View Full Version : Naseem Hamed or Antonio Tarver who place's higher on a all time great list?


Joey Giardello
05-24-2011, 10:02 AM
Naseem Hamed or Antonio Tarver who place's higher on a all time great list?

Rip Chudd
05-24-2011, 10:08 AM
Is this a serious question!?

Barn
05-24-2011, 10:26 AM
Gotta be Hamed.

studentofthegam
05-24-2011, 10:37 AM
Hamd by a hair. I guess because he only had one loss and hung them up on time.

baya
05-24-2011, 10:48 AM
tarver. he's the one who first beat the living legend RJJ.

hamed's never done anything close to that.

Scott9945
05-24-2011, 10:56 AM
Hamed, and IMO it isn't even close.

fitefanSHO
05-24-2011, 10:56 AM
Tarver ftw +1, he played Mason "The Line" Dixon in Rocky Balboa! :headbang:

bklynboy
05-24-2011, 10:57 AM
Naseem Hamed or Antonio Tarver who place's higher on a all time great list?

Neither belong on a ATG list. Naseem didn't continue after his loss to Barrera. I can't see him even beginning to be considered to be in the TOP 20.

(If you're not in the TOP 20 of your division how can you even be considered to be in a TOP 100 list?)

As for Tarver he was a good Light-Heavy - but beating a 35 year old Roy Jones doesn't make him an ATG.

fitefanSHO
05-24-2011, 10:59 AM
OK, but who currently WEIGHS more? :sucks:

http://uvtblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/fatprinceNaseem.jpg

bklynboy
05-24-2011, 11:04 AM
OK, but who currently WEIGHS more? :sucks:

http://uvtblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/fatprinceNaseem.jpg

OK, now that's sad, it reminds me of Ben Stiller getting fat at the end of Dodgeball.

PRINCE O' PROSE
05-24-2011, 11:05 AM
Now, I'm in the small group of people who are actually Tarver fans here - but anyone who picks Tarver is a little wacky, that's all I'm saying.

IronDanHamza
05-24-2011, 11:58 AM
Neither are ATG's.

PRINCE O' PROSE
05-24-2011, 12:02 PM
Neither are ATG's.
I think he just means where they would place in an All-Time list of all the notable guys ever to do it, not necessarily a top 100-200 (wherever one numerically draws the line to define ATG).

RockyB
05-24-2011, 12:09 PM
Tarver is NOT an ATG.

The Surgeon
05-24-2011, 12:20 PM
Tarver was a good to very good fighter who essentially made his name in a weak division and then by beating a damaged version of Roy Jones. But he was nothing to get excited about and i wont be mentioning him to my kids and grandkids


Prince Naseem Hamed is another matter all together! He was a Great Fighter, not ATG but great nonetheless. The hardest hitting Feather weight that ever walked imo and at his best he had fantastic reflexes and agility to boot, one of a kind and so so exciting in and out of the ring, love him or hate him u WERE entertained! Naz was on the slide long before he lost to the Truely Great Prime Marco Antonio Barrera and anyone who has seen the documentry leading to that fight (Big Fight Little Prince?) knows Naz was not ready for that fight. No excuses the best man Did win but it wasnt the one sided ass whipping people remember, he had some moments in there even then.

Basically im saying NAZ >>> TARVER

fitefanSHO
05-24-2011, 12:44 PM
Wait a minute, excuse me, he beat Rocky Balboa! :boxing:

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/_photos/2006/12/14/rocky-topper.jpg

IronDanHamza
05-24-2011, 01:33 PM
I think he just means where they would place in an All-Time list of all the notable guys ever to do it, not necessarily a top 100-200 (wherever one numerically draws the line to define ATG).

In that case then it's Naz.

