Which fighters historically do you feel are underrated

[Anthony342]

Yeah Oscar fought how fighters should fight, could stick and move and go right at someone and always fought the best.

[McGoorty]

The most underrated boxer of all time today is Les Darcy, outside of his homeland he is virtually forgotten and misses out on 9 out of ten lists these days yet it was not always the case, Darcy was once in every list of the greatest fighters, especially middleweight lists where he was always ranked near the top and in some cases at the very top, even in the late 60's he was on all these lists yet now a few decades later he hardly ever gets put on a list, or is even mentioned in 9 out of 10 boxing books... it is the most mysterious thing in boxing to me since Mysterious Billy Smith was fighting.

[McGoorty]

Gilberto Roman
Duilio Loi
Fritzie Zivic
Dave Sands
Brian Mitchell

yes Dave Sands is highly underrated

[IronDanHamza]

Totally agree and IMO Humean has become one of the better posters here. The thing I so hate with the net is that if one lets a troll troll away it encourages them. I would say this: Use the report button because apparently thats what the mods want done. Maybe this will enable them to get rid of the trolls, I hope so.

I disagree with basically everything Humean says but I'd be lying if I said he didn't know his stuff.

[billeau2]

The most underrated boxer of all time today is Les Darcy, outside of his homeland he is virtually forgotten and misses out on 9 out of ten lists these days yet it was not always the case, Darcy was once in every list of the greatest fighters, especially middleweight lists where he was always ranked near the top and in some cases at the very top, even in the late 60's he was on all these lists yet now a few decades later he hardly ever gets put on a list, or is even mentioned in 9 out of 10 boxing books... it is the most mysterious thing in boxing to me since Mysterious Billy Smith was fighting.

It just goes to show how regular media sources for the masses are on such a base level. McGoorty the truth is that I know this for a fact being I have written for these sources in the martial arts. I have written a post about this and its not to toot my horn, it is to make the point that you are asking about.

When I was writing regularly for Black Belt (among others) which is the most widely circulated martial arts mag, I would deliberately make sure that everything I wrote had a level of content that an average media biased individual would grasp and the reading level would be about that of a very bright fourth grader...thats not really an exxageration by much.

I can almost be certain that people writing for the media making these lists are generally speaking of the same ilk and do not have the knowledge as historians to know about fighters like Les Darcy, hence, the exclusion. Most of the people I wrote with, wrote glorified press releases with the same basic dribble repeated and repackages with a few new technical details in the photos.

Heres a hypothetical example of what 90% of the material looks like in the most widely circulated martial art mag in the world today:

"chim KUm Lee was the third child in a family and his uncle passed the deadly art of egg fu down to him... Lee states " the difference in our art is that we use all ranges of combat, kicks to the outside, punches and grappling closer." But Lees art has an additional twist as he says " we also consider the spiritual side and have meditation techniques that help build a strong mind for combat." (then a few picks showing karate like movements are displayed...yada yada yada....

First off, what is so remarkable about this technical detail? Nothing!!!! its common sense. And what art does not claim to have some form of mental conditioning? Maybe MMA? Most individuals cant even see that they assume martial arts is meditating so that when an art does not they assume a false dichotomy of traditional/nontraditional...and the media plays right into that false dichotomy.

the reason why posters like Jughead get so angry and consider analysis on any meaningful level to be threatening is because THIS IS THE SHIZZLE PEOPLE ARE GESTATED ON!" Most people can't even take the time to read a real article more than a few pages long and get fed this shizzle regulalry and expect to hear it regurgitated back.

So when a case is made for a fighter that is not a media darling....Well try to critisize Bruce Lee in the martial arts media for example. Ever hear of "Riley Hawkins?" he is my "Les Darcey." There is a picture of Sensie Hawkins, who taught one of my teachers, with Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris...but you don't hear of this man unless you really know who the great fighters and innovaters were in the karate circles back in the day. Riley was so good that he actually taught Karate techniques to the Okinawans to modernize the kumite applications of the art. He impressed them that much. His students were feared by all during the dojo busting period which made baltimore an honest place to teach....cause if you taught shizzle you got a the visit!

