I don't know if it's just me or if anyone else is the same here, but are there any boxers you flip flop over, whether it's in terms of greatness or ability? I'll give 3 examples 1) Bob Fitzsimmons: sometimes I see him fight, I read the reports and I think he'd give anyone below 175 absolute hell. I think to myself, if Ali and Hamed can get away with leaning back, he can as well and what he did clearly works. Then other times I look at him fight and I think he just looks so beatable that it's hard to imagine him going in against any significantly filmed MW champions that followed him and coming out the winner. 2) Sonny Liston:, sometimes I watch him fight, I see his pre championship run and the absolute domination over Patterson and I genuinely feel like I'm watching one of the best boxers ever, not just at HW, but ever. And I find it hard putting him outside a top 5 HW list. But other times I think there are a lot of champions with a stronger resume, with better longevity, with better championship reigns and I struggle placing him inside my top 10. Rocky Marciano: Sometimes I look at the behemoths who were nearly men in later generations, the likes of McCline, Golota, Grant, Valuev, Briggs etc and I picture them entering the ring as a challenger to Marciano and getting knocked out because they didn't have what it takes at the highest level. But other times I think to myself, no one else in boxing history gets the benefit of doubt regarding weight, divisions exist for a reason and he's against someone he just, frankly, shouldn't be fighting. These are all regular thought processes I have. Right now this second I do think Ruby beats most guys south of 175, Liston belongs outside the top ten and Rocky would successfully defend his belt against the plethora of gigantic nearly men that came after him. But next year I might well think the opposite thoughts I posted. Does anyone else have "flip-flop fighters" like this?
I just flipped on someone last night, though not in terms of greatness or really even ability. It was likability, and it was James Broad. As a teenager watching him on TV in the eighties, I really couldn't stand the guy. I saw him as a fat, unmotivated waste who was taking up valuable TV time. I watched a few of his fights last night - against Donnie Long, Eddie Gregg, and Razor Ruddock - and he was pretty articulate and, again, likable in his interviews. He put in an honest night's work against Long and Gregg, and IMO was jobbed against Ruddock. He was a top-15 type who didn't quite have it to hang with the best, but worked well at a level below. As far as fat and unmotivated, Broad looked a lot more fit than Andy Ruiz or Adam Kownackie. It's too bad he died so young.
For me, it's Larry Holmes. I despised him in real time and was hoping he'd get gobsmacked by anybody and always thought he clearly lost to Carl Williams and I mean clearly. I thought he was an arrogant, overrated ducker. Then I got smarter about the business side of boxing and figured out he managed again and again to overcome a lack of "promotional push" coming up the ranks and was one of the most mentally tough and professional fighters ever who paid three careers worth of dues coming up. I still think he's probably overrated a bit as far as pure ability and skill, but underrated as far as just being one of the most serious and mentally disciplined fighters ever and as getting the most out of what he had. So I've come to really like and respect him, but I still get annoyed when he gets what I call the "Carlos Monzon Treatment" and gets a few too many layers of gloss here.
I'm like that with Lennox Lewis. In real time I was never impressed by him and I mean never. In 96 everyone at school would be talking about Holyfield and Tyson, Lewis was never in the picture. Every time he won it surprised me and my mates. We thought Holyfield would do him, Tua, Tyson, Klitschko and he proved us wrong time and time again. We dismissed him as boring and not that good. But looking back now I can't believe I held him in such low esteem.
Hey don't leave out Jimmy Young luf,....sometimes you just hate him, then other times, you hate him 10x more.
Sometimes I appreciate the way he achieved what he did with the whole establishment against him. Other times I remember the fights of his I've watched, all those wasted hours, and my hatred grows. But I don't tend to flip flop with negative fighters, I always take a sever dislike. I wouldn't have even licensed him to fight had I been on charge of the Maryland Boxing Commission.
This, my friend, is patently absurd to the highest degree...like you want boxing reduced to the level of "rock em/sock em" robots....which is what you would get without the nuances of styles that you don't necessarily approve of.
I love ring wars lol. It would be ideal if aggression was the main scoring factor, would make for much more entertaining fights. But even with defensive styles, I don't mind a guy making them miss and making them pay. Young was content just making them miss.
I actually think Rocky would beat all those big heavyweights. Grant had no defense and glass jaw, Briggs had awful stamina. McCline was better than both (he beat Grant and Briggs easily), but always found a way to lose his biggest fights, the same goes to Golota... And Valuev... Well, you should watch his fight against 5'9'' Marcelo Fabian Dominguez to understand he would have had ZERO chances against Rocky This content is protected
I know it's a bit more modern, but Ricky Hatton at 140. Growing up as a big Hatton fan I rated him highly at 140 at the time. Think he would give anyone a fight in that division with his unreal work rate, relentless action and his body work. After Mayweather and Pacman I dismissed Hatton for quite a few years thinking I probably overated and I questioned his resume. Then recently I have gone back over Hattons fights up to Kosta championship fight and I'm back to thinking at 140 he was a monster. Shame we didn't get to see Hatton fight Cotto or Mayweather at 140. I still think Mayweather beats him, but it would be more competitive. Hatton vs Cotto at 140 would have been a great fight.
Probably a few... Mike Tyson, I was a huge fan during the 80’s and thought he might be the best ever...late 90’s-2000’s I thought he was overrated and if “you just stood up to the bully he would fold”...now I kind of think I have a more balanced opinion where I see a top 10 ATG (at the minimum in the conversation) who would be a tough nights work for any great ever regardless of the outcome. Marciano and Louis are 2 that I felt were overrated prior to gaining a better understanding and appreciation of classic boxing and its history...I probably had both outside of the top 10 just 15-20 years ago...now I think Louis is the goat and Rocky is a top 10 staple who is likely the most underrated ATG ever (come and get me new guys lol).
Why you differed from consensus scoring on all but the six unanimous rounds of Mayweather—Castillo, exhibit A.