IIIX JACK XIII
05-24-2011, 01:46 PM
Hamed easily. He beat alot of good but not great fighters, Its a shame he is mostly remembered for his loss to Barrera (which is nothing to be ashamed of tbh).

baya
05-24-2011, 01:57 PM
who on naz's resume is better than a seemingly undefeated rjj?

naz was more exciting, but the better fighter is still tarver IMO.

PRINCE O' PROSE
05-24-2011, 03:13 PM
who on naz's resume is better than a seemingly undefeated rjj?

naz was more exciting, but the better fighter is still tarver IMO.
Overall résumé matters more than one huge win.


Naz was more exciting, is the better fighter and has the far superior overall body of work. And that's from a Tarver fan.



I know you harbor strong contempt for a certain community, but don't embed that prejudice to the point of making yourself appear unlearned.

Unless you actually are unlearned about Hamed's opposition.

The_Demon
05-24-2011, 03:18 PM
Hamed and it isnt close

$BloodyNate$
05-24-2011, 05:36 PM
Seriously? It's Tarver and it's not even close. Nobody wants to give the man ANY credit. It's ridiculous. Roy Jones won a really close fight in the 1st fight so he obviously wasn't past his best then. Tarver ended Roy Jones Jr's prime. Glenn Johnson destroyed whatever was left. Then Tarver lost to Glenn in a good close fight, but Tarver easily avenged it in the 2nd fight.

Antonio Tarver ended Roy Jones Jr's prime and superman status. Hamed lost to the only great fighter he fought in Barrera. He was only popular because he was flashy, but that doesn't make resume. His division wasn't too hott either. Not to mention Tarver still could win the cruiserweight title this summer.

CarlosG815
05-24-2011, 05:45 PM
Seriously? It's Tarver and it's not even close. Nobody wants to give the man ANY credit. It's ridiculous. Roy Jones won a really close fight in the 1st fight so he obviously wasn't past his best then. Tarver ended Roy Jones Jr's prime. Glenn Johnson destroyed whatever was left. Then Tarver lost to Glenn in a good close fight, but Tarver easily avenged it in the 2nd fight.

Antonio Tarver ended Roy Jones Jr's prime and superman status. Hamed lost to the only great fighter he fought in Barrera. He was only popular because he was flashy, but that doesn't make resume. His division wasn't too hott either. Not to mention Tarver still could win the cruiserweight title this summer.

I see eye to eye with you most of the time but I think you are underrating Hamed a bit.

Watch his fights closely, and take a closer look at the resume. It's better than he gets credit for and the Hamed that fought Barrera was not the best version of Hamed by a longshot.

I gotta go with Hamed here. Tarver beating Jones is impressive but I think that Hamed was the more skilled fighter, did more for the sport, and I found it very impressive how he came to the US and handled Kevin Kelley.

Cesar Soto and Augie Sanchez were both solid wins. Augie was an excellent fighter and Naz beat the **** out of him. Watch Naseem put him into a coma.

PRINCE O' PROSE
05-24-2011, 05:58 PM
I see eye to eye with you most of the time but I think you are underrating Hamed a bit.
Just a bit.



"He was only popular because he was flashy, but that doesn't make résumé."

No, what makes a resume is establishing a looooooong-ass reign at the top of a weight-class by beating up (brutally knocking out, in most cases) a string of past, contemporaneous and future titlists and game contenders, unifying belts and roughing up whichever alpha titlists he could put hands on.




I don't understand why cats can't leave their belligerent attitudes at the door of the History section (to spare us these hideously wrong categorical statements). I can be as belligerent as anyone, and yet I still do it, for the good of the subforum. Maybe it's just poor breeding, lack of education etc.

Farewell.

Alec900
05-24-2011, 06:58 PM
Wait a minute, excuse me, he beat Rocky Balboa! :boxing:

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/_photos/2006/12/14/rocky-topper.jpg

balboa was robbed!!!

IronDanHamza
05-24-2011, 07:03 PM
Seriously? It's Tarver and it's not even close. Nobody wants to give the man ANY credit. It's ridiculous. Roy Jones won a really close fight in the 1st fight so he obviously wasn't past his best then. Tarver ended Roy Jones Jr's prime. Glenn Johnson destroyed whatever was left. Then Tarver lost to Glenn in a good close fight, but Tarver easily avenged it in the 2nd fight.

Antonio Tarver ended Roy Jones Jr's prime and superman status. Hamed lost to the only great fighter he fought in Barrera. He was only popular because he was flashy, but that doesn't make resume. His division wasn't too hott either. Not to mention Tarver still could win the cruiserweight title this summer.

Roy Jones showed in the first Tarver fight he was quite visiblly on the slide.

You're underrating Hamed's resume. He has solid names and a solid reign.

Much more than Tarver does, atleast.

Scott9945
05-24-2011, 10:05 PM
Seriously? It's Tarver and it's not even close. Nobody wants to give the man ANY credit. It's ridiculous. Roy Jones won a really close fight in the 1st fight so he obviously wasn't past his best then. Tarver ended Roy Jones Jr's prime. Glenn Johnson destroyed whatever was left. Then Tarver lost to Glenn in a good close fight, but Tarver easily avenged it in the 2nd fight.

Antonio Tarver ended Roy Jones Jr's prime and superman status. Hamed lost to the only great fighter he fought in Barrera. He was only popular because he was flashy, but that doesn't make resume. His division wasn't too hott either. Not to mention Tarver still could win the cruiserweight title this summer.

Tarver won (and lost) to RJ and Johnson. Other than that, what? Hamed beat at least 10 former, current, or future world champions. If it wasn't for a famous one punch KO, Tarver would have been considered an average 175 lb champion.

CarlosG815
05-24-2011, 10:10 PM
Tarver won (and lost) to RJ and Johnson. Other than that, what? Hamed beat at least 10 former, current, or future world champions. If it wasn't for a famous one punch KO, Tarver would have been considered an average 175 lb champion.

I agree Scott. But we can't discredit the KO altogether, he is an above average champion. Great fighter Tarver was, but Naz was special. Naz is one of those once in a lifetime guys.

Scott9945
05-24-2011, 10:17 PM
I agree Scott. But we can't discredit the KO altogether, he is an above average champion. Great fighter Tarver was, but Naz was special. Naz is one of those once in a lifetime guys.

Oh I loved that KO. It made me money and it made me happy. :)

Definitely one of the most memorable KO's I've ever seen.

baya
05-24-2011, 10:32 PM
Just a bit.



"He was only popular because he was flashy, but that doesn't make résumé."

No, what makes a resume is establishing a looooooong-ass reign at the top of a weight-class by beating up (brutally knocking out, in most cases) a string of past, contemporaneous and future titlists and game contenders, unifying belts and roughing up whichever alpha titlists he could put hands on.




I don't understand why cats can't leave their belligerent attitudes at the door of the History section (to spare us these hideously wrong categorical statements). I can be as belligerent as anyone, and yet I still do it, for the good of the subforum. Maybe it's just poor breeding, lack of education etc.

Farewell.

You're looking more into it than you need to.

Really, unlearned? Seriously sounding like a scorned woman with a venomous tongue right now that can't grasp the idea of the reality of a difference in opinion.

Any fighter that steps up in competition and then quits just like the woman you're portraying to be in your posts is NOT better than Tarver.

Get your head out of your ass, its Tarver,

baya
05-24-2011, 10:39 PM
I agree Scott. But we can't discredit the KO altogether, he is an above average champion. Great fighter Tarver was, but Naz was special. Naz is one of those once in a lifetime guys.

Quitter.

Hamed gave that word new meaning after MAB.

Ziggy Stardust
05-24-2011, 10:55 PM
Hamed was a fraud who lost to the only fighter he fought that had a pulse.....then quit the game out of fear of being exposed again.

