View Full Version : Mustafa Hamsho-the best middleweight that never won a title?


Benncollinsaad
09-30-2009, 06:02 PM
The title says it all. Hamsho was definitely one of the top 10 mws in the 80's, yet he never won a title. Had a brave attempt against Hagler the first time. Beat Alan Minter, young Bobby Czyz.

BennyST
09-30-2009, 08:22 PM
Bennie Briscoe.

GJC
09-30-2009, 08:59 PM
Got briscoe and the whole murderers row middles have been so deep I don't think hamsho gets near to be honest

GJC
09-30-2009, 09:17 PM
Think you said it yourself Benn he was a top ten contender in the 80's bit of a leap to make him the best mw never to win the title. Personally I'd probably go with Langford, Hamsho I'd rate under Rubin Carter.

Obama
10-01-2009, 12:02 AM
Hamsho is definitely under Carter, and Carter is under another 30+ guys, half of which we often deem Heavyweights and Light Heavyweights despite the fact that they were natural Middleweights.

Anyways, Georgie Benton > Bennie Briscoe. And you can never forget about Charley Burley in these discussions, who I rate in the top 10 ATG Middleweights.

JAB5239
10-01-2009, 12:38 AM
Hamsho is definitely under Carter, and Carter is under another 30+ guys, half of which we often deem Heavyweights and Light Heavyweights despite the fact that they were natural Middleweights.

Anyways, Georgie Benton > Bennie Briscoe. And you can never forget about Charley Burley in these discussions, who I rate in the top 10 ATG Middleweights.

Im curious why you think Hamso is "definitely" under Carter? Seems there resumes are pretty equal to me. What makes it such a definitive separation for you?

Obama
10-01-2009, 01:42 AM
Im curious why you think Hamso is "definitely" under Carter? Seems there resumes are pretty equal to me. What makes it such a definitive separation for you?

Ummmm, talent? :boxing:

Benncollinsaad
10-01-2009, 06:40 AM
Ummmm, talent? :boxing:

Carter lost to Giardello and a few other top mws of that time. Hamsho lost to Hagler, who was a better fighter, perhaps much better than Giardello. Your case sounds pretty thin.

Didn't he also lose to Dick Tiger?

Benncollinsaad
10-01-2009, 07:09 AM
I actually meant Hamsho was the best middleweight of the EIGHTIES that never won a title. And he was def ONE OF the best that never won a title.

mickey malone
10-01-2009, 07:53 AM
Think you said it yourself Benn he was a top ten contender in the 80's bit of a leap to make him the best mw never to win the title. Personally I'd probably go with Langford, Hamsho I'd rate under Rubin Carter.
Beat me to it with Langford and Carter... I'd say Hamsho's a worthy contender to.. I think Herol Graham falls into this category also... I know he was brutally KO'd by Jackson, but I also think it's fair to say that Graham was making him look stupid, until the Virgin Islander pulled it out the bag.. Should also be mentioned, that he gave Mike McCallum & Sambu Kalambay all they could handle over 12...

Benncollinsaad
10-01-2009, 08:16 AM
Beat me to it with Langford and Carter... I'd say Hamsho's a worthy contender to.. I think Herol Graham falls into this category also... I know he was brutally KO'd by Jackson, but I also think it's fair to say that Graham was making him look stupid, until the Virgin Islander pulled it out the bag.. Should also be mentioned, that he gave Mike McCallum & Sambu Kalambay all they could handle over 12...
Yeah, Graham def falls into this category. One of the top 5 mw's to never win a major title.

I'd also add Olajide on that list, altho he also competed as a smw. He still was an underachiever. He lost to Barkley because he couldn't get his rhythm going and his shoes were slippery as well.:lol1: He did put him down in the 4th and had he fought like he did against Hearns, he'd certainly survive the 12 rounds and maybe take the decision.

sonnyboyx2
10-01-2009, 10:20 AM
The title says it all. Hamsho was definitely one of the top 10 mws in the 80's, yet he never won a title. Had a brave attempt against Hagler the first time. Beat Alan Minter, young Bobby Czyz.

IMO Hamsho was fortunate to get the nod over Minter, Herol Graham would have taken Hamsho to school, i would also fancy Roldan, Sibson, Frank Fletcher and Mark Kaylor to handle Hamsho in the 80s

oldgringo
10-01-2009, 10:29 AM
Michael Watson
Holman Williams
Herol Graham

mickey malone
10-01-2009, 11:04 AM
Yeah, Graham def falls into this category. One of the top 5 mw's to never win a major title.