Why don't we hear of people like hawkins and Darcey? Well I know with Riley it was a combination of things... At first it was racial (he is a black man), then it was the fact that he did most of his work at home in Baltimore. And then it was the fact that there was no BS. No crazy claims, just very rough,elite training that drove off those who had ego or designs. But the fact of the matter is those in the know would put Riley hawkins on a proverbial short list. I can see with Darcey the same applies.

[McGoorty]

It just goes to show how regular media sources for the masses are on such a base level. McGoorty the truth is that I know this for a fact being I have written for these sources in the martial arts. I have written a post about this and its not to toot my horn, it is to make the point that you are asking about.

When I was writing regularly for Black Belt (among others) which is the most widely circulated martial arts mag, I would deliberately make sure that everything I wrote had a level of content that an average media biased individual would grasp and the reading level would be about that of a very bright fourth grader...thats not really an exxageration by much.

I can almost be certain that people writing for the media making these lists are generally speaking of the same ilk and do not have the knowledge as historians to know about fighters like Les Darcy, hence, the exclusion. Most of the people I wrote with, wrote glorified press releases with the same basic dribble repeated and repackages with a few new technical details in the photos.

Heres a hypothetical example of what 90% of the material looks like in the most widely circulated martial art mag in the world today:

"chim KUm Lee was the third child in a family and his uncle passed the deadly art of egg fu down to him... Lee states " the difference in our art is that we use all ranges of combat, kicks to the outside, punches and grappling closer." But Lees art has an additional twist as he says " we also consider the spiritual side and have meditation techniques that help build a strong mind for combat." (then a few picks showing karate like movements are displayed...yada yada yada....

First off, what is so remarkable about this technical detail? Nothing!!!! its common sense. And what art does not claim to have some form of mental conditioning? Maybe MMA? Most individuals cant even see that they assume martial arts is meditating so that when an art does not they assume a false dichotomy of traditional/nontraditional...and the media plays right into that false dichotomy.

the reason why posters like Jughead get so angry and consider analysis on any meaningful level to be threatening is because THIS IS THE SHIZZLE PEOPLE ARE GESTATED ON!" Most people can't even take the time to read a real article more than a few pages long and get fed this shizzle regulalry and expect to hear it regurgitated back.

So when a case is made for a fighter that is not a media darling....Well try to critisize Bruce Lee in the martial arts media for example. Ever hear of "Riley Hawkins?" he is my "Les Darcey." There is a picture of Sensie Hawkins, who taught one of my teachers, with Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris...but you don't hear of this man unless you really know who the great fighters and innovaters were in the karate circles back in the day. Riley was so good that he actually taught Karate techniques to the Okinawans to modernize the kumite applications of the art. He impressed them that much. His students were feared by all during the dojo busting period which made baltimore an honest place to teach....cause if you taught shizzle you got a the visit!

Why don't we hear of people like hawkins and Darcey? Well I know with Riley it was a combination of things... At first it was racial (he is a black man), then it was the fact that he did most of his work at home in Baltimore. And then it was the fact that there was no BS. No crazy claims, just very rough,elite training that drove off those who had ego or designs. But the fact of the matter is those in the know would put Riley hawkins on a proverbial short list. I can see with Darcey the same applies.

