Which fighters do you feel are historically overrated

[The Old LefHook]

Harry Greb fought more Hall of Fame fighters than almost any other fighter in history...

Mike Tyson had one of the greatest chin's in Heavyweight history. No fighter ever poleaxed Mike Tyson, there had to be a breaking down process go on first. Were Tyson would take sustained beating over the course of 6rds or more before he succumbed to the onslaught (Douglas & Holyfield).. his losses at the tail-end of his career was when addicted to anti-depressants, alcohol, ******* & cannabis. No fighter, not even Muhammad Ali could fight while addicted to Anti-depressants.

Tyson had a good chin. You are correct that he had to be broken down first and could take an ugly beating in the process.

To make the leap from there that Tyson had one of the greatest chins in heavyweight history has only your contention to support it that since he was on drugs he must have had an all time great chin to take beatings from such monsters as Danny Williams et al.

Medium punching Holyfield was too much for him. How is his chin any better than others who Holy wore down and took out late? Only in your fabrications, Sonny.

Mike had a pretty sturdy chin, better than, say, Norton and Patterson. But any more than that he did not prove. Alas, this is the case with the whole of the Tyson career. His AT reputation is based explicitly on an early brilliance against medium opposition. No one ever looked better going through the contenders and paper champs. But he never beat a fighter who will have the word great appended to his name by any writer. He lost to more fighters who will never have this disticntion than to those who will.

Since his resume lacks victories over great opponents, and you are still a victim of the Tyson hypnosis most of us were able to break after a good look at the evidence, you have to find some backdoor through which to elevate his status. You do not have a whit of information regarding how others might do "addicted to drugs." Do you have a pharmacology degree? Of course I will need all the medical notes on Tyson, so I can ascertain if you have assessed the degree of his addiction and debilitation correctly. All this so you can make some wild leap regarding how good his chin must have been when he was not on drugs because of how good you see it was when he was on them.

You keep hammering away in every post on Tyson with the word "addicted" like it is some absolute pronouncement and bell of doom, like Tyson was holed up in a crack house between fights. The person on drugs seems to be you as you make your twisted assessments. Doctors will give a diagnosis of addiction under a variety of disparate circumstances. Doctors can be paid to testify to anything, if it would help in court. Treatment for "addiction" is standard practice in most U.S. states under plea bargain and probation deals after a vehicular arrest under the influence. It has nothing to do with actual addicition. It is simply where our court system pipes offenders of certain statutes.

Boxers get credit for only the historical accolades they earn. Squandered potential is just that. They get no credit for whay they might have been with a different psychology or if they didn't smoke pot.

I have heard of deep hypnosis, lad, but you are a miraculous medical anomaly. If anyone of us knew the words while we count three and snap our fingers, we would say them and wake you, dear Sonny. Give everyone credit for still trying.

The magic phrase is one out of an infinite sea of phrases. If we ever find it you will awake and remember nothing.

[juggernaut666]

Tyson had a good chin. You are correct that he had to be broken down first and could take an ugly beating in the process.

To make the leap from there that Tyson had one of the greatest chins in heavyweight history has only your contention to support it that since he was on drugs he must have had an all time great chin to take beatings from such monsters as Danny Williams et al.

Medium punching Holyfield was too much for him. How is his chin any better than others who Holy wore down and took out late? Only in your fabrications, Sonny.

Mike had a pretty sturdy chin, better than, say, Norton and Patterson. But any more than that he did not prove. Alas, this is the case with the whole of the Tyson career. His AT reputation is based explicitly on an early brilliance against medium opposition. No one ever looked better going through the contenders and paper champs. But he never beat a fighter who will have the word great appended to his name by any writer. He lost to more fighters who will never have this disticntion than to those who will.

Since his resume lacks victories over great opponents, and you are still a victim of the Tyson hypnosis most of us were able to break after a good look at the evidence, you have to find some backdoor through which to elevate his status. You do not have a whit of information regarding how others might do "addicted to drugs." Do you have a pharmacology degree? Of course I will need all the medical notes on Tyson, so I can ascertain if you have assessed the degree of his addiction and debilitation correctly. All this so you can make some wild leap regarding how good his chin must have been when he was not on drugs because of how good you see it was when he was on them.

