Jeez o pete he you know more about boxing than me! Ezz's losses were after he was in the tank for pete's sake! I understand the Jimmy Young comments but his early career (with the losses) were possibly mismanagement among other things. He hit prime and was a contending tough SOB! Will...anyone...go to BoxRec...and look at Jose Gonzalez??? An obvious 'journeyman' who had multi-big wins (and losses) I think he defines the thread! Welter late 50's fought em' all! Middle thruout the 60's (can't mention all the fights but went toe to toe with the Hurricane and stopped him on deep cuts) Despite his being a shell of himself come 1970, he 'warred' with Galindez and Kates before retiring (at LH)! A...true...warrior!
-The ko percentage is a overrated thing but Young had 11kos/56 fights with 447 !!! rounds and only 11kos(considering he had lots of mediocre or weak opponents) -His successful carrier longevity sucks. -This "who has he beat" thing is overrated. The Lyle wins and the Foreman win doesn't mean he was a good fighter. Valuev beat Holyfield. Is Valuev better than the prime Holyfield? Toney knocked Holyfield out. Is Toney all-time great heavyweight? -The win is one thing.Basically the win by ko is much more better. -The 70s golden era is overrated by some journalists. Seemingly every fighter were outstanding from this era:Ali (yes he was), Foreman(he was) but Frazier,Shavers,Quarry,Lyle,Norton,Bob Foster, Ellis,Chuvalo,Patterson,Wepner are overrated. They are very popular by lots of "grandfather" journalist. The great times... The popularity and the quality are two total different things. I think this era was slightly better than the klitschko era. -All in all Young a typical overrated mediocre-sometimes bum- 70s fighter. -And what about the Foreman-Lyle?It was the Fight of the Year by the overrated Ring Magazine. Ok this fight was interesting punch after punch without hesitation.Two easy to hit fighters. But the quality? W. klitschko is much more skilled.And i don't like wladimir k. at all.
Orlando Zulueta - beat world champs Jimmy Carter, Paddy DeMarco, Don Jordan and Bud Smith as well as top contenders Paolo Rosi and Percy Bassett, not to mention fighting Joe Brown down to the wire for the world title getting stopped in the 15th round - his only time stopped in 128 fights. By the way, his record was an unimposing 69-45-14.
Without doubt its Emmanuel Augustus 38-34-6 Very talented boxer but never realized just how good he was. Fought anyone, anywhere, anytime. "Lost" lots of fights he really won because people did not like his clowning, others were blatant robberies. If he'd had a good manager team behind him he could have been a champion
Getting losses at the end of the line kinda inflates things in this argument. Freddie Pendleton had a lot of losses when he was one of the best 5 lightweights in the world.
Are you seriously comparing the Holyfield losses to Valuev and Toney to Young's wins over Foreman, Lyle and Ali? Total rubbish.
For sure. With Al Haymon by his side he would have been a 3 division champ. No I'm kidding, Freddie probably would have tell this crook to go **** himself because he was a real prizefighter, not a cherrypicker.
Tony Canzoneri One of the best lightweight's of all time. He retired with a record of 137-24-10 with 3 no decisions.
Fireman Jim Flynn, career record 73-59-22, holds wins over Sam Langford, Tiger Flowers, Billy Papke and Jack Dempsey.
since when is 30 or 40 losses against a couple of hundred, 200 fights a bad record? and the opening post also listing such numbers. if you think 6-10 losses out of 30 or 40 fights is great, excellent or just fine, well dear God all the better are those other fighters who lost similar percentages but against strong opposition for years on end and contesting every other week or so. Well that's not a bad or 'worse' record in any manner at all! Scartissue's examples and breakdown some them up!