You know it,you see a prospect and he makes you sit up and think wow this is something special and you announce to everyone who will listen that they are a future hall of famer or at least world champion and then there progress slows until they underachieve and don't produce what there skills should of.watching chelo Gonzalez last week I will be closely following him in future but expect him to fall in this category Who's yours? For me 2 stand out recently linares and Guzman both have been 'world' champs but I expected so much more Domestically Kell brook could be heading that way,when he was with ****** at British level he looked top draw
I fell for the Shannon Briggs hype... In the UK Richard Evatt (RIP) looked very impressive on the way up, then took a fight in Poland, lost and never got back that momentum.
I think there have been very few boxers that I would say underachieved. Some fighters end up not as good as we hoped (or hyped), but that's normally down to them not having the talent or the mental fortitude to do as well as we initially thought. If Gonzales goes on to be a flop, it won't necessarily mean he underachieved, more like he was never really the complete package to start with.
Victor Ortiz,Andre berto,frankie Gavin,James degale all looked great but are capable of more And David Hayes heavyweight career is worthy of a mention I think
Should of used a different title Underachieved is wrong term What I meant is when you really rate someone and they fall short of your high expectations you had for them
Guzman and Hamed. Alex arthur id say as well, if hed moved up earlier he was good enough to win a world belt properly i think, instead of how he got it
:yep remember watching his fight vs soto on sky and thinking this guy will be up in the p4p discussions within a couple of years, sad he wasn't dedicated enough :-(