You keep hammering away in every post on Tyson with the word "addicted" like it is some absolute pronouncement and bell of doom, like Tyson was holed up in a crack house between fights. The person on drugs seems to be you as you make your twisted assessments. Doctors will give a diagnosis of addiction under a variety of disparate circumstances. Doctors can be paid to testify to anything, if it would help in court. Treatment for "addiction" is standard practice in most U.S. states under plea bargain and probation deals after a vehicular arrest under the influence. It has nothing to do with actual addicition. It is simply where our court system pipes offenders of certain statutes.

Boxers get credit for only the historical accolades they earn. Squandered potential is just that. They get no credit for whay they might have been with a different psychology or if they didn't smoke pot.

I have heard of deep hypnosis, lad, but you are a miraculous medical anomaly. If anyone of us knew the words while we count three and snap our fingers, we would say them and wake you, dear Sonny. Give everyone credit for still trying.

The magic phrase is one out of an infinite sea of phrases. If we ever find it you will awake and remember nothing.

You couldn't be more wrong ,Tyson took over 200 punches from Lennox Lewis and completely walked thru another monster puncher Razor Ruddock while actually near prime years ,Ali never had to face such punchers not efen Foreman who never really pounded Ali s chin anyway ,even out of shape a 6'4 230 Douglas had to pound on him for ten rounds before Tyson went down...he certainly has an iron chin when mentally ready,Holyfield was the one instance but he does not hit harder than Ruddock or Lewis ,not even close!Mentioning weak chin Patterson to 220 Tyson is a joke,even to punchers who had 90% k.o percentages like 6'3 240 Frank Bruno.

[NChristo]

There's a left uppercut on the inside about 35 seconds into the video. From 39 seconds to about 43 seconds....that looks like inside fighting to me. 2:05 to 2:08 seems like infighting.

In this gif he throws a compact hook at about as close a distance as you can get:



And here he closes from long range beautifully but then finishes from in close:


Maybe we should clarify what you mean by inside work, though. Do you mean things like shoulder bumps and maneuvering with the head?

Those gifs are perfect examples of his ability to control the distance but neither of them are of Lopez fighting on the inside, be it that he was so good at controlling the distance that he rarely had to / was forced to fight on the inside.

[sonnyboyx2]

Tyson had a good chin. You are correct that he had to be broken down first and could take an ugly beating in the process.

To make the leap from there that Tyson had one of the greatest chins in heavyweight history has only your contention to support it that since he was on drugs he must have had an all time great chin to take beatings from such monsters as Danny Williams et al.

Medium punching Holyfield was too much for him. How is his chin any better than others who Holy wore down and took out late? Only in your fabrications, Sonny.

Mike had a pretty sturdy chin, better than, say, Norton and Patterson. But any more than that he did not prove. Alas, this is the case with the whole of the Tyson career. His AT reputation is based explicitly on an early brilliance against medium opposition. No one ever looked better going through the contenders and paper champs. But he never beat a fighter who will have the word great appended to his name by any writer. He lost to more fighters who will never have this disticntion than to those who will.

Since his resume lacks victories over great opponents, and you are still a victim of the Tyson hypnosis most of us were able to break after a good look at the evidence, you have to find some backdoor through which to elevate his status. You do not have a whit of information regarding how others might do "addicted to drugs." Do you have a pharmacology degree? Of course I will need all the medical notes on Tyson, so I can ascertain if you have assessed the degree of his addiction and debilitation correctly. All this so you can make some wild leap regarding how good his chin must have been when he was not on drugs because of how good you see it was when he was on them.

You keep hammering away in every post on Tyson with the word "addicted" like it is some absolute pronouncement and bell of doom, like Tyson was holed up in a crack house between fights. The person on drugs seems to be you as you make your twisted assessments. Doctors will give a diagnosis of addiction under a variety of disparate circumstances. Doctors can be paid to testify to anything, if it would help in court. Treatment for "addiction" is standard practice in most U.S. states under plea bargain and probation deals after a vehicular arrest under the influence. It has nothing to do with actual addicition. It is simply where our court system pipes offenders of certain statutes.

Boxers get credit for only the historical accolades they earn. Squandered potential is just that. They get no credit for whay they might have been with a different psychology or if they didn't smoke pot.

I have heard of deep hypnosis, lad, but you are a miraculous medical anomaly. If anyone of us knew the words while we count three and snap our fingers, we would say them and wake you, dear Sonny. Give everyone credit for still trying.

The magic phrase is one out of an infinite sea of phrases. If we ever find it you will awake and remember nothing.

Well were do i start with answering this garbage...You claim he "Never beat a fighter who will have the word Great appended to his name by any writer"

Larry Holmes - Tyson knocked out Holmes in 4rds. The only time Holmes has been stopped in 75 professional fights..After that defeat Holmes went 23-3 including 3 world title fights. Holmes is widley regarded by many as ATG Top 5 and by most as ATG Top 10....

Michael Spinks - 31-1 "The man who beat the Man"- The first 175lb Undisputed Champion to win the Heavyweight Title in the history of Professional Boxing. Widely regarded as The Greatest Light-heavyweight Champion in history.. No1 ATG in that division. Spinks twice defeated Larry Holomes the universally recognised Heavyweight Champion.. Mike Tyson knocked out Spinks in 91 seconds.

Both Holmes & Spinks will be lorded as "All Time Greats" for as long as Boxing and it's history, are put into words by writers..

Mike Tyson also defeated:

Frank Bruno - Former world champion
Tony Tubbs - Former world champion
James Smith - Former world champion
Tony Tucker - Former world champion
Trevor Berbick - Former world champion
Pinklon Thomas - Former world champion
Bruce Seldon - Former world champion

Maybe you can point out to me "Where his career lacks victories over great opponents" like you claim?... beating 9 World Champions (7 by KO) seems pretty impressive by any fighters standards.. 7 of those World Champions were still reigning champion when defeated by Tyson.

I won't go on to make a comparrison between Tyson's career achievements and the career of your idol Lennox Lewis. Simply because there is no comparrison between them. Lewis career and his choice of opposition are "Meagre" compared to Mike Tyson's...

Mike Tyson's drug addiction - Tyson's drug addiction has been well documented since the early 1990s. Tyson has even been imprisoned for drug offences.. But you would like to "hairbrush away" that fact, you cannot handle how that destroys your agenda, which is to "Hate" on Mike Tyson at every opportunity possible..

Did Mike Tyson refuse to sign an autograph for you? did he ride your mummy or was he holed up with your daddy?... you need to drop the hatred mate, because trying to preach it to me is like ****ing your head against a brick wall.. I am not no Tyson fanboy nor is he any idol of mine. i talk and debate boxing by facts and the old line you have spewed out: "He never beat any great fighters" etc etc... is a load of rubbish as i have just pointed out to you above... in fact Mike Tyson has one of the greatest resumes in all Heavyweight history.

[The Old LefHook]

Well were do i start with answering this garbage...You claim he "Never beat a fighter who will have the word Great appended to his name by any writer"

Larry Holmes - Tyson knocked out Holmes in 4rds. The only time Holmes has been stopped in 75 professional fights..After that defeat Holmes went 23-3 including 3 world title fights. Holmes is widley regarded by many as ATG Top 5 and by most as ATG Top 10....

Michael Spinks - 31-1 "The man who beat the Man"- The first 175lb Undisputed Champion to win the Heavyweight Title in the history of Professional Boxing. Widely regarded as The Greatest Light-heavyweight Champion in history.. No1 ATG in that division. Spinks twice defeated Larry Holomes the universally recognised Heavyweight Champion.. Mike Tyson knocked out Spinks in 91 seconds.

Both Holmes & Spinks will be lorded as "All Time Greats" for as long as Boxing and it's history, are put into words by writers..

Mike Tyson also defeated:

Frank Bruno - Former world champion
Tony Tubbs - Former world champion
James Smith - Former world champion
Tony Tucker - Former world champion
Trevor Berbick - Former world champion
Pinklon Thomas - Former world champion
Bruce Seldon - Former world champion

Maybe you can point out to me "Where his career lacks victories over great opponents" like you claim?... beating 9 World Champions (7 by KO) seems pretty impressive by any fighters standards.. 7 of those World Champions were still reigning champion when defeated by Tyson.

I won't go on to make a comparrison between Tyson's career achievements and the career of your idol Lennox Lewis. Simply because there is no comparrison between them. Lewis career and his choice of opposition are "Meagre" compared to Mike Tyson's...