I'd also add Olajide on that list, altho he also competed as a smw. He still was an underachiever. He lost to Barkley because he couldn't get his rhythm going and his shoes were slippery as well.:lol1: He did put him down in the 4th and had he fought like he did against Hearns, he'd certainly survive the 12 rounds and maybe take the decision.
Olajide was widely tipped to win the title, but his rise & fall, all happened too quickly.. Had a slick style and was exciting to watch, came up around the same time as another mentionable in James Kinchen, who also gave Hearns a good scrap, but I can't remember if they ever faced one another...

Obama
10-01-2009, 12:29 PM
Carter lost to Giardello and a few other top mws of that time. Hamsho lost to Hagler, who was a better fighter, perhaps much better than Giardello. Your case sounds pretty thin.

Didn't he also lose to Dick Tiger?

....... Overall Carter fought better opposition, so I'd expect him to have more losses. And talent isn't measured by who comes up in the L column on a resume. We already established resume wise neither fighter has a significant advantage. Talent is measured by watching the two guys fight, and evaluating their skills.

And for the record, if the two ever met h2h, Carter would knock Hamsho the hell out.

Yeah, Graham def falls into this category. One of the top 5 mw's to never win a major title.

I'd also add Olajide on that list, altho he also competed as a smw. He still was an underachiever. He lost to Barkley because he couldn't get his rhythm going and his shoes were slippery as well.:lol1: He did put him down in the 4th and had he fought like he did against Hearns, he'd certainly survive the 12 rounds and maybe take the decision.

How are you defining this list of Middleweights? Middleweights that never competed in other weight classes? That's about the only way he MIGHT make the list.

Benncollinsaad
10-01-2009, 01:02 PM
....... Overall Carter fought better opposition, so I'd expect him to have more losses. And talent isn't measured by who comes up in the L column on a resume. We already established resume wise neither fighter has a significant advantage. Talent is measured by watching the two guys fight, and evaluating their skills.

And for the record, if the two ever met h2h, Carter would knock Hamsho the hell out.



How are you defining this list of Middleweights? Middleweights that never competed in other weight classes? That's about the only way he MIGHT make the list.
Hey, Herol Bomber Graham would ice Carter or any other of your choices!:boxing:

JAB5239
10-01-2009, 03:00 PM
Ummmm, talent? :boxing:

Talent is not the end all in boxing. If it was guys like Zab Judah and Ricardo Williams would be legends. Intangibles such as toughness and heart are much more important in my opinion.

[QUOTE=Obama;6238315]....... Overall Carter fought better opposition, so I'd expect him to have more losses. And talent isn't measured by who comes up in the L column on a resume. We already established resume wise neither fighter has a significant advantage. Talent is measured by watching the two guys fight, and evaluating their skills.

Carters resume is no better than Hamsho's, and he has more losses in less fights and was finished as a top fighter by 27 years old. Looking like the better fighter doesn't make someone the better fighter.

And for the record, if the two ever met h2h, Carter would knock Hamsho the hell out.

I highly doubt that would happen. Hamsho always showed a sturdy chin and Carter wasn't the big puncher his win over Griffith might indicate. This fight would come down to a battle of wills and almost definitely come down to a decision.

Obama
10-01-2009, 03:12 PM
Carter was a massive puncher. This is not up for debate. Get rid of any 1 fight he ever had and he'd still be considered a massive puncher. Hansho is getting KOed. He was far from an elusive target. He'd try to play rough with Carter and it would backfire, as Carter was simply too strong.

Bigmacpoper
10-01-2009, 03:22 PM
And for the record, if the two ever met h2h, Carter would knock Hamsho the hell out.

And for the record, the h2h argument is flawed,stupid and wrong and can never be applied as a legitimate argument to a topic.

You never do change unfortunately, dunce.

JAB5239
10-01-2009, 03:37 PM
Carter was a massive puncher. This is not up for debate. Get rid of any 1 fight he ever had and he'd still be considered a massive puncher. Hansho is getting KOed. He was far from an elusive target. He'd try to play rough with Carter and it would backfire, as Carter was simply too strong.

Its without a doubt up to debate. As I've already stated, Carter was spent by age 27, and the man only had 19 ko's in 40 fights. Sorry Obama, that is not a massive puncher. Getting a highlight reel ko, doesn't make you a massive puncher anymore than hitting a grand slam make you a consistent home run hitter. I know Carter could wallop pretty good, but Hamsho could take it even better.

