Ray Mercer vs Kubrat Pulev primes

If Mercer is motivated and in shape, he pummels Pulev, and lays him out cold like a Wlad did.

 

Honestly this seems like just the type of fight Mercer would randomly drop before giving the best fighter in the division his toughest fight or an L, Mercer was just weird that way

But obviously Mercer at his best should be favored

 

Mercer. Just better and every thing

 

Mercer by KO 4-6.

 

Pulev. He didn’t lose rounds near his prime except to Wlad.

 

Thompson fight was close, He certainly lost rounds there. It was also the only world level fighter He fought before facing Wlad, so him not losing rounds to some European level fighters and journeymen is not all that impressive.

Mercer at his best stops Pulev, imo - although @The Undefeated Lachbuster makes a good point that He was quite an erratic performer.

 

Thompson was also very good at winning rounds. He and Pulev were much more consistent at scoring points than Mercer.

Mercer “at his best” went down on the cards against Morrison and Damiani and lost on the cards to Lewis and Holyfield. He’s also considered to not be “at his best” for the Holmes fight for no apparent reason other than that he was outboxed.

 

Thompson was a solid contender, but He was 42 years old. I think that's the same age as Holmes when He fought Mercer? 42 years old Holmes was better than anyone Pulev faced before Klitschko... and maybe better than anyone He ever beat (I could see that version of Holmes beating Chisora).
Mercer had good effort against Lennox and Evander - and the fact that He probably should've lost to Marion Wilson just before that speaks to his inconsistency.

I think We can at least agree that Mercer's effort against Lennox and Holyfield was more impressive than Pulev's effort against Wladimir and Joshua?

 

Pawel Kardyni 116-112
Don Trella 117-111
Mickey Vann 118-110

Those are the scores for Pulev against Thompson. Thompson was coming off the Price wins and Ustinov and Dimitrenko were pretty highly regarded when Pulev beat them.

Pulev would obviously do better than Mercer against Holmes and most likely be favored.

 

- Yes, those were the scorecards.. with Pulev the promoted fighter, closing in on a title shot. The first one was the most accurate one.
- No, Ustinov and Dimitrenko were certainly not "pretty highly regarded". I can't remember anyone rating those 2 as potential word class contenders. Just guys with padded record, solid enough for European level but not even close to world class.
- Price was a solid win. Again, just an Euro-level fighter.

Maybe Pulev would do better than Mercer against Holmes, since styles make fights - but it certainly does not make 42 years old Thompson better than 42 years old ATG heavyweight in Holmes.
What We know for a fact is that Mercer did WAY better against Lennox than Pulev against Wlad and better against Evander than Pulev against Joshua.

 

Pulev was 39 vs Joshua and past prime

 

Dimitrenko was Ring rated from 2008 to 2011 (Did Mercer even see four straight years?). Ustinov wasn’t quite as highly regarded, but was an undefeated giant who had beaten some recognizable names like Barrett and had transitioned from a pro kickboxing career.

 

There was some draught in the division at the time, so I could see how Dimitrenko might've made it to the bottom of top 10. He was a solid European level fighter, but He never made it to world level for a reason.
Ustinov I won't even comment on. If wins over those kind of opponents have to be mentioned to advertise someone's resume, then it says something.

Fair enough - although the point that Pulev was never as competitive against elite level opponent as Mercer was in his best performances, still stands.

I liked Pulev, I think I saw every single one of this fights. He was solid, reliable fighter and deserving contender - but his best wins are close(Or at least very competitive) decisions against veteran Tony Thompson and gate keeper/fringe contender Dereck Chisora. Maybe Hughie Fury too. Besides that He got the job done on European level.
Step above and He looked out of his depth. In my eyes, Mercer certainly had more potential and more upside.

 

The simplest way that I can explain the differences between the careers of Pulev and Mercer is that Pulev was seen as higher risk:reward whereas Mercer was seen as a game loser with name recognition. Pulev got to fight Wlad because he was one of the best available fighters and then basically got iced out of the picture until he was old enough to get a fight with Joshua. Mercer, from the Damiani fight to the Briggs fight, got his big fights in large part because he was a beatable guy with a name. He did his part and upset Damiani, who probably would’ve beaten him on most nights is his prime, and squashed Morrison because Morrison was that bad, but there’s a reason why his name kept getting called. Pulev was a little bit better.