Poet

SCtrojansbaby
05-24-2011, 10:55 PM
Naz and its not even close.
Tarver was the best Lightheavy in the world for a year. Naz was the best featherweight in the world for over 3 years

studentofthegam
05-25-2011, 10:01 AM
Tarver was a good to very good fighter who essentially made his name in a weak division and then by beating a damaged version of Roy Jones. But he was nothing to get excited about and i wont be mentioning him to my kids and grandkids


Prince Naseem Hamed is another matter all together! He was a Great Fighter, not ATG but great nonetheless. The hardest hitting Feather weight that ever walked imo and at his best he had fantastic reflexes and agility to boot, one of a kind and so so exciting in and out of the ring, love him or hate him u WERE entertained! Naz was on the slide long before he lost to the Truely Great Prime Marco Antonio Barrera and anyone who has seen the documentry leading to that fight (Big Fight Little Prince?) knows Naz was not ready for that fight. No excuses the best man Did win but it wasnt the one sided ass whipping people remember, he had some moments in there even then.

Basically im saying NAZ >>> TARVERIf that wasnt a one sided ass whoopin then what was. I dont remember him staggering MAB with all that power.

bklynboy
05-25-2011, 10:30 AM
Hamed was a fraud who lost to the only fighter he fought that had a pulse.....then quit the game out of fear of being exposed again.

Poet

I have to agree with this. In my mind to be talked about as an ATG you have to, at the very least, be the best in your division for a while. Hamed, while entertaining, never reached a level to be included in ATG lists.

Will he be remembered? Sure. So will Gatti, and by extension Mickey Ward, and neither of them are ATGs.

IronDanHamza
05-25-2011, 11:38 AM
I have to agree with this. In my mind to be talked about as an ATG you have to, at the very least, be the best in your division for a while. Hamed, while entertaining, never reached a level to be included in ATG lists.

Will he be remembered? Sure. So will Gatti, and by extension Mickey Ward, and neither of them are ATGs.

Naz isn't an ATG and maybe not even a HOF'er but I think it's difficult to argue that Antonio Tarver is greater than him.

The Surgeon
05-25-2011, 11:41 AM
If that wasnt a one sided ass whoopin then what was. I dont remember him staggering MAB with all that power.

Calzaghe vs Lacy was. Barrera spanked him and was a deserved winner but to hear people talk nowadays ud think he'd ran him outta the ring or shut him out but the truth is while outclassed Naz still did some scoring and the official cards read 115-112, 116-111 and 115-112 so it wasnt as bad as people say. Tho just to stress i agree the right man won and the better fighter won. And no he didnt stagger MAB with all that power but then i never said he did did i, and if u dont rate the mans punch power ur very misguided

CarlosG815
05-25-2011, 11:50 AM
Calzaghe vs Lacy was. Barrera spanked him and was a deserved winner but to hear people talk nowadays ud think he'd ran him outta the ring or shut him out but the truth is while outclassed Naz still did some scoring and the official cards read 115-112, 116-111 and 115-112 so it wasnt as bad as people say. Tho just to stress i agree the right man won and the better fighter won. And no he didnt stagger MAB with all that power but then i never said he did did i, and if u dont rate the mans punch power ur very misguided

The score was only that close because Barrera lost a point... Naseem may have won 2 or 3 rounds. That is a lopsided loss to me, Surgeon...

CarlosG815
05-25-2011, 11:51 AM
Naz isn't an ATG and maybe not even a HOF'er but I think it's difficult to argue that Antonio Tarver is greater than him.

It's true that Naz may not be inducted into the hall of fame. For me that kind of sucks. I think he's definitely hall of fame worth.

The Surgeon
05-25-2011, 12:04 PM
The score was only that close because Barrera lost a point... Naseem may have won 2 or 3 rounds. That is a lopsided loss to me, Surgeon... Carlos i agree it was lopsided, but i remember it being one of the easiest beatdowns ever for a title and i think alot of others do too but it wasnt quite on that level. When was the last time u watched it, its not as bad as u remember im betting man.

