most overrated fighters in history

Boxrec.com has created a generation of boxing fans with no substance or depth. :nonono: This thread clearly shows that.

he was flat footed did not know how to cut the ring down and was not an intelligent fighter thats why he pulled his arm out the socket trying to hit thin air and why he kept coming foward in straight lines against Ali he had a long jab agreed but not a very good one i hate to shatter peoples illusions but just because they old it does not make the better or untouchable or imune to criticism That's not accurate. Liston was very good at cutting off the ring which is why he was knocking just about everybody out. All top fighters in the division too. When he fought Ali he was facing the fastest heavyweight in the history of boxing. And no heavyweight before or since moved with the refexes of that version of Ali. As for the jab, Liston had one of the most punishing, powerful jabs in history. Rread up on what a 39 year old Liston's jab did to Chuck Wepner's face. Liston had one of the best heavyweight jabs in history and that's not debatable. This is not coming from an old guy either.

Prime Mike Tyson because of catskills23 Catskills said he had tourette's syndrome

Prime Mike Tyson because of catskills23

Honestly, I get the feeling that most of these "boxing fans" didn't even watch that. It was a good series if you took it in the right context. They just watch when their favorite unbeaten fighter is on HBO. If he loses then they look for a new hero. Agreed. I think Legendary nights focuses more on the drama surrounding the fight rather than the greatness of the fighter. The best one I watched was the Chavez-Taylor one episode. That one had tragic overtones that I really didn't take into consideration until I watched it. I knew it was bad though. Richard Steels actions were disgraceful.

Liston is always on people's ATG list because he belongs there. He was more than just "that dude that lost to Clay": People have really forgotten how good Sonny was in his prime; back when he was smashing Cleveland Williams twice. You really need to watch more fights: Just because you haven't seen someone on HBO doesn't mean he wasn't any good. Poet he was flat footed did not know how to cut the ring down and was not an intelligent fighter thats why he pulled his arm out the socket trying to hit thin air and why he kept coming foward in straight lines against Ali he had a long jab agreed but not a very good one i hate to shatter peoples illusions but just because they old it does not make the better or untouchable or imune to criticism

Pernell Whitaker, was a runner just like Mayweather and Joan Guzman, they are just in the wrong sport they should have tried Track and field, they just bored the hell out of me.

Liston is always on the ATG lists that is overrated not underrated IMO Like Poet says, it's because he belongs there. Most people that do rate him place him in the lower top 10. That's pretty accurate, but no, he is often ignored/forgotten because of his accomplishments. But if you analyze his skills and abilities in his prime you wonder how he's not as popular as other fighters. Liston is always on people's ATG list because he belongs there. He was more than just "that dude that lost to Clay": People have really forgotten how good Sonny was in his prime; back when he was smashing Cleveland Williams twice. You really need to watch more fights: Just because you haven't seen someone on HBO doesn't mean he wasn't any good. Poet Liston was unfortunate to peak late in age, and in an era where there weren't enough all time greats for him to beat. Not to mention that young Lion Cassius Clay who proved to be the antichrist for him in and out of the ring. So I agree, he is often overshadowed and ignored.

I'm hearing all of this but the bottom line is his best win is over Anthony Mundine. Two wins over Taylor alone pretty much trumps that. Also we are talking resume here, the fact that he was galant in defeat against Joe does not come into the discussion. I agree that he is an extremely good fighter and that he would have a very good chance of beating Pavlik, but at the moment he does not have the resume to support being rated alongside him. I am hearing you too, but I disagree. I don't see how a pair of victories over one opponent, who himself has some pretty big (and valid) question marks against him is enough to elevate one boxer that highly above another. It's just one guy. Throw in the fact that 1) Kessler actually does look a better boxer than Pavlik and 2) that disregarding the Calzaghe result man for man his resume is actually better than Pavliks (also Pavlik never faced anyone as good as Joe), I would rate Kessler very close to Pavlik. OK, in the results based P4P list you can't have him up there, but in terms of how good he actually is, of course you can. Agree to disagree I guess.

So let me get this straight, Abadger. Taylor and Pavlik are shit. Calzaghe is astonishing. And Kessler is brilliant. Is it any wonder you irritate so many people when you are so fucking unbelievably biased? But I believe a far greater number believe me to be pretty objective. Its not that much of a stretch to believe 1) that the P4P #2 is good, and 2) that Mikkel Kessler is better than Jermain Taylor or Pavlik is it?

Kessler's resume really isn't that bad. He stopped Siaca for the WBA title, defended against a much better Mundine than we see today, then the solid Eric Lucas, then hammered longtime WBC champ Beyer although Beyer was past it really. Next up was an extremely credible defence against Andrade and he then sought unification against Calzaghe. All in all Kessler probably faced and beat the best fighters he possibly could have at the time, none of these fights were what I would call soft, especially considering his youth. Most of these fighters I would say were on Miranda's level and Mundine probably not a million miles from the Taylor that fought Pavlik. Perhaps most importantly of all, until Calzaghe, he outclassed all of those guys pretty easily too. I'm hearing all of this but the bottom line is his best win is over Anthony Mundine. Two wins over Taylor alone pretty much trumps that. Also we are talking resume here, the fact that he was galant in defeat against Joe does not come into the discussion. I agree that he is an extremely good fighter and that he would have a very good chance of beating Pavlik, but at the moment he does not have the resume to support being rated alongside him.

