and a linear paper title, for what it's worth.

He had a good run, but his losses were also a lot more ugly than Witherspoon's.

The reason he gets a bit of a harsh deal is because a lot of people judged him as a champion and not as a good contender. For instance, someone like Quarry, who is one of the best contenders, also had his share of ugly losses.

 

he was an ordinary fighter at best.

It reflects on how top-heavy the Heavyweight division is that people would place him in a top 50.

you could probably make a top 150-200 for several other weight divisions like Middle, Light and Featherweight, where every fighter would be better than Rahman.

 

Quarry did indeed lose badly in some of his fights, but the general difference is that Jerry lost mainly to elite fighters who were for the most part in their primes. Losing twice to Frazier, twice to Ali, once to Norton, once to Ellis, and a decision to Machen, when Jerry had few fights, is not much to be ashamed of. The chuvalo loss hurts him a tad, but from those who saw that fight ( I didn't ), the outcome was pretty much bull****. He also picked up a loss or two late, but who could blame him for losing a fight in 1992?

Rahman, was beaten convincingly two times by Oleg Maskaev, and once by John Ruiz. Both were decent fighters, but hardly on par with the stars of the 60's and 70's crue. He also lost to a 39 or 40 year old Holyfield which isn't terribly flattering either.

 

if u watch the 2nd fight, rahman easily schooled masakev with his jab early on easily winning the first 3 rounds. then for some reason he got tired and abandoned the jab in the mid rounds and he fell apart. he could have shutout maskaev.

 

And I certainly think that it would have helped his standing if he had.

 

how is spoon rated over pinklon thomas?

 

A good question, but I'll try and answer it like this. Although Thomas defeated Witherspoon directly head to head, I think Witherspoon's list of wins outweighs that of Thomas's. Outside of Witherspoon and an aging Weaver, there really isn't much else frankly. Witherspoon defeated Tony Tubbs, Greg Page, Renaldo Snipes, James Smith, James Broad, and gave hell to a reigning Holmes. Both Thomas and Witherspoon beat James Tillis, but Spoon dusted him in a single round.

Witherspoon also has claim to being a two time titlist, whereas no other alpha champ of the 80's ever did this.

 

People often talked about Rahman's talent and how he was often squandering it, but I never really thought he was that talented. I guess since he started boxing at 20, I guess you can say he had a good feel for boxing to achieve what he did, but I was never really impressed with him. He had an excellent jab, pretty heavy hands, and strength, but he was rather slow, chinny, shaky stamina, sloppy with his combos (he often left himself off balance and open), etc...The jab was the only thing that I found myself really impressed with, and there are lots of guys with nice jabs.

That being said, he does get a lot of flack and not enough credit. People always talk about him being a "one-hit" wonder, and he did have some bad bad losses, but he deserved to win the Tua rematch, and the first fight was marred by shoddy refereeing. These both came when Tua was ranked in the top 10. Rahman beat a younger, better, more active Corrie Sanders than the one Vitali Klitschko beat for The Ring title. The James Toney fight could've easily gone to Rahman, and Monte Barrett was ranked at the bottom of the top ten if I remember correctly when Rahman beat him.