The Surgeon
05-25-2011, 12:05 PM
It's true that Naz may not be inducted into the hall of fame. For me that kind of sucks. I think he's definitely hall of fame worth.

Naz put boxing back on the map in this country and there are far worse fighters in there than him, he has to make the Hall

joseph5620
05-25-2011, 01:35 PM
Naseem Hamed or Antonio Tarver who place's higher on a all time great list?





Hamed and I don't even think it's close.

CarlosG815
05-25-2011, 04:50 PM
Naz put boxing back on the map in this country and there are far worse fighters in there than him, he has to make the Hall

I agree with you man. He HAS to make the Hall.

Scott9945
05-25-2011, 07:32 PM
I agree with you man. He HAS to make the Hall.

To me it is a travesty than Hamed isn't already in. IMO it is mostly anti Muslim backlash from the biased US boxing writers. And I'm not in anyway associated with Islam.

Jeff Da Maori
05-25-2011, 07:56 PM
Naseem Hamed or Antonio Tarver who place's higher on a all time great list?

Neither of them place very highly, but I'd have Hamed by a long way. He beat a lot of world champions and was a big reason behind the little fellas starting to earn good money.

bojangles1987
05-25-2011, 08:28 PM
What kind of moron question is this? Tarver was nothing more than a pretty good fighter that will be forgotten. Hamed was far better and will be remembered.

SCtrojansbaby
05-26-2011, 09:27 AM
Hamed should definitely be in the Hall he is the most entertaining boxer EVER

IronDanHamza
05-26-2011, 10:48 AM
I think Naz will get inducted down the line.

I wouldn't exactly call him First Ballot, anyway.

But I think he will get inducted down the line most likely.

project xxx1
05-26-2011, 10:50 AM
hamed...........

bklynboy
05-26-2011, 02:41 PM
To me it is a travesty than Hamed isn't already in. IMO it is mostly anti Muslim backlash from the biased US boxing writers. And I'm not in anyway associated with Islam.

I don't think he deserves to be first-ballot HOF (or second). He was good and deserves to be in because he was a fan favorite - the same as Gatti.

Outside being fan favorites Hamed, Gatti and Hatton are border-line, there's no bias there.

The Surgeon
05-26-2011, 03:21 PM
I don't think he deserves to be first-ballot HOF (or second). He was good and deserves to be in because he was a fan favorite - the same as Gatti.

Outside being fan favorites Hamed, Gatti and Hatton are border-line, there's no bias there.

Arturo Thunder Gatti is a hardcore warrior legend and one of my favs but he is at least 1 whole league below hamed imho

Scott9945
05-26-2011, 07:43 PM
I don't think he deserves to be first-ballot HOF (or second). He was good and deserves to be in because he was a fan favorite - the same as Gatti.

Outside being fan favorites Hamed, Gatti and Hatton are border-line, there's no bias there.

If you compare the records and accomplishments of Gatti and Hamed it isn't even remotely close. Hatton fits somewhere in between.

Ziggy Stardust
05-26-2011, 08:01 PM
If you compare the records and accomplishments of Gatti and Hamed it isn't even remotely close. Hatton fits somewhere in between.

The problem is Hamed never really accomplished much of anything. He made his name beating washed-up guys like Tom Johnson and Kevin Kelley. Most of title "reign" was defenses of the joke WBO belt. The first time he fought a world-class fighter who was actually world-class at the time Hamed fought him he got exposed and retired. The guy had a big punch and people ALWAYS overrate guys like that.

Poet

New England
05-26-2011, 08:09 PM
The problem is Hamed never really accomplished much of anything. He made his name beating washed-up guys like Tom Johnson and Kevin Kelley. Most of title "reign" was defenses of the joke WBO belt. The first time he fought a world-class fighter who was actually world-class at the time Hamed fought him he got exposed and retired. The guy had a big punch and people ALWAYS overrate guys like that.

Poet


flashiness probably adds to the ovverating as well. you make a good point


i cant keep my eyes off of a FW with one punch knockout power
call me a softie lol!

Ziggy Stardust
05-26-2011, 08:57 PM
flashiness probably adds to the ovverating as well. you make a good point


i cant keep my eyes off of a FW with one punch knockout power
call me a softie lol!

You're quite right about the flashiness lol. As I like to say, Ray Leonard was a great fighter on substance not the flash. If anything the flash was a turnoff to me.

I understand the visceral emotional reaction to KO power.....I'm just immune to it myself :hah9: To me a lopsided technical beating is just as good: Either way is a valid road to Damascas ie. getting a dominating win. I'd be a pretty boring person to watch a fight with lol: I watch fights in total silence (with the occasional technical comment thrown in) with an impassive look on my face.....even if it's the biggest fight of the year :hahahaha9: My viewing style is sort of like Joe Louis' in-ring persona.....which also happens to be my ideal level of flashiness :chuckle9:

Poet

Scott9945
05-26-2011, 09:26 PM
The problem is Hamed never really accomplished much of anything. He made his name beating washed-up guys like Tom Johnson and Kevin Kelley. Most of title "reign" was defenses of the joke WBO belt. The first time he fought a world-class fighter who was actually world-class at the time Hamed fought him he got exposed and retired. The guy had a big punch and people ALWAYS overrate guys like that.

Poet

Johnson
Robinson
Medina
McCullough
Vazquez
Kelley
Soto
Ingle
Bungu

All former, present, or future champions when they were beaten by Hamed. None of those wins were contorversial or even that close. Tom Johnson was washed up? He was 44-2 when he fought Hamed and hadn't lost in over 5 years.

Hamed was a lot more than a guy with a big punch. And it's a fact that he only lost one fight in his entire career. He was outclassed, but he didn't quit and wasn't KO'd or even dropped. I still question the objectivity of many people out to bury him. He has a Hall of Fame resume.

SCtrojansbaby
05-26-2011, 09:27 PM
There is a place in the HOF for guys like Gatti and Hamed who were entertainers.

Ziggy Stardust
05-26-2011, 11:47 PM
Johnson
Robinson
Medina
McCullough
Vazquez
Kelley
Soto
Ingle
Bungu

All former, present, or future champions when they were beaten by Hamed. None of those wins were contorversial or even that close. Tom Johnson was washed up? He was 44-2 when he fought Hamed and hadm't lost in over 5 years.

Hamed was a lot more than a guy with a big punch. And it's a fact that he only lost one fight in his entire career. He was outclassed, but he didn't quit and wasn't KO'd or even dropped. I still question the objectivity of many people out to bury him. He has a Hall of Fame resume.

They had already been talking in Ring Magazine about Johnson being on the slide well before the Hamed fight. The fact that he went 7-8 in his remaining 15 fights is a pretty damn good indicator he was washed up.

As for the rest:

Robinson - A Euro-fraud with nothing but other Euro-frauds on his resume.

Medina - Aside from going 1-2 against Tom Johnson he lost to practically every notable opponent he faced.

McCullough - Entertaining club fighter and no more. Think Gatti.

Vazquez - Doesn't have a single victory over a top opponent on his record.

Kelley - Hell, even HBO was calling him past it and looking for redemption in the pre-fight feature on him......and he went 4-3 in his next 7 fights and 13-8 the rest of his career.

Soto - Has 23 losses on his record and the only fighter of note he ever beat was a very green Jose Luis Castillo.

Ingle - The poster boy of Euro-frauds. The only top name on his victory list is a washed up Junior Jones.

Bungu - Two close wins over the notoriously erratic Kennedy McKinney and an over-hyped never-was in Danny Romero doesn't make you an elite fighter.

