Wasted Talent/Underachieving

[JUYJUY]

Those who have wasted talent include the likes of Chris Eubank and Naseem Hamed. Those who have underachieved include the likes of Herol Graham. But there's one that stands out more than the rest (I'll come to him later).

We'll start with Chris Eubank. Eubank could of been fighter of the decade, he could of won everything if he took the sport more seriously and if the Watson tragedy didn't happen. Eubank was all skill, sharp as a cat, and when he had a man hurt Pre-Watson he was a deadly finisher. But the Watson tragedy caused him to lose his punch and lose focussed aggression. And also, Eubank was only ever in the sport for the money which is a shame.

Hamed's natural speed and power, his 'Graham style' defence, and his combination punching made him the hottest prospect in boxing around 94/95 (much like Nigel Benn was the hottest prospect in boxing around 88/89), but Hamed hasn't had any decent performances since Tom Johnson and his best ever performance remains Steve Robinson. Hamed simply stopped training hard and by 97/98 was a shadow of his former self, his defence wasn't up to scratch anymore and he just stopped punching in combinations while becoming reliant on only looking for one-punch KO's.

'Bomber' Graham is the best fighter of our lifetime to not win a world title. He was an elusive, defensive southpaw. He was a slick switch-hitter, quick hands and feet, and made Pernell Whitaker look easy to hit. Unfortunately for Graham, his punching power didn't match his punching accuracy. Graham would of been Hagler's, Hearns', Leonard's or Duran's toughest ever fight, but the prospect of a light-punching, defensive fighter did little to attract American audience. Graham of 86 has a very good chance against Hagler of 86, Graham was actually #1 contender before Hagler-Leonard. Graham is the man who both McCallum and Jackson described as their "most awkward ever opponent".

But there's one guy who was the grandmaster of wasting what talent he had and underachieving...... MICHAEL NUNN.

Nunn was the best fighter of his era before drugs got him between the Kalambay and Toney fights. He was better than Tyson, better than Holyfield, better than Eubank, better than Whitaker. He had EVERYTHING going for him but decided to become a coke head instead. He was a tall, rangy southpaw who was very quick and as slick as anybody. He had a good right jab, good endurance, he could slip shots, and proved against Kalambay that he could actually punch too (wicked counter left hand).


Any more examples of underachievers or just wasted talent?

[Mike Tyson Jr.]

Originally Posted by JUYJUY

Those who have wasted talent include the likes of Chris Eubank and Naseem Hamed. Those who have underachieved include the likes of Herol Graham. But there's one that stands out more than the rest.

Eubank could of been fighter of the decade. Eubank could of won everything if he took the sport more seriously and if the Watson tragedy didn't happen. Eubank was all skill, as sharp as a cat, and when he had a man hurt Pre-Watson he was a deadly finisher. But the Watson tragedy caused him to lose his punch and lose any focussed aggression. And also, Eubank was only ever in the sport for the money which is a shame.

Hamed's natural speed and power, Graham style defence, and combination punching made him the hottest prospect in boxing around 94/95 (much like Nigel Benn was the hottest prospect in boxing around 88/89), but Hamed hasn't had any decent performances since Tom Johnson and his best ever performance remains Steve Robinson. Hamed simply stopped training hard and by 97/98 was a shadow of his former self, his defence wasn't up to scratch anymore and he just stopped punching in combinations while becoming reliant on only looking for one-punch KO's.

'Bomber' Graham is the best fighter of our lifetime not to win a world title. He was an elusive, defensive southpaw, a slick switch-hitter, quick hands and feet, and made Pernell Whitaker look easy to hit. Unfortunately for Graham, his punching power didn't match his punching accuracy. Graham would of been Hagler's, Hearns', Leonard's or Duran's toughest ever fight, but the prospect of a light-punching, defensive fighter did little to attract American audience. Graham of 86 has a very good chance against Hagler of 86, Graham was actually #1 contender before Hagler-Leonard. Graham is the man who both McCallum and Jackson described as their "most awkward ever opponent".

But there's one guy who was the grandmaster of wasting what talent he had and underachieving...... MICHAEL NUNN.

Nunn was the best fighter of his era before drugs got him between the Kalambay and Toney fights. He was better than Tyson, better than Holyfield, better than Eubank, better than Whitaker. He had EVERYTHING going for him but decided to become a coke head instead. He was a tall, rangy southpaw who was very quick and as slick as anybody. He had a good right jab, good endurance, he could slip shots, and proved against Kalambay that he could actually punch too (wicked counter left hand).


Any more examples of underachievers or just wasted talent?

I have some old tapes of
Michael Nunn in my collection.
he wasnt in the same league as
Tyson,Holyfield, Whitaker. he was
a B level fighter.

[JUYJUY]

Originally Posted by Mike Tyson Jr.

I have some old tapes of
Michael Nunn in my collection.
he wasnt in the same league as
Tyson,Holyfield, Whitaker. he was
a B level fighter.

You don't have any old tapes of Michael Nunn Pre-Kalambay, or you wouldn't of made that comment.

[Mike Tyson Jr.]

Originally Posted by JUYJUY

You don't have any old tapes of Michael Nunn Pre-Kalambay, or you wouldn't of made that comment.

if he was in the league of
the greats like Whitaker than
he would have not lossed to James Toney.

[JUYJUY]

Originally Posted by Mike Tyson Jr.

if he was in the league of
the greats like Whitaker than
he would have not lossed to James Toney.

Are you blind? I said the Pre-Kalambay Nunn, before drugs got him. Watch Nunn in his early career and nobody could catch him, he was ****ing awesome. He was better than all of them.

[theironone]

thats cos he was fighting fighters not in the top class, he was good but not great, what about Aaron pryor drugs wrecked him too, have a coke and a smile and **** up your boxing career

[RwK]

Originally Posted by Mike Tyson Jr.

if he was in the league of
the greats like Whitaker than
he would have not lossed to James Toney.

If Tyson was great....how did he lose to Buster Douglas?

[Mike Tyson Jr.]

Originally Posted by RunWithKnives

If Tyson was great....how did he lose to Buster Douglas?

Because Kevin Rooney stopped training
him and tyson came in at the heaviest
at that time and he wasnt as sharp as
he used to be cuase he changed trainers.
douglas beat a fighter not in his prime.

[JUYJUY]

Originally Posted by theironone

thats cos he was fighting fighters not in the top class, he was good but not great

"he was good but not great" Exactly, he wasn't great and that's the whole point of this thread. But he was better than those who were greater than him. You only have to watch Nunn in his early career to see what talent he had, he was so quick and slick and looked impossible to beat. It's hard to put many fighters in that class based on how quick and slick he obviously was before drugs got him. He was better than Roy Jones.

[jabsRstiff]

JUYJUY vs. MikeTysonJr. -


"When Nutlickers Collide".