View Full Version : Overated by fans/media more so that overtated fighters


Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 09:16 AM
Overated by fans more so that overtated fighters? come on!! we all have 1 or 2 so lets hear them, here is your chance to let it all out :purity:


You can pick more than two if you like. I know SonnyBox will pick Lennox by default but he can still post that if he likes, its all good.

An exaggerated opinion on a particular fighter, its not to say they are not great, just that the hype outweighs the credentials/ability of the fighter from YOUR! perspective.

My picks.......

Marvin Hagler, Duran & Kostya Tszyu.

Dont get me wrong all were tremendous fighters whom i respect but i just dont believe the high regard Tszyu is held in stacks up to the skills and resume he has. His skills were much better in the amateurs from the footage ive seen, but as a Pro he lacked defence and he could not fight inside, his resume is not what id expect for the amount of hype that surrounds his name.

Hagler because when i watch Hagler what i see is a methodical fighter with good countering skills albeit not spectacular, and a guy who had pretty average hand & foot speed, its no surprise to me that Duran, Leonard were able to give him so much trouble with their Boxing skills, because like i said whist Hagler was a competent Boxer, he was not an exceptional one, what Hagler did have going for him was ..........he was a punishing puncher, had good stamina, iron jaw, heart, good countering skills albeit not spectacular as i mentioned.


Duran just purely on the fact some people rank him waay to high on their ATG lists. He was a great LW because of his longevity more so than because of who he beat, but was he any better than Whitaker at Lightweight? he had a great reign but Whitaker had wins over Azumah Nelson, Haugen, Paez, Pendleton,JLR, Mayweather. The win over Nelson is better than any of Duran's imo. De Jesus is the best name on Duran's resume at LW. I also think his stint at MW/LMW gets overrated to, if you stay around long enough and keep taking losses eventually you can beat a crude Iran Barkley and give your resume a nice shine. He was outboxed by Laing, Benitez, he was knocked out against Hearns, lost two other fights with Leonard, and whilst he did well against Hagler he still lost. He is a great fighter but people put him up there way too far. I think Duran came in out of shape a lot of the time but he does not get a free pass if that is why he lost on occasion. Another thing, Duran's defence gets over hyped too much imo, whilst he had a good defence it was not as air tight as people would have you believe, he got nailed quite a few times with right hands or left hooks. Duran is an ATG but he is not a (4) ATG like some laughable have him as.


Lets hear yours..........

TheGreatA
10-05-2009, 09:33 AM
I'm not sure if a win over Azumah Nelson at LW should rate that highly.

DeJesus and Ken Buchanan are ATG lightweights in my opinion, possibly top 20. Edwin Viruet, Ray Lampkin, Suzuki Ishimatsu, Hector Thompson, Hiroshi Kobayashi, Leoncio Ortiz, Saoul Mamby, Emiliano Villa, Vilomar Fernandez, Jimmy Robertson, Masataka Takayama, etc. were all good fighters.

I really rate Duran's early career win over Ernesto Marcel as well.

I think post-1980's fighters tend to get a bit overhyped, because more footage is available. It's far more difficult to seek out film of a Joe Brown, Esteban DeJesus, Jose Napoles and Jimmy Carter than a Jose Luis Castillo.

Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 09:43 AM
I'm not sure if a win over Azumah Nelson at LW should rate that highly.

DeJesus and Ken Buchanan are ATG lightweights in my opinion, possibly top 20. Edwin Viruet, Ray Lampkin, Suzuki Ishimatsu, Hector Thompson, Hiroshi Kobayashi, Leoncio Ortiz, Saoul Mamby, Emiliano Villa, Vilomar Fernandez, Jimmy Robertson, Masataka Takayama, etc. were all good fighters.

I really rate Duran's early career win over Ernesto Marcel as well.

I think post-1980's fighters tend to get a bit overhyped, because more footage is available. It's far more difficult to seek out film of a Joe Brown, Esteban DeJesus, Jose Napoles and Jimmy Carter than a Jose Luis Castillo.




I think fighter pre 1980 get more overhyped, that is why people are able to make their reign out to look better than it actually was. Great fighters have their own competition over hyped to make them look even better.

Durans best wins imo would be Marcel, Viruet, De Jesus, Kobayashi, Fernandez.

Ziggy Stardust
10-05-2009, 10:01 AM
I think post-1980's fighters tend to get a bit overhyped, because more footage is available. It's far more difficult to seek out film of a Joe Brown, Esteban DeJesus, Jose Napoles and Jimmy Carter than a Jose Luis Castillo.

