Is Iran Barkley overrated ?

Because all ive seen from is ..................him get beat down in a war with Robbie Sims, get shcooled by Kalambay, lose to a blown up Robero Duran who was nearing 40 at the time if remember right, give Michael Nunn an uncomfortable night but ultimately lose and get shooled by Toney and beat down by Nigel Benn.

His claim to fame is knocking out Hearns with a lucky shot who was dominating him at the time and winning the rematch.

I think he's under rated thats a tough mother fu''''

i think he's under rated thats a tough mother fu''''

wow i actually think he is underated

Not at all. I never see him gettin unreasonable praise around here. He may actually be slightly underrated.

I think he's under rated thats a tough mother fu''''

I would not disagree he is tough, he is tough and a good puncher if nothing else.

To be fair I find it hard to say he's overrated and if anything he is underrated around here. It's pretty easy to downgrade any fighters legacy and wins which you did by saying his best win was a lucky punch.

But lets look at Barkley's accomplishments
3 Weight World Champion
.WBC Middlweight
.IBF Super Middlweight
.WBA Light Heavyweight

Only ever man to defeat Thomas Hearns twice, and each time Barkley beat Hearns, Hearns was on a good run and was a world champion. The balde also beat some good contenders including Darrin Van Horn (47-2). He also gave a prime Michael Nunn a good fight losing on a MD.

But there no hiding the fact the Barkley blew hot and cold, his loss to Benn was dissapointing, but shound't of been stopped and his lost to Duran was just a great performance by a great fighter with one last great fight in him, and he did only lose on SD.

Toney got him past his best. (And Duran was 37 when he fought Barkley).

I also think people don't talk about Barkley's amature accomplishments enough. He was a good amature.

1981 New York Golden Gloves Middleweight Silver Medalist, losing to Dennis Milton.
1981 Gold Medalist at the Empire State Games.
1982 Middleweight Bronze Medalist at the Copenhagen Box Cup.
1982 Middleweight Bronze Medalist at the World Amateur Championships in Munich.

He was also named Named The Ring Magazine Comeback of the Year fighter for 1992.

To be fair I find it hard to say he's overrated and if anything he is underrated around here. It's pretty easy to downgrade any fighters legacy and wins which you did by saying his best win was a lucky punch.

But lets look at Barkley's accomplishments
3 Weight World Champion
.WBC Middlweight
.IBF Super Middlweight
.WBA Light Heavyweight

Only ever man to defeat Thomas Hearns twice, and each time Barkley beat Hearns, Hearns was on a good run and was a world champion. The balde also beat some good contenders including Darrin Van Horn (47-2). He also gave a prime Michael Nunn a good fight losing on a MD.

But there no hiding the fact the Barkley blew hot and cold, his loss to Benn was dissapointing, but shound't of been stopped and his lost to Duran was just a great performance by a great fighter with one last great fight in him, and he did only lose on SD.

Toney got him past his best. (And Duran was 37 when he fought Barkley).

I also think people don't talk about Barkley's amature accomplishments enough. He was a good amature.



He was also named Named The Ring Magazine Comeback of the Year fighter for 1992.

Two of those title wins were against Hearns himself. Barkley was not even a natural MW imo, he was more of a LHW coming down to MW but he still lost to a blown up 37 year old Duran with a sketchy record at 160.

No matter which way your work it he got schooled by good fighters and his best win was over a WW.

He should not have been stopped against Benn, why ? there was a 3 knockdown rule and Barkley was down 3 times.

Two of those title wins were against Hearns himself.

And? he was still a two weight world champion, and he didnt get 2 of his 3 belts of any average fighter, which is even better.

Barkley was not even a natural MW imo, he was more of a LHW coming down to MW but he still lost to a blown up 37 year old Duran with a sketchy record at 160.

Yes he was a Middlweight because he got on the scale and made 160, FACT. No matter if he boiled down or not, he was still a Middleweight fighter. And your discrediting Duran's win, the fight after Duran, Barkely went and took a prime Michael Nunn to a MD. Duran just gave one last great performance, and if not as if he destroyed Iran, it was a SD.

No matter which way your work it he got schooled by good fighters and his best win was over a WW.

