Does anyone think Chavez is overrated? Dont get me wrong he was a great fighter and accomplished a lot, but im thinking he was a bit overrated.
He fought about 50 bums before he won his first world title. A vacant title against an unworthy challenger. Then besides Roger Mayweather he defeated a bunch of bums in defense of his title before getting a good win against Rosario for his lightweight belt. He just kept fighting bums and getting some solid wins in between like vs Camacho. He then got that controvesial win over Meldrick Taylor. After that huge win he followed it up against two guys whos records were 5-3 and 4-3. Come on now. He went on to get schooled by Whitaker and get a draw and yadditaddi ya you guys know the rest.
He was a great fighter, but I think people put him on a higher pedistal than the Barrera's and Morales' which I think is wrong. What seperates him from them? Only his record. But his record was extremely padded. He fought bums in like 90 of his fight. He didnt accomplish more than either of them have or still are.
I rate Barrera and Morales above Chavez. I rate Barrera slightly over Morales mainly because their accomplishments are similiar but Barrera won the triogy against Morales and had that huge win over Naz. One could make an argument for either.
Say Barrera beats Marquez and then Pacquaio. I thin hes the best Mexican fighter ever(if he isnt already) hands down.
He fought about 50 bums before he won his first world title. A vacant title against an unworthy challenger. Then besides Roger Mayweather he defeated a bunch of bums in defense of his title before getting a good win against Rosario for his lightweight belt. He just kept fighting bums and getting some solid wins in between like vs Camacho. He then got that controvesial win over Meldrick Taylor. After that huge win he followed it up against two guys whos records were 5-3 and 4-3. Come on now. He went on to get schooled by Whitaker and get a draw and yadditaddi ya you guys know the rest.
He was a great fighter, but I think people put him on a higher pedistal than the Barrera's and Morales' which I think is wrong. What seperates him from them? Only his record. But his record was extremely padded. He fought bums in like 90 of his fight. He didnt accomplish more than either of them have or still are.
I rate Barrera and Morales above Chavez. I rate Barrera slightly over Morales mainly because their accomplishments are similiar but Barrera won the triogy against Morales and had that huge win over Naz. One could make an argument for either.
Say Barrera beats Marquez and then Pacquaio. I thin hes the best Mexican fighter ever(if he isnt already) hands down.
lol But yes I think he is over rated..
Comment