I have always been a bit of a boxing historian, check my old threads, I know a bit about most good boxers there ever were but Darcy I know more about, I have evry book on the subject, have visited his statue in Maitland, talked to old men who had sat near ringside to see him fight and all were in total awe of him, many claimed he was the best most complete fighter they ever saw and above all so strong he seemed from another planet, I have read accounts on every single one of his 50 fights and have been deeply touched by all the tragedy of his last months on this earth, there has never been a more tragic tale in boxing that I can think of. I don't care where punters put him in lists as long as he is in them somewhere, I expect as boxing fans that every poster here knows his name and can relate some story or fight about him, this is the HISTORY section. I am appalled by some of the trolls I have read here this week, I have not been on the site for a while, I don't know this Jughead guy, he didn't exist when I was here a few years ago but all I saw was him trashing some poster, not good enough. ...... .................................................. .................................................. .... .................................................. .................................................. ............... ..... There has to be meaningful discussion about the great fighters and the not so great (but memorable nonetheless of days gone by, I am of the school that holds the opinion that most of todays big names are nothing compared to those in boxings heyday, hell many of the top guys today would struggle trying to beat a Chuck Davey or a Billy Graham or Charlie Fusari let alone beat a Willie Pep or a Benny Leonard or a Jack Britton and most would turn white at the prospect of fihghting a Battling Nelson or a Joe Gans or a Les Darcy once they had seen them fight but once... they would not even think about signing. but anyway....... I did various forms of striking martial arts and enjoyed the odd Black Belt magazine. Analysis IS boxing, all the greats and trainers were analysts of their style, Bob Fitzsimmons was a marvelous thinker and innovator hyet that gets overshadowed by his stats and his blacksmith hardness (Darcy was also a blacksmith)... yes training has improved in many ways but does it beat working an anvil for ten hours then running for an hour and then sparring and working the bags and mits every day and having to get back to work a few hours after fighting and a long train journey (that's Darcy's regime) ????? I am not sure, I never had to grow up in extreme poverty like Darcy and most of the old time greats and had to walk and work as hard as they did but it sure must have made a man HARD and HUNGRY to get out of that life and provide for a large family as Les had to with all those siblings and a drunk dad...... there is so much to analyse that we can only try to do our best, I will remain steadfast to try to educate as many posters and fans as I can.... cheers. Greg

[McGoorty]

It just goes to show how regular media sources for the masses are on such a base level. McGoorty the truth is that I know this for a fact being I have written for these sources in the martial arts. I have written a post about this and its not to toot my horn, it is to make the point that you are asking about.

When I was writing regularly for Black Belt (among others) which is the most widely circulated martial arts mag, I would deliberately make sure that everything I wrote had a level of content that an average media biased individual would grasp and the reading level would be about that of a very bright fourth grader...thats not really an exxageration by much.

I can almost be certain that people writing for the media making these lists are generally speaking of the same ilk and do not have the knowledge as historians to know about fighters like Les Darcy, hence, the exclusion. Most of the people I wrote with, wrote glorified press releases with the same basic dribble repeated and repackages with a few new technical details in the photos.

Heres a hypothetical example of what 90% of the material looks like in the most widely circulated martial art mag in the world today:

"chim KUm Lee was the third child in a family and his uncle passed the deadly art of egg fu down to him... Lee states " the difference in our art is that we use all ranges of combat, kicks to the outside, punches and grappling closer." But Lees art has an additional twist as he says " we also consider the spiritual side and have meditation techniques that help build a strong mind for combat." (then a few picks showing karate like movements are displayed...yada yada yada....

First off, what is so remarkable about this technical detail? Nothing!!!! its common sense. And what art does not claim to have some form of mental conditioning? Maybe MMA? Most individuals cant even see that they assume martial arts is meditating so that when an art does not they assume a false dichotomy of traditional/nontraditional...and the media plays right into that false dichotomy.

the reason why posters like Jughead get so angry and consider analysis on any meaningful level to be threatening is because THIS IS THE SHIZZLE PEOPLE ARE GESTATED ON!" Most people can't even take the time to read a real article more than a few pages long and get fed this shizzle regulalry and expect to hear it regurgitated back.

So when a case is made for a fighter that is not a media darling....Well try to critisize Bruce Lee in the martial arts media for example. Ever hear of "Riley Hawkins?" he is my "Les Darcey." There is a picture of Sensie Hawkins, who taught one of my teachers, with Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris...but you don't hear of this man unless you really know who the great fighters and innovaters were in the karate circles back in the day. Riley was so good that he actually taught Karate techniques to the Okinawans to modernize the kumite applications of the art. He impressed them that much. His students were feared by all during the dojo busting period which made baltimore an honest place to teach....cause if you taught shizzle you got a the visit!