Poet

RichCCFC
05-27-2011, 12:18 AM
I smell a hint a prejudice in poet's posts.

Scott9945
05-27-2011, 12:58 AM
They had already been talking in Ring Magazine about Johnson being on the slide well before the Hamed fight. The fact that he went 7-8 in his remaining 15 fights is a pretty damn good indicator he was washed up.

As for the rest:

Robinson - A Euro-fraud with nothing but other Euro-frauds on his resume.

Medina - Aside from going 1-2 against Tom Johnson he lost to practically every notable opponent he faced.

McCullough - Entertaining club fighter and no more. Think Gatti.

Vazquez - Doesn't have a single victory over a top opponent on his record.

Kelley - Hell, even HBO was calling him past it and looking for redemption in the pre-fight feature on him......and he went 4-3 in his next 7 fights and 13-8 the rest of his career.

Soto - Has 23 losses on his record and the only fighter of note he ever beat was a very green Jose Luis Castillo.

Ingle - The poster boy of Euro-frauds. The only top name on his victory list is a washed up Junior Jones.

Bungu - Two close wins over the notoriously erratic Kennedy McKinney and an over-hyped never-was in Danny Romero doesn't make you an elite fighter.

Poet

Like many top fighters, Johnson declined after taking the first beating of his career. He had been the IBF champion for 4 years and had won 11 stright title fights. The Ring Magazine reference is just selective speculation. It was a very legitimate win. Kelley and McCullough were former champions with just one career loss. Soto was 54-7 when he fought Hamed and was the WBC champion. And Bungu beating McKinney and Romero was pretty damn impressive, whether you want to admit it or not.

joseph5620
05-27-2011, 11:54 AM
Like many top fighters, Johnson declined after taking the first beating of his career. He had been the IBF champion for 4 years and had won 11 stright title fights. The Ring Magazine reference is just selective speculation. It was a very legitimate win. Kelley and McCullough were former champions with just one career loss. Soto was 54-7 when he fought Hamed and was the WBC champion. And Bungu beating McKinney and Romero was pretty damn impressive, whether you want to admit it or not.



I think Hamed gets a lot of unfair criticism. Jim Lampley clearly showed his own bias and personal dislike in the Barrera fight. Hamed had an impressive run prior to losing to Barrera and he had exceptional power and speed. The Barrera loss doesn't erase his previous success. I've seen top fighters lose in more dominant and embarrassing fashion than Hamed without losing their status as a HOF fighter.

Ziggy Stardust
05-27-2011, 11:55 AM
Like many top fighters, Johnson declined after taking the first beating of his career. He had been the IBF champion for 4 years and had won 11 stright title fights. The Ring Magazine reference is just selective speculation. It was a very legitimate win.

No sale. That's the old so-and-so ruined so-and-so argument that fans use to protect the reputation of their favs when they beat up a washed-up name. I don't buy it any other time it's used and I'm not buying now. When guys who are payed to watch boxing for a living notice you're sliding it's a pretty damn good indicator you're sliding not "selective speculation". Just because he held a belt doesn't mean he wasn't past-it: Johnson hadn't fought a legitimate world-class opponent in a long time and even a washed-up champion can usually still beat tomato cans.


Kelley and McCullough were former champions with just one career loss. Soto was 54-7 when he fought Hamed and was the WBC champion. And Bungu beating McKinney and Romero was pretty damn impressive, whether you want to admit it or not.

Beating Soto has about as much cred as beating as beating up Yori Boy Campos. No matter how you spin it Soto was NOT an elite opponent. Hell, Peter McNeely was 36-1 when he fought Tyson.....does that make McNeely an elite opponent?

Being a former champ doesn't mean it's a good win. Joe Louis was a former champ and Marciano doesn't any credit for beating him.....nor should he. You get credit for how good an opponent is at the time you fight him NOT for good he USED to be.