Mike Tyson's drug addiction - Tyson's drug addiction has been well documented since the early 1990s. Tyson has even been imprisoned for drug offences.. But you would like to "hairbrush away" that fact, you cannot handle how that destroys your agenda, which is to "Hate" on Mike Tyson at every opportunity possible..

Did Mike Tyson refuse to sign an autograph for you? did he ride your mummy or was he holed up with your daddy?... you need to drop the hatred mate, because trying to preach it to me is like ****ing your head against a brick wall.. I am not no Tyson fanboy nor is he any idol of mine. i talk and debate boxing by facts and the old line you have spewed out: "He never beat any great fighters" etc etc... is a load of rubbish as i have just pointed out to you above... in fact Mike Tyson has one of the greatest resumes in all Heavyweight history.

Yeah, Tyson beat a prime Holmes, didn't he, you idiot? And Spinks was a great heavyweight, wasn't he , you purple-eyed halfwit?

The Holmes fight elevated Tyson to a new level, didnt it? You are so ****** I wonder why I bother with your halfwittedness.

Tyson's big problem was he could never beat a great fighter.

Oh, I forgot. Holmes was great when he fought Tyson. Go crawl back in your hole.

When the best fighter he ever beat has halfwits like you arguing over whether it was Spinks, elderly Holmes or Ruddock, it is already obvious that he lacked great comepetition he could beat.

Because Buster Douglas was 6'3" and weighed 230, he must punch super hard, eh? Maybe your halfwit twin said that, but does it matter? You two are on the same level. Douglas was a semi-bum and a medium puncher, not a super puncher.

Tell us, genius, how taking a lot of small shots means you can take one big one? Be sure and show your work.

How drunk are you most of the time? Absolutely soiling yourself, I imagine from your posts.

[ShoulderRoll]

Again he's clearly not inside there on either clip.

The first clip he's taking half steps back as his opponent is moving forward.

The second clip is also at mid range.

Everytime a fighter found there way inside on Lopez he's clearly uncomfortable and try's to make room for punches. Similarly to how Marquez would.

Those gifs are perfect examples of his ability to control the distance but neither of them are of Lopez fighting on the inside, be it that he was so good at controlling the distance that he rarely had to / was forced to fight on the inside.

Guys, to me knowing how to fight on the inside means knowing how to throw compact punches effectively when close to your opponent. Finito admittedly preferred to fight at longer range but I think I have given enough examples to show that he was not without the ability to be destructive at close range

He might not be like J.C. Chavez in that department but he's also not like Wlad who immediaty clinches when the distance shortens up and who rarely throws punches there. The latter is what I would consider having an inside game that is non-existent.

[joseph5620]

Jack Dempsey

Meldrick Taylor

Julio Cesar Chavez

Jersey Joe Walcott

Gene Tunney

Mike Tyson

Oscar Delahoya

[Humean]

In general fighters from the first half of the twentieth century are overrated, particularly those that fought in the US. Heavyweights in general are also badly overrated. In regards to some specific cases i'd say that on internet forums that Harry Greb and Charley Burley are the two most overrated and even Sugar Ray Robinson in so far as he is like the top trump card that trumps everyone else in fantasy match-ups, as if he was perfect.

[IronDanHamza]

Guys, to me knowing how to fight on the inside means knowing how to throw compact punches effectively when close to your opponent. Finito admittedly preferred to fight at longer range but I think I have given enough examples to show that he was not without the ability to be destructive at close range

He might not be like J.C. Chavez in that department but he's also not like Wlad who immediaty clinches when the distance shortens up and who rarely throws punches there. The latter is what I would consider having an inside game that is non-existent.

I've seen your examples and out of your examples I see no inside fighting at all.

Most of those "short compact punches" are at mid range especially in the gifts you provided.

And no he doesn't clinch like Wlad he usually either shells up or moves out and finds distance.

It's most defintely a clear weakness of his.

[IronDanHamza]

Jack Dempsey

Meldrick Taylor

Julio Cesar Chavez

Jersey Joe Walcott

Gene Tunney

Mike Tyson

Oscar Delahoya

Interesting choice in Tunney.

Why would you say so?

I agree with all the others.