Case in point: I have practically ALL of Pernell Whitaker's fights on DVD while only maybe a third of Duran's and most of the Duran fights I have are post 1980. In fact, the vast majority of the fighters for whom it could be said I have "career packs" for (fewer than 10 missing fights) are fighters who fought the bulk of their careers post-1990. The fights are simply easier to come by.

Poet

Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 10:07 AM
Case in point: I have practically ALL of Pernell Whitaker's fights on DVD while only maybe a third of Duran's and most of the Duran fights I have are post 1980. In fact, the vast majority of the fighters for whom it could be said I have "career packs" for (fewer than 10 missing fights) are fighters who fought the bulk of their careers post-1990. The fights are simply easier to come by.

Poet

I hear you there but one thing that puzzles me with that is, if those fights are so hard to come by then how come a 20+ year old have the ability to rank Duran as a number 4 ATG if those fights are unavailable or they were not born when he fought back then.

Ziggy Stardust
10-05-2009, 10:15 AM
I hear you there but one thing that puzzles me with that is, if those fights are so hard to come by then how come a 20+ year old have the ability to rank Duran as a number 4 ATG if those fights are unavailable or they were not born when he fought back then.

By doing research. I don't need to see the Battle of Allesia to know Julius Ceaser was a great general: Researching the battle tells me that. The truth is that I, for one, treat boxing the way I would treat any academic subject that interests me. Now if video is available I watch it as I'm also a fan of the sport and enjoy it, but even then I'll still do some research though prehaps not as much as I would in the case of fighters who have very little film available of them.

Poet

Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 10:20 AM
By doing research. I don't need to see the Battle of Allesia to know Julius Ceaser was a great general: Researching the battle tells me that. The truth is that I, for one, treat boxing the way I would treat any academic subject that interests me. Now if video is available I watch it as I'm also a fan of the sport and enjoy it, but even then I'll still do some research though prehaps not as much as I would in the case of fighters who have very little film available of them.

Poet

I just dont like relying on someone else's interpretation and its not as though there is not enough footage of him to form an opinion.

Ziggy Stardust
10-05-2009, 10:39 AM
I just dont like relying on someone else's interpretation and its not as though there is not enough footage of him to form an opinion.

Well, with Duran at least there's a lot of footage the problem is most of it's past-prime stuff. Now I was lucky in that I grew up in the 70s and could see Duran fighting in his prime on ABC's Wide World of Sports on Saturday's. Can most posters here say that? A few, yes, but the rest have to rely on available video; most of which is post-1980 stuff.

I don't see the need to "reinvent the wheel" myself. I don't need to redo Einstein's equations to know that the Theory of Relativity is valid: I am reasonably certain that Einstein knew what he was about so there's no need to start from scratch.

In a related note, I'm not saying YOU but I've caught this from other posters who are of the younger crowd, there seems to be a distrust of education in any form in that unless they can see or experience something for themselves than it has no validity. I find that rather disturbing: I mean, why spend all that money sending someone to college when they're turning their noses up at everything they're supposed to be learning there? I mean, one doesn't have to actually GO to Mongolia to know it actually exists does he?

Poet

Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 11:04 AM
Well, with Duran at least there's a lot of footage the problem is most of it's past-prime stuff. Now I was lucky in that I grew up in the 70s and could see Duran fighting in his prime on ABC's Wide World of Sports on Saturday's. Can most posters here say that? A few, yes, but the rest have to rely on available video; most of which is post-1980 stuff.

I don't see the need to "reinvent the wheel" myself. I don't need to redo Einstein's equations to know that the Theory of Relativity is valid: I am reasonably certain that Einstein knew what he was about so there's no need to start from scratch.

In a related note, I'm not saying YOU but I've caught this from other posters who are of the younger crowd, there seems to be a distrust of education in any form in that unless they can see or experience something for themselves than it has no validity. I find that rather disturbing: I mean, why spend all that money sending someone to college when they're turning their noses up at everything they're supposed to be learning there? I mean, one doesn't have to actually GO to Mongolia to know it actually exists does he?

Poet


Fair play.

Im not doubting that Duran was a great fighter, he was a great fighter, its just i dont think his resume makes him the a (4) ATG, its fair to say ive not seen all of Duran's fights at LW but i have watched footage of ....