His best win was over a WW? Did Thomas Hearns get on the scale and weigh 147lb? No, Going into both fights Hearns was on good runs. The first time he had one his last 5, which included wins over Dennis Andries and Juan Domingo Roldan. The second time going into the fight Hearns hadn't been beat since the first Barkley fight, and had beaten the 30-0 WBA LHW Champion Virgill Hill.


He should not have been stopped against Benn, why ? there was a 3 knockdown rule and Barkley was down 3 times.

That rule is bogus, and it just proved how bogus it was, when it was clear Barkley could of continued, but IT had to be stopped because of that rule.

I don't think so, if anything I feel he's a little underrated.

Barkley was a huge guy and a real tough cookie, he beat Michael Olajide, James Kinchen, Caveman Lee, Wilford Scypion all of who was contenders and good fighters.. his fight with Duran was a `Classic`and one of Durans best career performances, its cannot be taken from Barkley that he `twice` beat Thomas Hearns showing incredible toughness and guts in both fights.

Barkley was a huge guy and a real tough cookie, he beat Michael Olajide, James Kinchen, Caveman Lee, Wilford Scypion all of who was contenders and good fighters.. his fight with Duran was a `Classic`and one of Durans best career performances, its cannot be taken from Barkley that he `twice` beat Thomas Hearns showing incredible toughness and guts in both fights.

First time he beat Hearns with a lucky shot and the second time by hanging on him all the time. And still it was a razor thin victory. He lost to the best technicians like Kalambay, Toney and Maske. He was a warrior and that's why many of you like him. But face it-he was never a great fighter.

prime mr. barkley at his best can beat all the guys in the "super six" tournament IMHO...

he can easily clean up MW & SMW divisions in this era i think...

prime mr. barkley at his best can beat all the guys in the "super six" tournament IMHO...

he can easily clean up MW & SMW divisions in this era i think...

yes i agree with you IMO Barkley would be favourd to beat all the Super 6

First time he beat Hearns with a lucky shot and the second time by hanging on him all the time. And still it was a razor thin victory. He lost to the best technicians like Kalambay, Toney and Maske. He was a warrior and that's why many of you like him. But face it-he was never a great fighter.
yes your correct he did beat Hearns with what could be called a `lucky shot`but was it really "Lucky"?

Hearns suffered a horrendous `broken nose`in their 2nd fight, yet i must say that Barkley`s tactics in the 2nd fight worked great for him, they got him the victory.

and like you say, Barkley was never in the fights against the guys who was technically better than him... Barkley was far from being an ATG but he was better than a lot of guys who claim to be world champions today

He was a bit of a throw back IMO not overly talented but very tough and durable who could hurt. Probably is underrated when you consider he was a 3 time champion. Don't think anyone counts him a an atg but everyone gives a win against him on another fighters record the weight it deserves.

His only claim to fame is beating Hearns twice. The first time it happened Hearns had just gone back from LHW to MW again and that musta taken some steam out of him. It was not a wise choice and I wonder why he did it. The second time Hearns was already not in his prime anymore. He was still good, but not as good as before.

Barkley did give Duran a good fight, but still lost in convincing fashion. Can't believe one judge gave him that fight.

That rule is bogus, and it just proved how bogus it was, when it was clear Barkley could of continued, but IT had to be stopped because of that rule.
__________________

Maybe it is a bogus rule but it was still a rule that night and Barkley visited the canvas 3 times. Debatable, he might have gone down again if Benn was able to go at him again, he looked pretty confused walking about like he did not know what just happened, meanwhile Padilla looked down at ringside and called the fight off.

Maybe it is a bogus rule but it was still a rule that night and Barkley visited the canvas 3 times. Debatable, he might have gone down again if Benn was able to go at him again, he looked pretty confused walking about like he did not know what just happened, meanwhile Padilla looked down at ringside and called the fight off.

I never disputed the fact that the rule was in place that night, but it was still bogus and due to this rule a fight was stopped to early when Barkley could of continued.

You have started a thread saying Iran Barkley is overrated, and I don't see how this is true when no really overrates him anyway and if anything like most have said he is pretty underrated. To call him overrated is silly.

