Which fighters historically do you feel are underrated

[NChristo]

Nice 10 year old response but with what evidence did you come to this conclusion?

With what evidence did you come up with that Duran beats Napoles so decisively, imo based on the DeJesus bouts if Napoles doesn't lose on cuts it's a hella close fight. Hearns is a mismatch for Mantequilla though.

[Mr.MojoRisin']

With what evidence did you come up with that Duran beats Napoles so decisively, imo based on the DeJesus bouts if Napoles doesn't lose on cuts it's a hella close fight. Hearns is a mismatch for Mantequilla though.

I never said Duran beat Napoles. Hearns beats Napoles. Napoles wasn't a true Middleweight. He was a Welterweight who moved up to beat Monzon but lost by TKO. Hearns was harder hitting and faster than Napoles, not to mention the incredible size difference.

[NChristo]

He wasn't even a true Welter, Napoles was a natural lightweight just like Duran, not too take anything more away from the win, even though it's clear Napoles didn't belong at Middleweight it's still a decent win.

Hearns and Duran beat anyone on Monzon's resume. Monzon didn't beat any of those fighters anywhere near their primes.

..............

[Mr.MojoRisin']

I still see Hearns destroying him. But this is about Hagler and Monzon. Hagler beat Duran, Hearns, Mugabi, Hamsho, Briscoe, and Antuofermo. Hearns literally threw everything he had at Hagler and Hagler ate it. I will stand by what I said of Hagler steamrolling over Monzon.

[Ray Corso]

"He wasn't even a true Welter"...........

Napoles;
1958-59 Featherweight
1960-65 Lightweight
1965-70 Welterweight

He beat the welter king (Cokes) in 1969 so I don't see how you consider him
a "true" lightweight.
He belonged there because he was the Welter King trying for the next Title its what many champions did before the "junior & super" divisions were robbed by the title organizations to secure more title fights.

Naples was a real fighter at any weight but was a true Welter.

Ray.

[sonnyboyx2]

I still see Hearns destroying him. But this is about Hagler and Monzon. Hagler beat Duran, Hearns, Mugabi, Hamsho, Briscoe, and Antuofermo. Hearns literally threw everything he had at Hagler and Hagler ate it. I will stand by what I said of Hagler steamrolling over Monzon.

Hagler defeated Duran by (one point) on all judges scorecards.
Hagler was very fortunate Hearns broke his famous right hand in the opening round, otherwise Hearns would have had the victory via TKO4 (cuts)..

Mugabi - Terry Norris & Gerald McClellan both showed how to take care of Mugabi.

Hamsho - very limited fringe contender who Monzon would have murdered.

Briscoe - Monzon easily defeated Benny when he was in his prime, not the old wash-up years past his best version whom Hagler defeated.

Antuofermo - would not see the halfway point if fighting Monzon

Marvin Hagler simple did not have the boxing skill, punch-power or physical size to defeat Carlos Monzon

[Weltschmerz]

I would give a shout to Vitali Klitschko. If he was American and had an impressive resume, he would have been talked about as one of the greatest ever heavyweights.

[NChristo]

"He wasn't even a true Welter"...........

Napoles;
1958-59 Featherweight
1960-65 Lightweight
1965-70 Welterweight

He beat the welter king (Cokes) in 1969 so I don't see how you consider him
a "true" lightweight.
He belonged there because he was the Welter King trying for the next Title its what many champions did before the "junior & super" divisions were robbed by the title organizations to secure more title fights.

Naples was a real fighter at any weight but was a true Welter.

Ray.

Good job quoting the first line but not the part immediatly after, Napoles was a 'natural' lightweight who was forced to move up to Welter to get a title shot because he was unable to get one against Ortiz, he was not big at Welter at all. He's still a top 10 Welter but he was clearly better suited as a Lightweight, good job taking my post out of context though.

[Mr.MojoRisin']

Hagler defeated Duran by (one point) on all judges scorecards.
Hagler was very fortunate Hearns broke his famous right hand in the opening round, otherwise Hearns would have had the victory via TKO4 (cuts)..

Mugabi - Terry Norris & Gerald McClellan both showed how to take care of Mugabi.

Hamsho - very limited fringe contender who Monzon would have murdered.

Briscoe - Monzon easily defeated Benny when he was in his prime, not the old wash-up years past his best version whom Hagler defeated.

Antuofermo - would not see the halfway point if fighting Monzon

Marvin Hagler simple did not have the boxing skill, punch-power or physical size to defeat Carlos Monzon

Whether it is one point or 10 points, a win is a win.

Hagler had already eaten everything Hearns threw at him. You don't break your hands from throwing soft punches. Hearns even said himself that he threw his best punches at Hagler. We don't need to use "what ifs" in fights that already happened.

Mugabi- Was hard hitting Hagler provided the blueprint for Norris and McClellan to destroy Mugabi.

Hamsho- Only had 1 defeat at debut up until Hagler.

Briscoe- I don't disagree but he still lost to Hagler

Antuofermo- A good boxer who wasn't an ATG but shouldn't be underestimated.

My point is, Monzon didn't fight that great of competition aside from Griffith, Briscoe, Benvenuti, and Napoles. Also, he beat them in Argentina where the judging could have been biased like in other countries. Monzon didn't fight enough competition to be equated with Hagler who beat two of the hardest hitting middleweights of all time.

[Humean]

In general a lot of fighters from the last few decades are underrated historically, partly because they had fewer total fights than previous generations. Duilio Loi is certainly amongst the most overlooked fighters historically.