Obama
10-01-2009, 03:48 PM
[B]

Its without a doubt up to debate. As I've already stated, Carter was spent by age 27, and the man only had 19 ko's in 40 fights. Sorry Obama, that is not a massive puncher. Getting a highlight reel ko, doesn't make you a massive puncher anymore than hitting a grand slam make you a consistent home run hitter. I know Carter could wallop pretty good, but Hamsho could take it even better.

I never said Carter was a great fighter, so you can stop reciting his record to me. Telling me he was past his prime at an early age is also irrelevant, as the argument obviously assumes a prime vs prime comparison. And factoring in the man's losses to his KO ratio is flat out purposefully deceptive. Anyone who was around when Carter was fighting called him a massive puncher. You can't just look at his numbers long after the guy had fought and claim otherwise because they don't appear the way they're supposed to. He was a massive puncher because everyone during his time said he was. It's not like the guys who fought him turned around and told the world the man couldn't crack. End of story really.

I'm not continuing this argument...just seems silly.

Benncollinsaad
10-01-2009, 03:52 PM
I never said Carter was a great fighter, so you can stop reciting his record to me. Telling me he was past his prime at an early age is also irrelevant, as the argument obviously assumes a prime vs prime comparison. And factoring in the man's losses to his KO ratio is flat out purposefully deceptive. Anyone who was around when Carter was fighting called him a massive puncher. You can't just look at his numbers long after the guy had fought and claim otherwise because they don't appear the way they're supposed to. He was a massive puncher because everyone during his time said he was. It's not like the guys who fought him turned around and told the world the man couldn't crack. End of story really.

I'm not continuing this argument...just seems silly.

Hamsho was a better fighter, his record is simply better and he has fought just as strong opposition, if not even stronger. Carter beat a former welterweight Emile Griffith, thats his biggest win.

JAB5239
10-01-2009, 03:56 PM
I never said Carter was a great fighter, so you can stop reciting his record to me. Telling me he was past his prime at an early age is also irrelevant, as the argument obviously assumes a prime vs prime comparison. And factoring in the man's losses to his KO ratio is flat out purposefully deceptive. Anyone who was around when Carter was fighting called him a massive puncher. You can't just look at his numbers long after the guy had fought and claim otherwise because they don't appear the way they're supposed to. He was a massive puncher because everyone during his time said he was. It's not like the guys who fought him turned around and told the world the man couldn't crack. End of story really.

I'm not continuing this argument...just seems silly.


I never said Carter couldn't hit. But you're trying to make it sound like he should rate amongst the best punchers ever and that Hamsho had a chin of crystal. Neither are true.

Obama
10-01-2009, 04:10 PM
Hamsho was a better fighter, his record is simply better and he has fought just as strong opposition, if not even stronger. Carter beat a former welterweight Emile Griffith, thats his biggest win.

He beat a prime future 2 time MW Champion is who he beat. And his level of opposition was far greater, not remotely debatable. His biggest win trumps Hamshos.

I never said Carter couldn't hit. But you're trying to make it sound like he should rate amongst the best punchers ever and that Hamsho had a chin of crystal. Neither are true.

Hamsho didn't have a thin chin, but that didn't keep the man from getting KOed. The only guy he fought remotely like Carter was Hagler, and we saw what happened there.

JAB5239
10-01-2009, 04:19 PM
Hamsho didn't have a thin chin, but that didn't keep the man from getting KOed. The only guy he fought remotely like Carter was Hagler, and we saw what happened there.

Come on my man, we both know Carter isn't in the same stratosphere as a puncher or a fighter compared to Hagler, and Hamsho made it 11 tough rounds the first fight. A Hamsho-Carter fight would be an ugly entertaining brawl where you could flip a coin to decide the winner.

GJC
10-01-2009, 06:42 PM
Blimey I wished I hadn't bought up Carter's name lol. Kind of only used it to place Hamsho in the scheme of things. I didn't think Hamsho was that convincing against Minter and I count Minter in the lower reaches of MW champions.

Obama
10-03-2009, 02:36 AM
Come on my man, we both know Carter isn't in the same stratosphere as a puncher or a fighter compared to Hagler, and Hamsho made it 11 tough rounds the first fight. A Hamsho-Carter fight would be an ugly entertaining brawl where you could flip a coin to decide the winner.

Fighter no, puncher yes, but whatever! I'm done defending a fighter I don't even consider all that good just to expose another fighter even worse. :beerchug: