Why Omar Narvaez is so underrated ?

It's that shiny 67-7-2 record, I think.

When I scroll through boxrec looking at the record of some old time fighters, competing in an era that I don't know much about, did not watch many fights from and did not study carefully - and I see record like that, I initially assume it was probably a high caliber fighter. It stands out to Your eyes, which is why record-padding in boxing works in general.

 

To add to what has already been said, imo, most his prime was during one of the weaker periods in history for his division. Not filled with bad fighters by any means, but '00 Flyweight was full of "one or two world title challenge loss/one or two defences then lose to someone of a similar level in a tougher/less safety-first with matchmaking era" sort of champs, and he was just one of them.

The Donaire fight at the time seemed the epitome of a jump up in weight and cash in while I still can fight at the time. He was cooked by the time he fought Inoue.

 

To piggyback on what @Greg Price99 noted, of all of Narvaez' title fight opponents, only three were in the Ring top ten at the start of that calendar year. One was rated #5 while the others were #8 and #9. That being said, Narvaez was ranked in the Ring top ten at either flyweight or junior bantamweight for 14 consecutive years. This includes three years ranked number one at 115 pounds,

Narvaez was obviously a good fighter but just didn't do enough to prove he should be considered a great fighter.