Leoncio Ortiz
Esteban De Jesus 1,2,3
Guts Ishimatsu
Hector Thompson
Ken Buchanan
Hiroshi Kobayashi
Ernesto Marcel
Benny Huertas
Ray Lampkin
Edwin Viruet
Lou Bizzarro
Vilomar Fernandez
Rojas
Edwin Viruet 2
Adolfo Viruet

Also i dont think i need to have been of that era to know whom at that time was considered a great fighter (elite) if they were of the stature (a) i would know who they are (b) their record would confirm that.


When i look at Duran's record at LW it does not jump out at me and say "WOW"

The fact that his reign was long is impressive but i dont see that many great names on there. Where are the Sanchez's, Arguello's ? i know guys like Fernandez, Viruet are respectable wins/fighters, they both held wins over Escalera, Arguello, but his resume seems to be solid rather than spectacular, its not so much his career at LW that im skeptical of its more a culmination of a him having a solid LW career albeit not spectacular and losing fights to guys who were less than stellar, now im not gonna crucify him for that because i think there were legit reasons for his losses to Hearns, Sims, Leonard, Laing, Benitez but by the same token im not going to put him as an ATG(4) if you get my drift, lets for arguments sake he does not beat Leonard, how far does he fall from (4) ATG status ? id say pretty significantly, that there says it all to me about how exaggerated his place is as a(4) ATG.

i echo the sentiments he was an ATG and a terrific fighter but im skeptical and think his ranking as an ATG is exaggerated, a great fighter but

CCobra
10-05-2009, 11:09 AM
By doing research. I don't need to see the Battle of Allesia to know Julius Ceaser was a great general: Researching the battle tells me that. The truth is that I, for one, treat boxing the way I would treat any academic subject that interests me. Now if video is available I watch it as I'm also a fan of the sport and enjoy it, but even then I'll still do some research though prehaps not as much as I would in the case of fighters who have very little film available of them.

Poet

Very well said.

Ziggy Stardust
10-05-2009, 11:47 AM
Fair play.

Im not doubting that Duran was a great fighter, he was a great fighter, its just i dont think his resume makes him the a (4) ATG, its fair to say ive not seen all of Duran's fights at LW but i have watched footage of ....

Leoncio Ortiz
Esteban De Jesus 1,2,3
Guts Ishimatsu
Hector Thompson
Ken Buchanan
Hiroshi Kobayashi
Ernesto Marcel
Benny Huertas
Ray Lampkin
Edwin Viruet
Lou Bizzarro
Vilomar Fernandez
Rojas
Edwin Viruet 2
Adolfo Viruet

That's pretty much most of the available footage of a prime Duran so you've see as much as anybody.


Also i dont think i need to have been of that era to know whom at that time was considered a great fighter (elite) if they were of the stature (a) i would know who they are (b) their record would confirm that.

I don't think you need to have been of that era either: While it may give some insight I wouldn't consider it essential by any means. For most fans, I would point out, looking at respective resumes can make a difference as to whether an opponent had stature or not based on how recent a fighter is simply because those opponents would be more familier to a typical fan. Buddy McGirt we know has statue because he was a world-class fighter within recent memory. But would a typical fan checking Whitaker's resume 30 years from now know that? Or would McGirt be just another opponent?


When i look at Duran's record at LW it does not jump out at me and say "WOW"

For me, DeJesus does and so do the Viruets. So do a number of fighters off Whitaker's resume. But will those same names make a fan say "wow" 30 years from now? It's unlikely fans will even know who those fighters are.


The fact that his reign was long is impressive but i dont see that many great names on there. Where are the Sanchez's, Arguello's?

Sanchez never fought outside of Featherweight and Arguello had just moved up at the same time Duran started to go after the Welters.


i know guys like Fernandez, Viruet are respectable wins/fighters, they both held wins over Escalera, Arguello, but his resume seems to be solid rather than spectacular, its not so much his career at LW that im skeptical of its more a culmination of a him having a solid LW career albeit not spectacular

Well, you could go over Whitaker's resume and come to the same conclusion though. Now, I don't think it's an accurate conclusion to be made about Pernell, I'm just saying the case can be made.


and losing fights to guys who were less than stellar, now im not gonna crucify him for that because i think there were legit reasons for his losses to Hearns, Sims, Leonard, Laing, Benitez but by the same token im not going to put him as an ATG(4)

Past-prime losses though, which I don't hold against a fighter unless his opponent was past-prime as well. That's why I don't hold the Trinidad fight against Whitaker, or give Felix any major kudos for it: Pernell was well over the hill for that fight.


if you get my drift, lets for arguments sake he does not beat Leonard, how far does he fall from (4) ATG status ? id say pretty significantly, that there says it all to me about how exaggerated his place is as a(4) ATG

Considering Duran was just past his best and not at his best weight then he would still get accolades for moving up and giving the Welterweight (himself a top-tier ATG) one hell of a war even in a losing effort.

Poet

Obama
10-05-2009, 12:04 PM
Duran is top 20 ATG material at best. People rating him in the top 10 are definitely over rating him. Same goes for Sugar Ray Leonard, and Muhammad Ali.

No one else commonly thrown into top 10 ATG lists unreasonably comes to mind. RJJ used to, but that changed after he got KTFO twice back to back. Mayweather might end up there shortly, and he'll be another guy that doesn't deserve it. Unless his next 4 wins are over the winner of Pac/Cotto, winner of Mosley/Berto, Paul Williams, and some MW Champion provided Williams isn't one, Mayweather won't deserve it.

Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 12:14 PM
That's pretty much most of the available footage of a prime Duran so you've see as much as anybody.




I don't think you need to have been of that era either: While it may give some insight I wouldn't consider it essential by any means. For most fans, I would point out, looking at respective resumes can make a difference as to whether an opponent had stature or not based on how recent a fighter is simply because those opponents would be more familier to a typical fan. Buddy McGirt we know has statue because he was a world-class fighter within recent memory. But would a typical fan checking Whitaker's resume 30 years from now know that? Or would McGirt be just another opponent?




For me, DeJesus does and so do the Viruets. So do a number of fighters off Whitaker's resume. But will those same names make a fan say "wow" 30 years from now? It's unlikely fans will even know who those fighters are.




Sanchez never fought outside of Featherweight and Arguello had just moved up at the same time Duran started to go after the Welters.




Well, you could go over Whitaker's resume and come to the same conclusion though. Now, I don't think it's an accurate conclusion to be made about Pernell, I'm just saying the case can be made.




Past-prime losses though, which I don't hold against a fighter unless his opponent was past-prime as well. That's why I don't hold the Trinidad fight against Whitaker, or give Felix any major kudos for it: Pernell was well over the hill for that fight.




Considering Duran was just past his best and not at his best weight then he would still get accolades for moving up and giving the Welterweight (himself a top-tier ATG) one hell of a war even in a losing effort.

Poet


Good post, some fair points.

I respect Duran a lot and dont get me wrong im not one of those trolls that thinks he never beat anybody at LW and is overrated because of his past prime losses, with me its more of a in the middle type of stand point.

I see the respective parties arguing about Duran's career and i can see validity to both sides of the argument but each of those parties cannot form a logical stand point to run with. The idiots will look at the "L" column and think the obvious, whilst the people arguing against them for Duran go over the top by claiming he is not only an ATG, but he is actually a number 4 ATG, its from one extreme to another imo. Im not saying you are either of them Poet, but that is the general consensus i get when talking about Duran's career, you either put him up to far or to low.

Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 12:20 PM
Duran is top 20 ATG material at best. People rating him in the top 10 are definitely over rating him. Same goes for Sugar Ray Leonard, and Muhammad Ali.

No one else commonly thrown into top 10 ATG lists unreasonably comes to mind. RJJ used to, but that changed after he got KTFO twice back to back. Mayweather might end up there shortly, and he'll be another guy that doesn't deserve it. Unless his next 4 wins are over the winner of Pac/Cotto, winner of Mosley/Berto, Paul Williams, and some MW Champion provided Williams isn't one, Mayweather won't deserve it.


I agree with most of this, but Obama............didn't you once say Mike Tyson was a top 10 ATG? i might be wrong there and you might have said he was a top 10 HW ATG, which one was it, can you remember ?

I cant remember myself exactly what it was you said, thats why im asking.:fing02:

Obama
10-05-2009, 12:32 PM
I agree with most of this, but Obama............didn't you once say Mike Tyson was a top 10 ATG? i might be wrong there and you might have said he was a top 10 HW ATG, which one was it, can you remember ?

I cant remember myself exactly what it was you said, thats why im asking.:fing02:

Top 10 Heavyweight. Top 50 p4p, maybe.

Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 12:34 PM
Top 10 Heavyweight. Top 50 p4p, maybe.

Phew! thats cool then :fing02:

GJC
10-05-2009, 06:59 PM
Hagler because when i watch Hagler what i see is a methodical fighter with good countering skills albeit not spectacular, and a guy who had pretty average hand & foot speed, its no surprise to me that Duran, Leonard were able to give him so much trouble with their Boxing skills, because like i said whist Hagler was a competent Boxer, he was not an exceptional one, what Hagler did have going for him was ..........he was a punishing puncher, had good stamina, iron jaw, heart, good countering skills albeit not spectacular as i mentioned.


I'm reminded of the Fred Astaire quote, balding can't act can dance a bit :)
Fair to say Hagler at his best didn't have the wow factor but a great fighter maybe not the best at any aspect but pretty solid all round.


Duran just purely on the fact some people rank him waay to high on their ATG lists.
Duran is an ATG but he is not a (4) ATG like some laughable have him as.


Oooo thats fighting talk :)
Lists are always going to cause arguments, hopefully reasoned intelligant ones. I rate Duran very highly, i'd have to figure out where but at his best certainly top 10 for me. Good knowledgable poster such as yourself and few other likely lads could I'm sure certainly make a convincing case for ten other fighters that should go above him. On the other hand I'm immodest enough to think that I might make a good couple of holes in a couple of fighters that you rate above him. Thats the beauty of lists and opinions and when a group of good posters get together the joy of these forums for me.

GJC
10-05-2009, 07:13 PM
Duran is top 20 ATG material at best. People rating him in the top 10 are definitely over rating him.


Always respect your opinions Obama and agreed with your quote on Castro
He was much better than Baldo and Hamsho. Beating Sweet Reggie and Action Jackson is serious business.

So my question would be name me 10/20 fighters that could beat a world class fighter who was still fairly prime at the age of 46. Factor in they were 20odd years past their prime and 5 weight divisions above their best weight?
Langford could do it after that its a struggle?

Dynamite Kid
10-05-2009, 07:23 PM
I'm reminded of the Fred Astaire quote, balding can't act can dance a bit :)
Fair to say Hagler at his best didn't have the wow factor but a great fighter maybe not the best at any aspect but pretty solid all round.


Oooo thats fighting talk :)
Lists are always going to cause arguments, hopefully reasoned intelligant ones. I rate Duran very highly, i'd have to figure out where but at his best certainly top 10 for me. Good knowledgable poster such as yourself and few other likely lads could I'm sure certainly make a convincing case for ten other fighters that should go above him. On the other hand I'm immodest enough to think that I might make a good couple of holes in a couple of fighters that you rate above him. Thats the beauty of lists and opinions and when a group of good posters get together the joy of these forums for me.


All respects to you GJC your a good guy. I have no problem if someone wants to put him in their top 10 its just i think top 4 is a bit excessive, not that anyone needs my permission to do so lol.

The irony is i dont even concern myself with ATG lists. I have never made one and have always been of the opinion, whats the point? they cause too much bickering etc.

GJC
10-05-2009, 07:41 PM
All respects to you GJC your a good guy. I have no problem if someone wants to put him in their top 10 its just i think top 4 is a bit excessive, not that anyone needs my permission to do so lol.

The irony is i dont even concern myself with ATG lists. I have never made one and have always been of the opinion, whats the point? they cause too much bickering etc.
I knocked up a top 20 pfp list recently but totally copped out and put them in alphabetical order :) I also knocked out the HW's al la Poet so I could squeeze another couple of fighters in.
You're right re the bickering it does exasperate me that some get so nasty and disrespectful of anothers views. I will have a dig at someone who re-writes history like Terrell gave Ali a hard fight or says Frazier couldn't punch but as to someone's opinion that A is better than B
I might not agree but im always interested to hear others opinions im not too old to learn something

Obama
10-05-2009, 07:53 PM
Always respect your opinions Obama and agreed with your quote on Castro


So my question would be name me 10/20 fighters that could beat a world class fighter who was still fairly prime at the age of 46. Factor in they were 20odd years past their prime and 5 weight divisions above their best weight?
Langford could do it after that its a struggle?

Well that's a good point. But meh, neither fighter looked impressive in those fights. Langford KOing HOFer Tiger Flowers whilst blind in both eyes is just a tad bit completely (pun intended) out of the league of anything an old Duran accomplished.

Anyways, Duran's losses in the 80s severely outweigh the relevance of his wins in the 90s. He simply wasn't a great fighter anymore post Leonard I.

Think of Duran's win over Castro like Holyfield's win (yes, I know what I just typed) over Valuev.

GJC
10-05-2009, 08:46 PM
Well that's a good point. But meh, neither fighter looked impressive in those fights. Langford KOing HOFer Tiger Flowers whilst blind in both eyes is just a tad bit completely (pun intended) out of the league of anything an old Duran accomplished.

Anyways, Duran's losses in the 80s severely outweigh the relevance of his wins in the 90s. He simply wasn't a great fighter anymore post Leonard I.

Think of Duran's win over Castro like Holyfield's win (yes, I know what I just typed) over Valuev.
No Langford is a given and I agree the Castro/Duran fights were never going to be FOTY. But like I said Langford and ? could do it?
Duran 80's and beyond only tantalised us with how good he could be when in condition. Basically he should have looked after himself better and realised a man of 30 can't abuse his body as much as a man of 20 can.
If he would have done that then I doubt anyone could keep him out of the top 4 let alone top 20.

1SILVA
10-06-2009, 12:49 AM
Overated by fans more so that overtated fighters? come on!! we all have 1 or 2 so lets hear them, here is your chance to let it all out :purity:


You can pick more than two if you like. I know SonnyBox will pick Lennox by default but he can still post that if he likes, its all good.

An exaggerated opinion on a particular fighter, its not to say they are not great, just that the hype outweighs the credentials/ability of the fighter from YOUR! perspective.

My picks.......

Marvin Hagler, Duran & Kostya Tszyu.

Dont get me wrong all were tremendous fighters whom i respect but i just dont believe the high regard Tszyu is held in stacks up to the skills and resume he has. His skills were much better in the amateurs from the footage ive seen, but as a Pro he lacked defence and he could not fight inside, his resume is not what id expect for the amount of hype that surrounds his name.

Hagler because when i watch Hagler what i see is a methodical fighter with good countering skills albeit not spectacular, and a guy who had pretty average hand & foot speed, its no surprise to me that Duran, Leonard were able to give him so much trouble with their Boxing skills, because like i said whist Hagler was a competent Boxer, he was not an exceptional one, what Hagler did have going for him was ..........he was a punishing puncher, had good stamina, iron jaw, heart, good countering skills albeit not spectacular as i mentioned.


Duran just purely on the fact some people rank him waay to high on their ATG lists. He was a great LW because of his longevity more so than because of who he beat, but was he any better than Whitaker at Lightweight? he had a great reign but Whitaker had wins over Azumah Nelson, Haugen, Paez, Pendleton,JLR, Mayweather. The win over Nelson is better than any of Duran's imo. De Jesus is the best name on Duran's resume at LW. I also think his stint at MW/LMW gets overrated to, if you stay around long enough and keep taking losses eventually you can beat a crude Iran Barkley and give your resume a nice shine. He was outboxed by Laing, Benitez, he was knocked out against Hearns, lost two other fights with Leonard, and whilst he did well against Hagler he still lost. He is a great fighter but people put him up there way too far. I think Duran came in out of shape a lot of the time but he does not get a free pass if that is why he lost on occasion. Another thing, Duran's defence gets over hyped too much imo, whilst he had a good defence it was not as air tight as people would have you believe, he got nailed quite a few times with right hands or left hooks. Duran is an ATG but he is not a (4) ATG like some laughable have him as.


Lets hear yours..........

The fighter most overrated by both the fans and media was gerry Cooney back in 1982. The nerve of them having Larry Holmes introduced before him in their 1982 title fight. Holmes made Cooney look like the amateur he was. Cooney was the most overrated fighter in the history of the sport. He cried like a *****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama
10-06-2009, 06:56 AM
No Langford is a given and I agree the Castro/Duran fights were never going to be FOTY. But like I said Langford and ? could do it?
Duran 80's and beyond only tantalised us with how good he could be when in condition. Basically he should have looked after himself better and realised a man of 30 can't abuse his body as much as a man of 20 can.
If he would have done that then I doubt anyone could keep him out of the top 4 let alone top 20.

Well, Archie Moore was still LHW Champ in his mid 40s, and George Foreman won the HW title in his mid 40s.

I rate both more impressively than beating Castro.

GJC
10-06-2009, 02:26 PM
Well, Archie Moore was still LHW Champ in his mid 40s, and George Foreman won the HW title in his mid 40s.

I rate both more impressively than beating Castro.
Don't get me wrong I'm not using the Castro win in as the be all and end all of Duran's career.:)
Re Moore and Foreman I'm not so sure i'd use them in this context.
Moore matured like a fine wine and learnt from every defeat also he was in better physical nick than a Duran who eat his way to the weight.
Think Heavys is more forgiving to aging fighters as the speed element whilst important is as vital. Also Foreman always will have a punchers chance, it amazes me that some rate the comeback Foreman above the 70's Foreman.