No disrespect to Tiger personally, he was great IMO, but on this forum, I always read when he´s in a fantasy matchup: "Tiger wins, way too strong pysically...", etc. some think he´s almost unbeatable, but he was beatable, his many defeats show it, do you know what I mean?
I've often commented. IMO his only really significant wins are over a still excellent but no-where near his best Cervantes and a well aged Arguello who was way up in the weights from his first title. Full kudo's that Alexis was still hell on water, but the esteem Pryor is often held in you'd swear he beat Leonard after Alexis and Napoles and Duran before him. I also see people talking about him as a killer puncher - the man's power was good but no-where near great. No argument Pryor is a great, and a good one. When we talk pinnacle greats however he need not apply IMO. Potentially his fizzing out after Arguello has helped and hurt him. It took away his opportunity at much furthering his legend vs Curry once he hit his straps and other matches that would have emerged but it also saved him possible damaging losses. The big thing is it cut his resume well short of what his reputation is.
Underrated if anything. He fizzed out in the Nelson rematch and never did anything again. Well Rooster might count his beating Nelson in their rubber match a few weeks ago But from Bantam to Feather Fenech was a monster IMO. He was a man fighting boys - he'd put on copious amounts of weight after the weigh in and was ridiculously strong. His endurance, stamina, will to win, no holds barred - they made him feared. He was like a more intense Duran with a bit less skill and outright one punch power. Have a look at a lot of his opponents, he beat many down. The first Nelson fight shows what he did and didn't have vs an ATG. His victory over Victor C is possibly his best ever.