Was Iran Barkley an A level fighter?

Barkley was B lvl at best. He beat some formerly great fighters, and created some "upsets", though the background was somewhat painted.

However, Toney should not acclaim appraisal for the win, if Barkley had already been blasted in one round - that immensely silly. If he should, then Benn should acclaim even more, for doing it before Toney and more convincingly. Benn>Toney?

 

No he definitely wasn't A level. Good post BTW, I like the part that emphasised the importance of analyzing resume correctly. I think this is the biggest factor, in deciding the ability of a fighter. Not just looking at the resume, but how they beat the opponents, and what stage of their career they were in at the time of the fight. Barkly looked VERY sloppy against Toney IMO, and was dominated.

 

It isn't relevant because you were not discussing it with ME. So you don't know if I would have mentioned it or not.

You can assess Kessler that way all you like. Nunn would have beaten Kessler.

 

Just to add though, Barkley did have some good fights, and reminds me in a lot of ways of Gatti. A guy who won world titles, and was a very tough guy, but didn't possess the skills to carry him on further.

 

The only thing I see here that's absurd is your arrogance to believe that every analysis you make is the correct one.

Simply put, I think your wrong. If you think I am....no skin off my back. Nunn was a better fighter than Kessler.

 

It would be ludicrous because of what Foster would bring to the table.

If Kessler does all you said, he may very well be considered greater than Nunn. It doesn't mean he would beat him. Stop trying to point out others opinions and place them in some important stature with my own.

SRR has done more than most fighters in any weight class. But there are fighters who could beat him and I have picked fighters to beat him. Thus I have already proven that I don't just take into account historical greatness and imprint.

Stop trying to mix things in that have nothing to do with what I said. I don't care what others said.

 

We weren't comparing DLH to Barkely, it was the guy they beat at their times, Hearns and Chavez. Did you lose track or something? Or were you going to try to argue or spin this into something else OTHER then what you posted. :roll:

 

He was good and had some good wins but not an A level boxer.

 

Can't rank too much on the "if" factor, but I certainly do not disagree with most of what you say.

 

barkley has a better resume than calzaghe

 

Barkley was not an A-level fighter but certainly a very good B-level fighter, better than most of the world champs around today. His power, heart and aggression made him what he was, skills left a bit to be desired. His high loss percentage is a direct result of fighting on way too long at the end of his career (he won 1 of his last 9 bouts). In his prime (85-93), he was a hell of a fighter. Just looking at the quality of the only men who beat him in that period tells you all you need to know: Kalambay, Duran, Nunn, Benn and Toney. In the same period he beat, amongst others, Randy Smith, Sanderline Williams, Wilfred Scypion, James Kinchen, Michael Olajide, Hearns twice and Darrin Van Horn. The Toney fight, I think, finished him as a serious contender, but in his prime nobody (except Benn) had an easy night with him.