Beating McCullough is no different from beating Gatti. Do you think I give De La Hoya and Mayweather any credit for beating up Gatti? Hell no! Gatti got the spit slapped out him every time he faced a legitimately elite fighter: How do hell do you get credit for beating someone like that? If anything Gatti was a BETTER fighter than McCullough was. And what the hell did Romero ever do to make him an impressive win for anyone? Get exposed as a fraud by Johnny Tapia? McKinney was too damn erratic in his performances to be stepping stone to elite status for anyone.....especially for someone with no other real names on their resume like Bungu.

Poet

Scott9945
05-27-2011, 12:28 PM
No sale. That's the old so-and-so ruined so-and-so argument that fans use to protect the reputation of their favs when they beat up a washed-up name. I don't buy it any other time it's used and I'm not buying now. When guys who are payed to watch boxing for a living notice you're sliding it's a pretty damn good indicator you're sliding not "selective speculation". Just because he held a belt doesn't mean he wasn't past-it: Johnson hadn't fought a legitimate world-class opponent in a long time and even a washed-up champion can usually still beat tomato cans.


Johnson was the IBF champion. His record spoke for itself. Was Hamed supposed to refuse the fight until a better champion turned up? Pernell Whitaker was clearly on the downside when he barely lost to DLH. While you can't begin to compare Johnson to Whitaker, it is a similar situation. Yet nobody ever downgrades Oscar's win over someone who had just struggled to beat Rivera and Hurtado. Same with Marciano beating a faded Walcott and Charles. Just pro USA double standards. You can only beat the best fighters available. Since you access to Ring Magazine from back then, who was rated higher than Johnson at 126?

Nacho_Analstain
05-27-2011, 12:49 PM
Hamed because hes English, nothin' else.

Ziggy Stardust
05-27-2011, 02:47 PM
Johnson was the IBF champion. His record spoke for itself. Was Hamed supposed to refuse the fight until a better champion turned up? Pernell Whitaker was clearly on the downside when he barely lost to DLH. While you can't begin to compare Johnson to Whitaker, it is a similar situation. Yet nobody ever downgrades Oscar's win over someone who had just struggled to beat Rivera and Hurtado. Same with Marciano beating a faded Walcott and Charles. Just pro USA double standards. You can only beat the best fighters available. Since you access to Ring Magazine from back then, who was rated higher than Johnson at 126?

I would point out I don't give De La Hoya credit for Whitaker.....if anything I count it against him that that he could only scrape by (and in my eyes LOST to) a past-it Whitaker. I don't give Marciano much credit Walcott and Charles either. Tom Johnson was rated #1 at Feather year end 1996.....and they were still pointing out he was sliding and only had the belt because the division was so weak at the time. Right now Light-Heavy is so weak an ancient and WELL past-it B-Hop is considered the best fighter in the division. You don't get credit for beating him. Another example is Larry Holmes. He was the #1 fighter in his division up until the Spinks fights. The sports writers had already pointed out he was clearly on the slide as early as the Bey fight and was ready to be taken at any time. Point is, even a past-it fighter (or even WELL past-it) can be the top guy in the division when the division is weak.

While you can only beat the best fighters available, it doesn't mean that those fighters are any good. Why should someone get credit for fighting in a weak division? This stuff isn't graded on a curve. Either you beat elite fighters or you don't. If there aren't any available for too bad so sad nobody said life was fair. You don't get put on the same level as someone who actually DID fight and beat elite opponents. If you're competition is ordinary why in the hell should you get the same credit for beating great competition? It's insulting to the fighters who actually DID fight and beat great competition.

The bottom line is you only get credit for a win in proportion to the quality of your opponent.....and specifically the quality of your opponent at the time you fought him. You don't get credit for beating great fighters if you don't fight them.....and you don't get symphathy bonus points just because there're none available.

Poet

baya
05-27-2011, 03:33 PM
Poet Is *****ing all over this thread.