Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mustafa Hamsho-the best middleweight that never won a title?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by mickey malone View Post
    Beat me to it with Langford and Carter... I'd say Hamsho's a worthy contender to.. I think Herol Graham falls into this category also... I know he was brutally KO'd by Jackson, but I also think it's fair to say that Graham was making him look ******, until the ****** Islander pulled it out the bag.. Should also be mentioned, that he gave Mike McCallum & Sambu Kalambay all they could handle over 12...
    Yeah, Graham def falls into this category. One of the top 5 mw's to never win a major title.

    I'd also add Olajide on that list, altho he also competed as a smw. He still was an underachiever. He lost to Barkley because he couldn't get his rhythm going and his shoes were slippery as well. He did put him down in the 4th and had he fought like he did against Hearns, he'd certainly survive the 12 rounds and maybe take the decision.
    Last edited by Benncollinsaad; 10-01-2009, 08:10 AM.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Benncollinsaad View Post
      The title says it all. Hamsho was definitely one of the top 10 mws in the 80's, yet he never won a title. Had a brave attempt against Hagler the first time. Beat Alan Minter, young Bobby Czyz.
      IMO Hamsho was fortunate to get the nod over Minter, Herol Graham would have taken Hamsho to school, i would also fancy Roldan, Sibson, Frank Fletcher and Mark Kaylor to handle Hamsho in the 80s

      Comment


      • #13
        Michael Watson
        Holman Williams
        Herol Graham

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Benncollinsaad View Post
          Yeah, Graham def falls into this category. One of the top 5 mw's to never win a major title.

          I'd also add Olajide on that list, altho he also competed as a smw. He still was an underachiever. He lost to Barkley because he couldn't get his rhythm going and his shoes were slippery as well. He did put him down in the 4th and had he fought like he did against Hearns, he'd certainly survive the 12 rounds and maybe take the decision.
          Olajide was widely tipped to win the title, but his rise & fall, all happened too quickly.. Had a slick style and was exciting to watch, came up around the same time as another mentionable in James Kinchen, who also gave Hearns a good scrap, but I can't remember if they ever faced one another...

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Benncollinsaad View Post
            Carter lost to Giardello and a few other top mws of that time. Hamsho lost to Hagler, who was a better fighter, perhaps much better than Giardello. Your case sounds pretty thin.

            Didn't he also lose to **** Tiger?
            ....... Overall Carter fought better opposition, so I'd expect him to have more losses. And talent isn't measured by who comes up in the L column on a resume. We already established resume wise neither fighter has a significant advantage. Talent is measured by watching the two guys fight, and evaluating their skills.

            And for the record, if the two ever met h2h, Carter would knock Hamsho the hell out.

            Originally posted by Benncollinsaad View Post
            Yeah, Graham def falls into this category. One of the top 5 mw's to never win a major title.

            I'd also add Olajide on that list, altho he also competed as a smw. He still was an underachiever. He lost to Barkley because he couldn't get his rhythm going and his shoes were slippery as well. He did put him down in the 4th and had he fought like he did against Hearns, he'd certainly survive the 12 rounds and maybe take the decision.
            How are you defining this list of Middleweights? Middleweights that never competed in other weight classes? That's about the only way he MIGHT make the list.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by Obama View Post
              ....... Overall Carter fought better opposition, so I'd expect him to have more losses. And talent isn't measured by who comes up in the L column on a resume. We already established resume wise neither fighter has a significant advantage. Talent is measured by watching the two guys fight, and evaluating their skills.

              And for the record, if the two ever met h2h, Carter would knock Hamsho the hell out.



              How are you defining this list of Middleweights? Middleweights that never competed in other weight classes? That's about the only way he MIGHT make the list.
              Hey, Herol Bomber Graham would ice Carter or any other of your choices!

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Obama View Post
                Ummmm, talent?

                Talent is not the end all in boxing. If it was guys like Zab Judah and Ricardo Williams would be legends. Intangibles such as toughness and heart are much more important in my opinion.


                [QUOTE]
                Originally posted by Obama View Post
                ....... Overall Carter fought better opposition, so I'd expect him to have more losses. And talent isn't measured by who comes up in the L column on a resume. We already established resume wise neither fighter has a significant advantage. Talent is measured by watching the two guys fight, and evaluating their skills.

                Carters resume is no better than Hamsho's, and he has more losses in less fights and was finished as a top fighter by 27 years old. Looking like the better fighter doesn't make someone the better fighter.


                And for the record, if the two ever met h2h, Carter would knock Hamsho the hell out.

                I highly doubt that would happen. Hamsho always showed a sturdy chin and Carter wasn't the big puncher his win over Griffith might indicate. This fight would come down to a battle of wills and almost definitely come down to a decision.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Carter was a massive puncher. This is not up for debate. Get rid of any 1 fight he ever had and he'd still be considered a massive puncher. Hansho is getting KOed. He was far from an elusive target. He'd try to play rough with Carter and it would backfire, as Carter was simply too strong.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Obama View Post
                    And for the record, if the two ever met h2h, Carter would knock Hamsho the hell out.
                    And for the record, the h2h argument is flawed,****** and wrong and can never be applied as a legitimate argument to a topic.

                    You never do change unfortunately, dunce.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by Obama View Post
                      Carter was a massive puncher. This is not up for debate.
                      Originally posted by Obama View Post
                      Get rid of any 1 fight he ever had and he'd still be considered a massive puncher. Hansho is getting KOed. He was far from an elusive target. He'd try to play rough with Carter and it would backfire, as Carter was simply too strong.

                      Its without a doubt up to debate. As I've already stated, Carter was spent by age 27, and the man only had 19 ko's in 40 fights. Sorry *****, that is not a massive puncher. Getting a highlight reel ko, doesn't make you a massive puncher anymore than hitting a grand slam make you a consistent home run hitter. I know Carter could wallop pretty good, but Hamsho could take it even better.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP