No hate for Jermaine Taylor, but why do people say he was a good fighter?

I thought Taylor beat Pavlik in the rematch, at least I scored it for Taylor. And the New York Post also had it for Taylor. He went 12 with Froch and was winning before the KO. He went 24 rounds with Hopkins and won both fights. He went 12 with Winky Wright in a back to back fight. He beat tough fighters like Spinks, Joppy, Ouma. He has TKO wins over lesser known/okay fighters like Raul Marquez, Alex Bunema, and Grady Brewer who just stopped Fernando Guerrero. So to say he's a shit fighter is going overboard and having no respect for boxing at all.

Come on guys, Taylor wasn't a good fighter. This is true as it gets. There were guys who beat Cory Spinks more convicningly than Taylor did. Like Latimore. And drawing with Winky Wright with the kind of size advantage Taylor had isn't anything special either. LOL, I remember watching that fight and people rejecting as a dull fight before it even started. It was an exciting fight that Cory Spinks won. I don't know where you got that Spinks lost.

Come on guys, Taylor wasn't a good fighter. This is true as it gets. There were guys who beat Cory Spinks more convicningly than Taylor did. Like Latimore. And drawing with Winky Wright with the kind of size advantage Taylor had isn't anything special either. I thought the spinks fight was a robbery. And saying latimore beat spinks is said. he was so far removed at that point.

I don't hate Taylor and don't think he was a shit fighter. Just think he was ordinary. I dont hate him I just think he was not even close to the skill level people had rated him at. He was far from great and barely good. His best attribute was his young athletic star power which was the hopes to bring boxing back to a rise especially in his few years when boxing took a downward spiral. He never lived up to the hype, I'm glad he tried and appreciate his heart but look at David Reid thats what he compares to a fighter everyone wanted to love and had so much hope in but when put in a tough situation he flopped.

Overrated. Had the great fortune of going up against Hopkins when he was done as a MW. I think BHop would've whooped his ass with more energy at 175.

He beat Bhop!!! He had to be good he beat good and great fighters. If it wasnt for his stamina issues would have clearly beat Pavlik the first fight. Great jab when it was going and good skill set. Footwork wasnt that good but he had potential to be great. Some boxers never be the same after they lose. Before he lost he pretty good. Was a good draw for american and was working on being a big draw.

Taylor was a sh*t fighter, the only thing he had was lunging punches and maybe an ok jab but to say he won the Hopkins fights is just BS because Hopkins was robbed both times. Taylor only got the decisions because people wanted to see a new champ and one that was young and fresh and could be a poster boy. When put in with any fighter that was considered a pressure fighter he got his as* whooped. Hopkins was a big mouth, who didnt care what anyone said and did his own thing his own way in and out of the ring and people didnt like that. Once again I will say Taylor was trash he was just a wanna be poster boy for boxing that people wanted to believe in and never lived up to his hype. I don't hate Taylor and don't think he was a shit fighter. Just think he was ordinary.

At the very least he fought Hopkins even twice. Only very good fighters could do that.

I remember Jim Lampley saying "Jermain Taylor is the fastest, strongest middleweight I've ever seen" and he had that frog in his throat. It was like he REALLY didn't wanna say that. :rofl: Taylor was always vastly overrated.

That when Taylor lost, it was knockout losses to Kelly Pavlick, Carl Froch, and Arthur Abraham. Look at the career knockout percentages of those three fighters. They are all murderous punchers. Taylors biggest problem over the last few years of his career, and maybe his entire career, was defence. If he wasnt so easy to hit, he would have beaten all three of the men who knocked him out.

Taylor was a sh*t fighter, the only thing he had was lunging punches and maybe an ok jab but to say he won the Hopkins fights is just BS because Hopkins was robbed both times. Taylor only got the decisions because people wanted to see a new champ and one that was young and fresh and could be a poster boy. When put in with any fighter that was considered a pressure fighter he got his as* whooped. Hopkins was a big mouth, who didnt care what anyone said and did his own thing his own way in and out of the ring and people didnt like that. Once again I will say Taylor was trash he was just a wanna be poster boy for boxing that people wanted to believe in and never lived up to his hype.

his style was really ugly but he was effective at the end

Taylor was a good fighter. He beat B hop twice at 160. He had a draw with a great defensive fighter in Winkey. He had Pavlic badly hurt in their first fight. He was the first man to knock down Froch and had he lasted the 12th, he would have won. He was good. He just needed better D and a bit more chin.

Taylor completely outclassed Froch for most of the fight. Not really. The fight was a lot like a Margarito-Cotto or Chavez-Taylor type affair where one guy is landing with speed and the TV guys get all carried away while the other guy just keeps landing thudding, harder, multiplying stuff. You could see Froch really chipping away the whole second half and it was WAY closer than the scores. I had Froch down 1 going into the final round.

You must keep in mind That when Taylor lost, it was knockout losses to Kelly Pavlick, Carl Froch, and Arthur Abraham. Look at the career knockout percentages of those three fighters. They are all murderous punchers.

Taylor completely outclassed Froch for most of the fight. The guy definitely has talent. Too bad about his stamina and chin issues.

Outside of the two iffy decisions he got he lost to Abraham of all guys and he never beat anybody who meant anything. He was, undoubtedly, a 'good' fighter if you use a broad definition. No one gets to the point he did (fighting a still VERY good Hopkins close (I had him losing and drawing with Hops in that order but still...) and snaring some D's) without being good. He and Froch, he and Pavlik? Wars. He lost. Gotta be pretty good to be in a memorable war with other good fighters. Abraham just had a bad run but look at the level of foe. Abraham was another tough out. If someone starts talking about where Taylor rates with the all time Middles or something, if that's the bar, then fire away. But Taylor's sin wasn't not being good. It was not being good enough.

Taylor was a guy who was so close to being very good or great. I think he was still a good fighter though you could argue he lost to Spinks and Winky on top of the Hopkins fights. The last time I ever felt like **** after a fight was Froch/Taylor. He's still hit Froch more than any other fighter and knocked him down too. Against AA his punch resistance was shot.

The guy put iron chinned Froch on his ass, came less than 10 seconds away from beating him and beat Bernard Hopkins twice and he's not good? Being competitive against Hopkins alone automatically makes you good because he's great. But to beat him? You're crazy to say he's not good. He's the only one at the time I think would have given Calslappy a run for his money.

he continually fought the best and paid the price for it. he could have fought bums and been up to 13 or 14 title defenses and been an all time great by now. oh well.