Why don't we hear of people like hawkins and Darcey? Well I know with Riley it was a combination of things... At first it was racial (he is a black man), then it was the fact that he did most of his work at home in Baltimore. And then it was the fact that there was no BS. No crazy claims, just very rough,elite training that drove off those who had ego or designs. But the fact of the matter is those in the know would put Riley hawkins on a proverbial short list. I can see with Darcey the same applies.

yes the modern media is mostly trashy and throwaway, and media darlings like Mayweather get the benefit of it today only to cop the other end of it once they are gone a few years... he could end up a Darcy one day in the respect that he could easily be near forgotten, of course Darcy will always be remebered but not the same way as he was when there were once guys who had seen him fight, sadly there are none left alive, lucky for me there were still plenty alive to educate me on him when i was 20 years old

[McGoorty]

I disagree with basically everything Humean says but I'd be lying if I said he didn't know his stuff.

g'day Dan.......................... :ANYWORD:Extravaganz

[billeau2]

I disagree with basically everything Humean says but I'd be lying if I said he didn't know his stuff.

differences are the spice of life. My knowledge of the sport is such that I can easily be swayed by something I initially disagreed with...I don't have a real storehouse of knowledge to begin with.

One guy convinced me about how strong a fighter Roy Jones was when compared to Calzaghe.

[billeau2]

I have always been a bit of a boxing historian, check my old threads, I know a bit about most good boxers there ever were but Darcy I know more about, I have evry book on the subject, have visited his statue in Maitland, talked to old men who had sat near ringside to see him fight and all were in total awe of him, many claimed he was the best most complete fighter they ever saw and above all so strong he seemed from another planet, I have read accounts on every single one of his 50 fights and have been deeply touched by all the tragedy of his last months on this earth, there has never been a more tragic tale in boxing that I can think of. I don't care where punters put him in lists as long as he is in them somewhere, I expect as boxing fans that every poster here knows his name and can relate some story or fight about him, this is the HISTORY section. I am appalled by some of the trolls I have read here this week, I have not been on the site for a while, I don't know this Jughead guy, he didn't exist when I was here a few years ago but all I saw was him trashing some poster, not good enough. ...... .................................................. .................................................. .... .................................................. .................................................. ............... ..... There has to be meaningful discussion about the great fighters and the not so great (but memorable nonetheless of days gone by, I am of the school that holds the opinion that most of todays big names are nothing compared to those in boxings heyday, hell many of the top guys today would struggle trying to beat a Chuck Davey or a Billy Graham or Charlie Fusari let alone beat a Willie Pep or a Benny Leonard or a Jack Britton and most would turn white at the prospect of fihghting a Battling Nelson or a Joe Gans or a Les Darcy once they had seen them fight but once... they would not even think about signing. but anyway....... I did various forms of striking martial arts and enjoyed the odd Black Belt magazine. Analysis IS boxing, all the greats and trainers were analysts of their style, Bob Fitzsimmons was a marvelous thinker and innovator hyet that gets overshadowed by his stats and his blacksmith hardness (Darcy was also a blacksmith)... yes training has improved in many ways but does it beat working an anvil for ten hours then running for an hour and then sparring and working the bags and mits every day and having to get back to work a few hours after fighting and a long train journey (that's Darcy's regime) ????? I am not sure, I never had to grow up in extreme poverty like Darcy and most of the old time greats and had to walk and work as hard as they did but it sure must have made a man HARD and HUNGRY to get out of that life and provide for a large family as Les had to with all those siblings and a drunk dad...... there is so much to analyse that we can only try to do our best, I will remain steadfast to try to educate as many posters and fans as I can.... cheers. Greg

here here! The thing about training methods is that when a guy is a foorballer its a very specific regime that will develop a very specific capacity. But men have been wrestling and hitting each other a long time and the capacity to develop more excellent training methods usually ends with a proverbial brick wall.... We can train to get bigger but then we lose endurance and even punching power. Things like running and fighting in a room are best trained for by doing. That has not changed. Physical labors make the body strong and able. Blacksmithing, throwing hay bales, etc. Its funny to see guys looking for tractor tires to toss around! that should tell anyone everything they need to know.