Most Overrated Fighters of All-Time

[IronDanHamza]

James Toney

[QueensburyRules]

- -At least Toney was honest about his steroid use.

Not so TUE 50-0 and his sycophant Tygart.

[billeau2]

- -What Tunney film you talkin of Rusty?

I've only seen the incomplete grainy 20 rds of the Dempsey fight where we can see his style for that fight, but hardly any difference between them. The scorecard(s) are lost like most old fights. The only thing we have is the drunken snippets of the media, which even today are hardly bastions of the truth, Thomas Hauser being a hard exception.

So, it's been you all along hoarding the lost footage of the Greb fights?

Yeah, right!

Film is not everything. Actually Rusty used precedent, something people could do more of here.

I also think it is a legitimate comparison to make regarding Tunney versus Charles and Tunney is better imo. Boxing people who saw the guys from that time think a lot of Tunney as well. Tunney had incredible skills from the old times, that is something that does not get press. He could fight you off the back foot, or the front.

Charles was good enough to give Marciano fits both times, Tunney would beat Marciano and make it look easy. Marciano never fought a guy who moved like Tunney...He would have if he fought an earlier version of Moore, but even then...Gene moved better and Moore almost beat Marciano.

Another way to think about it: How many guys did Marciano fight who could fight off the back foot? Much less do so as well as Tunney? who was mentored by Corbett in so doing.

[Joe Beamish]

Film is not everything. Actually Rusty used precedent, something people could do more of here.

I also think it is a legitimate comparison to make regarding Tunney versus Charles and Tunney is better imo. Boxing people who saw the guys from that time think a lot of Tunney as well. Tunney had incredible skills from the old times, that is something that does not get press. He could fight you off the back foot, or the front.

Charles was good enough to give Marciano fits both times, Tunney would beat Marciano and make it look easy. Marciano never fought a guy who moved like Tunney...He would have if he fought an earlier version of Moore, but even then...Gene moved better and Moore almost beat Marciano.

Another way to think about it: How many guys did Marciano fight who could fight off the back foot? Much less do so as well as Tunney? who was mentored by Corbett in so doing.

Sigh. Another white guy who built a wall between himself and black fighters.

But somehow he's just the greatest thing. He moved SO well!!

LOL

Right. Marciano hospitalizes that racist.

[billeau2]

Sigh. Another white guy who built a wall between himself and black fighters.

But somehow he's just the greatest thing. He moved SO well!!

LOL

Right. Marciano hospitalizes that racist.

You have a big chip in your shoulder. Tunney was not known as a racist. You should watch accusations, you would see that I have no racial favorites regarding fighters. I just happen to think Tunney was an incredible fighter.

Remove that chip from your shoulder...I let it go when you assumed I was a Dempsey fan boy, but im going to set the record straight ok?

I explained what I like about Dempsey to you. I never even took a position on his supposed preferences regarding fighting black fighters, or not. I only told you that Wills was not that strong a fighter imo.

To think that Tunney was better than Charles does not make one a racist.

If you are going to spread false information please don't respond to my posts.

[QueensburyRules]

Film is not everything. Actually Rusty used precedent, something people could do more of here.

I also think it is a legitimate comparison to make regarding Tunney versus Charles and Tunney is better imo. Boxing people who saw the guys from that time think a lot of Tunney as well. Tunney had incredible skills from the old times, that is something that does not get press. He could fight you off the back foot, or the front.

Charles was good enough to give Marciano fits both times, Tunney would beat Marciano and make it look easy. Marciano never fought a guy who moved like Tunney...He would have if he fought an earlier version of Moore, but even then...Gene moved better and Moore almost beat Marciano.

Another way to think about it: How many guys did Marciano fight who could fight off the back foot? Much less do so as well as Tunney? who was mentored by Corbett in so doing.

- -You using presumption, something no legit historian would be using in his research.

Happen to view both Tunney and Charles quite favorably and no doubt that would be a great chess match, but switch opposition, save for Greb, Charles would breeze it whereas Tunney would accumulate more losses.

No matter, fighters can only fight in their eras, and one thing Tunney lucked out on was he had a Hollywood Dempsey to enrich him enough to retire young and handsome, whereas those post WW2 years Charles thrived in were the scrappiest, most dangerous in boxing history and relatively low paying. Ez could take no young, handsome and wealthy retirement to suffer a needless tragic end.

I favor Charles in a Trilogy, so mind yer Ps and Qs and maybe you can bear witness to such a marvel in Valhalla.

[QueensburyRules]

Right. Marciano hospitalizes that racist.

- -No need for cheap street puffery Joe.

[billeau2]

- -You using presumption, something no legit historian would be using in his research.

Happen to view both Tunney and Charles quite favorably and no doubt that would be a great chess match, but switch opposition, save for Greb, Charles would breeze it whereas Tunney would accumulate more losses.

No matter, fighters can only fight in their eras, and one thing Tunney lucked out on was he had a Hollywood Dempsey to enrich him enough to retire young and handsome, whereas those post WW2 years Charles thrived in were the scrappiest, most dangerous in boxing history and relatively low paying. Ez could take no young, handsome and wealthy retirement to suffer a needless tragic end.

I favor Charles in a Trilogy, so mind yer Ps and Qs and maybe you can bear witness to such a marvel in Valhalla.

Im not using presumption I am putting fourth an opinion and citing information that is relevant. In point of fact my opinion about Tunney has more to do with his skills sets and how unique they were due to when he was fighting and how he fought Dempsey. Historians and trainers who saw do carry weight.

And why does Tunney get 5h1t on explaining away his victorys over Dempsey? No jack was a little more than a foil... Charles was a great fighter for sure.

Every victory in boxing can be explained away... Yet through the miracle of human institutions we find a winner a loser, or a draw.

[them_apples]

- -You using presumption, something no legit historian would be using in his research.

Happen to view both Tunney and Charles quite favorably and no doubt that would be a great chess match, but switch opposition, save for Greb, Charles would breeze it whereas Tunney would accumulate more losses.

No matter, fighters can only fight in their eras, and one thing Tunney lucked out on was he had a Hollywood Dempsey to enrich him enough to retire young and handsome, whereas those post WW2 years Charles thrived in were the scrappiest, most dangerous in boxing history and relatively low paying. Ez could take no young, handsome and wealthy retirement to suffer a needless tragic end.

I favor Charles in a Trilogy, so mind yer Ps and Qs and maybe you can bear witness to such a marvel in Valhalla.

This I actually agree with. I don't understand where Charles has an "overated" resume. To me his resume is underated. It's stacked to the brim with dangerous fights. Tunneys resume is not to be compared imo.

[Morandis]

Can I ask what is, in your opinion, the most overrated Mexican fighter, if you think there is some?

Pains me a great deal to say this, but in Mexico we grossly overrate Julio César Chávez.

Besides him, it's gotta be Pipino Cuevas. Nice career, but quite probably the worst boxer ever to be inducted into the Hall Of Fame.