Which fighters suffered the most through sharing an era with another fighter?

Liston popped in my head. He would have likely ruled until Smokin Joe came around. Although I'd favor young Liston over Frazier he probably would of lost at that point.

 

Joe Frazier and George Foreman. I don't think Frazier would've kept the title much longer than he did in reality; but at least he wouldn't have lost it in one of the most one-sided in humiliating fashions in the entire gloved boxing history.

 

One sided, yes.

Humiliating? Negative.

You don't climb off the canvas that many times and leave the ring without people having new found respect for your willpower and guts decades later.

 

Good points, on second thought Liston probably wouldn't have had much of a reign at that point...

 

rodrigo valdes? achieved a great deal in his career,but was in the shadow of monzon.

 

Funny, 'cause the flip side is that these great rivalries are what made these guys too. LaMotta and Robinson, Ali and Frazier, etc, all had to rise to their best game for their most challenging fights.

 

Lew Tendler would have been champ had Benny Leonard not be ruleing the divsion in the way that he did.

Billy Petrolle had one of the hardest eras to be champ, Here was a guy that had to get though the likes of Barney Ross, Jimmy McLarin, and Tony Canzi to be a champ, sadly he failed in his efforts in winning a world title. Just to many SUPER great fighters in the early 30's.

 

Buchanan was a great pick, great boxer.

Also, i dont know if this conforms with the thread, but Mike McCallum suffered maybe because of the greats around at the same time as him, not getting the biggest fights etc.

 

Sibson, Roldan, Hamsho

 

If he stayed there it would have been someone else kicking his butt in time - probably real soon.

And moving up he still had McCallum to deal with. He was neatly outboxing Mike, but whether not having that defeat to Honeyghan behind would have made any difference vs Mike is up to the jury.

 

Yes, it would have been a deserved exclaimation mark on a great career.

 

Tommy Hearns only lost in his prime to the two best fighters of his era, both by knockout. If you take away Leonard, he's for sure a top 5 welterweight by everyone, if you take away Hagler, he probably becomes the champ for that division and reigns until he either fights Barkley, which is a styles thing, or if he never fights Barkley, probably McCallum would beat that version of Hearns. If not, Toney surely would have.

Top choice is still Buchanan for me.

 

Buchanan and Liston are good mentions I feel.

 

dejesus as mentioned was always the fighter that was ready to take the division if duran wasent there. he reminded me of todays miguel cotto becuase he could do anything in there and imo he was even a smoother fighter then duran. just not as strong or as good on the inside.

if meldrick taylor dident have the greatest fighter in mexican history to worry about then he would surely have reigned as the greatest fighter not only in jr. lightweight but in the world for at least a little while. his career would have been greater then his already outstanding career was.

luis rodriguez i heard had alot of hard luck being in the same era as curtis cokes, emile griffin and nino benvenuti