Kessler is definately underrated but it is with good reason. Whilst he has been impressive in several of his victories to this point his resume is extremely weak. His best win is Anthony Mundine. Kessler's resume really isn't that bad. He stopped Siaca for the WBA title, defended against a much better Mundine than we see today, then the solid Eric Lucas, then hammered longtime WBC champ Beyer although Beyer was past it really. Next up was an extremely credible defence against Andrade and he then sought unification against Calzaghe. All in all Kessler probably faced and beat the best fighters he possibly could have at the time, none of these fights were what I would call soft, especially considering his youth. Most of these fighters I would say were on Miranda's level and Mundine probably not a million miles from the Taylor that fought Pavlik. Perhaps most importantly of all, until Calzaghe, he outclassed all of those guys pretty easily too.

Just like Hopkins's resume at 160 sucking, it wasn't a result of ducking or anything like that... it's just unfortunate that he (Kessler) is second best in a division with one of the two best fighters in boxing, himself, and a whole lot of lack of talent below him. Librado Andrade is actually probably his best win. Markus Beyer isn't a terrible win either, and Mundine is probably up there too. Whilst he looked really impressive against Andrade I don't class that as a great win as the opponent posed very little offsensive threat. Beyer is a bum who struggled past Danny Green. Mundine is easily his best win IMO. I say all this as a pretty big Kessler fan, I have been ever since he beat Mundine so convincingly out here. I just really want to see him step it up and stop beating these really average guys I have never heard of.

Kessler is definately underrated but it is with good reason. Whilst he has been impressive in several of his victories to this point his resume is extremely weak. His best win is Anthony Mundine. Just like Hopkins's resume at 160 sucking, it wasn't a result of ducking or anything like that... it's just unfortunate that he (Kessler) is second best in a division with one of the two best fighters in boxing, himself, and a whole lot of lack of talent below him. Librado Andrade is actually probably his best win. Markus Beyer isn't a terrible win either, and Mundine is probably up there too.

This would be maybe my favourite makeable fight after Calzaghe/ Pavlik. You are perfectly right about Kessler, he's excellent and you only really have to watch him to see it. Sadly I have the genuine feeling that we'll never see Kessler in with a big US name like Pavlik, after all, why in God's name would they fight him? I think to get it he'll have to go the Calzaghe route and go through Bute and Froch then maybe he'll get a crack at Taylor or someone. The longer Calzaghe holds onto his Ring 168 belt the worse for Kessler, because that would help him no end. This is a perfect post. 100% agreement from me. Don't get too down on it though, Kessler could easily get Jermain Taylor to fight him at some point, and since Taylor is so overrated, a victory over him would make Kessler so much more marketable.

I am like you in thinking that Mikkel Kessler is better than Kelly Pavlik, but I don't think it is by a lot. I just get frustrated because Kessler is so wildly underrated by everyone and Pavlik is so wildly overrated by everyone (which I suppose is what you were saying in your original post)... I think their ratings should be a lot closer to one another. I do think Kessler would beat Pavlik if they ever fought they, and damn... I really wish they would. It would be a pretty badass fight. Kessler is definately underrated but it is with good reason. Whilst he has been impressive in several of his victories to this point his resume is extremely weak. His best win is Anthony Mundine.

I am like you in thinking that Mikkel Kessler is better than Kelly Pavlik, but I don't think it is by a lot. I just get frustrated because Kessler is so wildly underrated by everyone and Pavlik is so wildly overrated by everyone (which I suppose is what you were saying in your original post)... I think their ratings should be a lot closer to one another. I do think Kessler would beat Pavlik if they ever fought they, and damn... I really wish they would. It would be a pretty badass fight. This would be maybe my favourite makeable fight after Calzaghe/ Pavlik. You are perfectly right about Kessler, he's excellent and you only really have to watch him to see it. Sadly I have the genuine feeling that we'll never see Kessler in with a big US name like Pavlik, after all, why in God's name would they fight him? I think to get it he'll have to go the Calzaghe route and go through Bute and Froch then maybe he'll get a crack at Taylor or someone. The longer Calzaghe holds onto his Ring 168 belt the worse for Kessler, because that would help him no end.

Basically I think Pavlik IS what he appears to be, which is a straightforward puncher with the pop to overwhelm a lot of opponents. Unless he improves dramatically (which he might, fighters do get better with time) I can't see him beating the better class of boxer out there, he is too predictable and too reliant on his power. I am too harsh on him though, it comes from being a Joe fan and all that that comes with on here. I am like you in thinking that Mikkel Kessler is better than Kelly Pavlik, but I don't think it is by a lot. I just get frustrated because Kessler is so wildly underrated by everyone and Pavlik is so wildly overrated by everyone (which I suppose is what you were saying in your original post)... I think their ratings should be a lot closer to one another. I do think Kessler would beat Pavlik if they ever fought they, and damn... I really wish they would. It would be a pretty badass fight.

calzaghe haye marciano

I think it is too early to say that Pavlik is overrated... Even though he has not had the best opposition, since I think Taylor is wildly overrated, and Miranda clearly sucks (that cat is pretty obviously out of the bag at this point on that issue), he has passed all of his tests with flying colors. Only a few dispute that Pavlik won the rematch against Taylor, and he looked pretty good, even in his closest call in the rematch. He is still very young, so he has plenty of time to improve the fighters on his resume, and we will really see what he is made of against Bernard Hopkins. Now, obviously no one looks good against B-Hop, but... if he wins against Hopkins, I do think that means that he really is the real deal. I would like to see Pavlik fight Abraham, Sturm, Wright, Calzaghe and Kessler for sure before he retires (which is an extremely long way off). I would also like to see him fight Dawson and whoever else is at the top of LHW if he ever moves up there. Basically I think Pavlik IS what he appears to be, which is a straightforward puncher with the pop to overwhelm a lot of opponents. Unless he improves dramatically (which he might, fighters do get better with time) I can't see him beating the better class of boxer out there, he is too predictable and too reliant on his power. I am too harsh on him though, it comes from being a Joe fan and all that that comes with on here.