Both have signature wins over a Big Name Champion (Roy Jones/Jermain Taylor) and both got SCHOOLED by Hopkins. So who is/was More Overrated? op
For what it's worth, Tarver beat more contenders in his division (although sometimes it took him two tries) and KO'd an ATG who was on top of the p4p rankings at the time.
Posters here make the mistake of thinking that their **** means **** outside this board. Pretty much any boxer to win a match is over rated here the next day only to be decimated after a loss. Proof, see the premise of this thread. :deal
Neither of these guys. They had great runs, just didn't have the longevity, but tasker either of those guys at their best, anf they give anyone anytime problems in their divisions.
Are you really THIS bored Daryll? You usually make good threads man. I bet you really know the deal is that neither Tarver nor Pavlik deserve most of the harsh criticisms they get. Most hate for Tarver is because a lot of folks Loved Jones so much. I can understand that, it is what it is though.:yep
I don't know about that, Pavlik didn't get knocked down and at least had the excuse he had to come up to an unnatural weight, Tarver didn't. Anyway Tarver is the better fighter with the better resume, as for who was more overrated it depends how high you rate either at their peaks, people got a bit carried away with Pavlik for a few months but those with level heads saw him as an exciting knockout puncher with all sorts of flaws. Tarver was in the pound for pound list for a long time on the strength of the Jones knockout, other than that he never really shined, a few wins here a few losses there, not the HOF'er he waqs being pegged as for a few years.
