Current Underachievers

Khan reached his potential already. He does some things really well but hes not well rounded, hes got weaknesses. I dont think he will ever be back on top or ever be the best in a division again. One loss you could write off as bad luck but its happening over and over, its a trend. Donaire though, I dont think he is living up to his potential by fighting guys like Arce. He is incredibly skilled but he isnt challenging himself. He could beat mares if he could be bothered to make that fight. Dawson I think did about as good as he can do. He is skilled but not everyone can be an ATG. Dawson has the physical skills and talent to be great, but not the mental fortitude, and having the physical skill set is only half of what you need to be great. The problem with Dawson is quite obvious, he switches trainers too much therefore he's always going to back to square one. You know when a boxer gets a new trainer, the trainer has to analyze the fighter see how he works, what's his strengths and weakness, what's an effective way of training him, etc. That's why Chad is never progressing but always regressing. He really is a ****ing moron, he clearly has confidence issues which is why he switches trainers too much, blames the trainer but not himself. He's ducked numerous fighters in his career (Diaconu and Cloud), and made a lot of bad career decisions (deciding to fight Ward at 168 for example).

SOLIS Has natural talent, experience and blinding speed. But still turns up for that crucial, career-defining fight with Vitali looking like a fat, middle-aged slob dragged away from an all-you-can-eat ice cream parlour. Why do that when you are a seriously quick, hard-hitting and talented heavyweight? Loses the fight by being too porky and twisting a knee, tragic. Really, tragic. Even Tony Tubbs, Greg Page and Mike Dokes did not manage that. CHRIS JOHN He's been a world featherweight kingpin for years. But only ever seems to face guys from the next village/beach resort and beats them, boringly on points. I think that John can actually fight, so why not finally meet someone who does not catch prawns and tuna for a living?

chris arreola. fat bastard.

Guzman Gamboa

I think Amir Khan has underachieved in the sense that when he was coming out of the Olympics, no one would have expected him to lose to Prescott, Garcia and Peterson calibur fighters. But, he fights the best.

zab judah. Not a huge fan but always thought if he were more fcoused and professional he'd have been the best.

He did beat Valuev. I'm not sure if a win over Adamek or Povetkin would be more impressive than Valuev - perhaps as impressive, but not more. That's the point though isn't it? the more impressive wins, the better and Haye isn't staying active. He could potentially have Adamek, Povetkin, Arreola, Chagaev and Vitali on his CV along with wins over Valuev, Chisora and Ruiz.

good ones so far. andre dirrell might be my number one. jorge linares yuriorkis gamboa (he's an odd case. he spent much of his prime as an amateur.) joan guzman 3 great choices here.

Joan Guzman Oladier Solis Andre Berto Victor Ortiz Just off the top of my head.

You can say anyone is an underachiever. Lewis shouldn't have lost the fights he did and Tyson shouldn't have lost to Douglas. Therefore, Lewis and Tyson must be underachievers. I'm not talking about fighters getting upset by other fighters, I'm talking about their accomplishments. Lewis and Tyson were both undisputed heavyweight champions. If you start your career at heavyweight, that's about as far as you can go.

He did beat Valuev. I'm not sure if a win over Adamek or Povetkin would be more impressive than Valuev - perhaps as impressive, but not more. Valuev was beaten by Chagaev, whereas Povetkin has beaten Chagaev, Byrd, and Chambers. Adamek has beaten Arreola and has only ever lost to Vitali and Chad Dawson. Both Adamek and Povetkin are bigger wins.

Is Khan really an underachiever? I think people mistake his often spectacular offence with the broader idea of superb talent. He has some very significant weaknesses that have eventually caught up with him, and with those weaknesses it's hard to see how much higher the guy could go. He's a title holder, and maybe a divisional champ if gets the right opponents. But he's not going to rule a division, there's too much stuff he doesn't know how to deal with. the guy is crazy fast. he has a few flaws that turn into game changers. defense and chin, mainly. if he fixed his defense he'd be a much rougher go. if he had an iron chin and a great defense he'd be very hard to beat at 140 lbs. he's crazy fast, tall at the weight, and he's got some steam.

good ones so far. andre dirrell might be my number one. jorge linares yuriorkis gamboa (he's an odd case. he spent much of his prime as an amateur.) joan guzman

You can say anyone is an underachiever. Lewis shouldn't have lost the fights he did and Tyson shouldn't have lost to Douglas. Therefore, Lewis and Tyson must be underachievers.

He could and should be doing much more at HW He did beat Valuev. I'm not sure if a win over Adamek or Povetkin would be more impressive than Valuev - perhaps as impressive, but not more.

Is Khan really an underachiever? I think people mistake his often spectacular offence with the broader idea of superb talent. He has some very significant weaknesses that have eventually caught up with him, and with those weaknesses it's hard to see how much higher the guy could go. He's a title holder, and maybe a divisional champ if gets the right opponents. But he's not going to rule a division, there's too much stuff he doesn't know how to deal with. But if guys like Hatton and Malignaggi - fighters who are shorter and slower than Khan - were able to win titles at 140 and 147, then shouldn't Khan be able to do at least that much?

Is Khan really an underachiever? I think people mistake his often spectacular offence with the broader idea of superb talent. He has some very significant weaknesses that have eventually caught up with him, and with those weaknesses it's hard to see how much higher the guy could go. He's a title holder, and maybe a divisional champ if gets the right opponents. But he's not going to rule a division, there's too much stuff he doesn't know how to deal with.

Really?. I disagree, although I did expect him to be competitive against Klitschko. Haye was the undisputed cruiserweight champ and did win a title at heavyweight. He's still the best heavyweight not named Klitschko. He could and should be doing much more at HW

I think Chris John is another fighter for this list. Apart from a questionable decision against Marquez, his biggest name is Rocky Juarez. And it's not like there weren't any good fighters in his weight class - gamboa, salido, lopez... He's by no means a great fighter, but he could have done more.

Khan reached his potential already. He does some things really well but hes not well rounded, hes got weaknesses. I dont think he will ever be back on top or ever be the best in a division again. One loss you could write off as bad luck but its happening over and over, its a trend. Donaire though, I dont think he is living up to his potential by fighting guys like Arce. He is incredibly skilled but he isnt challenging himself. He could beat mares if he could be bothered to make that fight. Dawson I think did about as good as he can do. He is skilled but not everyone can be an ATG. The only thing Khan needs is a defence, but if his career has in fact peaked then his talent's been wasted. Then again, he's made millions of dollars so no need to feel bad for the guy. Donaire's knocking out old guys at 122, but that's who Arum keeps putting in front of him. However, he did blast out a lot of top guys from 112-118 and he's likely to fight Rigo next (but we can't give credit for that until he actually beats him). Dawson is a mystery to me. He has everything a fighter needs to be great, but he's stuck at good.