Once again, styles make fights & Barkley's clumbsy style & physical strength proved a nightmare for some, but easy to deal with for others.. He also had a very intimidating presence, & would always be bigger than his opponent..
All in all I don't think he is overrated amongst fight fans, but only on paper.. He was also particularly well managed & took full advantage of his opportunities in winning 3 titles.. The only problem being, that he was far better at winning titles, than he was defending them.. The 2 victories against Hearns were special though.. They were pretty good versions of Hearns, with Barkley taking a beating for the first 3 rounds of fight 1.. The KO was possibly the hardest single punch Tommy ever got hit with.. In some ways, Hearns lost the second fight, mainly because he was worried about a repeat of the first.. He was a little more apprehensive than usual, & Barkley bullied him towards the end..
Barkley finished his career at heavyweight, & I believe KO'd an old Gerry Coetzee, but I doubt The Blade was too much younger himself.. I'd say in summing up, Barkley had a very good career, was well handled & left the game with all his faculties.. In fact, he's a very intelligent & likable chap out of the ring... He's not an ATG though, more of an upset king with a very good resume.. Who knows?... He may have upset Hagler or Leonard if they'd fought.. One things for sure though, everyone in boxing respects him..

His only claim to fame is beating Hearns twice. The first time it happened Hearns had just gone back from LHW to MW again and that musta taken some steam out of him. It was not a wise choice and I wonder why he did it. The second time Hearns was already not in his prime anymore. He was still good, but not as good as before.

Barkley did give Duran a good fight, but still lost in convincing fashion. Can't believe one judge gave him that fight.

Once again, styles make fights & Barkley's clumbsy style & physical strength proved a nightmare for some, but easy to deal with for others.. He also had a very intimidating presence, & would always be bigger than his opponent..
All in all I don't think he is overrated amongst fight fans, but only on paper.. He was also particularly well managed & took full advantage of his opportunities in winning 3 titles.. The only problem being, that he was far better at winning titles, than he was defending them.. The 2 victories against Hearns were special though.. They were pretty good versions of Hearns, with Barkley taking a beating for the first 3 rounds of fight 1.. The KO was possibly the hardest single punch Tommy ever got hit with.. In some ways, Hearns lost the second fight, mainly because he was worried about a repeat of the first.. He was a little more apprehensive than usual, & Barkley bullied him towards the end..
Barkley finished his career at heavyweight, & I believe KO'd an old Gerry Coetzee, but I doubt The Blade was too much younger himself.. I'd say in summing up, Barkley had a very good career, was well handled & left the game with all his faculties.. In fact, he's a very intelligent & likable chap out of the ring... He's not an ATG though, more of an upset king with a very good resume.. Who knows?... He may have upset Hagler or Leonard if they'd fought.. One things for sure though, everyone in boxing respects him..

agreed...........

Once again, styles make fights & Barkley's clumbsy style & physical strength proved a nightmare for some, but easy to deal with for others.. He also had a very intimidating presence, & would always be bigger than his opponent..
All in all I don't think he is overrated amongst fight fans, but only on paper.. He was also particularly well managed & took full advantage of his opportunities in winning 3 titles.. The only problem being, that he was far better at winning titles, than he was defending them.. The 2 victories against Hearns were special though.. They were pretty good versions of Hearns, with Barkley taking a beating for the first 3 rounds of fight 1.. The KO was possibly the hardest single punch Tommy ever got hit with.. In some ways, Hearns lost the second fight, mainly because he was worried about a repeat of the first.. He was a little more apprehensive than usual, & Barkley bullied him towards the end..
Barkley finished his career at heavyweight, & I believe KO'd an old Gerry Coetzee, but I doubt The Blade was too much younger himself.. I'd say in summing up, Barkley had a very good career, was well handled & left the game with all his faculties.. In fact, he's a very intelligent & likable chap out of the ring... He's not an ATG though, more of an upset king with a very good resume.. Who knows?... He may have upset Hagler or Leonard if they'd fought.. One things for sure though, everyone in boxing respects him..

Good post sir. Barkley was a menacing presence and was generally always the bigger, stronger man in the ring. He really was a guy who overachieved when he was thought to be out of a fight and underachieved when he was more of a favorite.