How do you rate Jermain Taylor as a boxer?

[abadger]

But he has already proved he can hang with the best. I am not sure I understand your point, Hopkins, Ouma, Spinks, Pavlik, Wright are some of the best and definitely considered highly at the point he fought them. He beat an all time great in Hopkins(a younger Hopkins), Ouma a solid champ, Spinks(weak sauce to me) but a talented boxer, drawing with a defensive dynamo Wright isn't that bad(Trinidad was embarrassed by him). Losing to Pavlik in the fashion he did in the second isn't that bad. Though Pavlik definitely showed what he does in the first fight.

I am not sure I understand how him fighting those guys and winning 5-2-1 ain't to bad, better then most opponents can do.

I can understand why my post seems contradictory, I guess it has to do with how highly you actually rate that competition in an objective sense, and still more than that how highly you actually rate Taylor's skill (as opposed to his record). My view is that while pretty strong, none of those results are anything truly spectacular. The most contentious, B-Hop, I felt Taylor won almost by default. Winky I think has had an inflated rep for a while now, and has long been past his best. So after considering these results I'd say we have a slightly better than average (in elite terms) boxer.

Then move onto Taylor's game itself. I've said many times before that to me he is a guy who does a lot of things well, but nothing excellently, with the closest thing he has to a major weapon being his jab. He also gasses and appears to be somewhat mentally fragile. To me he is again above average, but not much more than that.

So, I don't say Taylor is bad, but I really don't think he's that good either. I'd pick Kessler and Zaghe to beat him easily. If Froch proves not to be nursing any hidden weaknesses then I think he would too, since Taylor has already been beaten twice by a slow boxer whose main weapon is power.

Like I said, I hope you can see what I'm saying and that I'm not trying to 'discredit' him, just giving my opinion.

[KESSLER]

Taylor is the man! He would give alot of fighters out there hell. He is gonna destroy Lacy.

[Bea5T]

Decent boxer but overrated. Made a career off knocking out blown up light middleweights and getting an undeserved decision over Hopkins and an undeserved draw against Winky. Has almost completely lost his power - if he ever had any - whilst moving up in competition. Got out-jabbed and battered by a limited boxer like Pavlik.

He'll be a good supermiddleweight but would get beaten by Calzaghe, Kessler and Froch.......possibly even Bute. He should beat Lacy easily enough though.

hate is strong here


and european bias

laugh the ****ing out loud

[poeticlsykuac]

I can understand why my post seems contradictory, I guess it has to do with how highly you actually rate that competition in an objective sense, and still more than that how highly you actually rate Taylor's skill (as opposed to his record). My view is that while pretty strong, none of those results are anything truly spectacular. The most contentious, B-Hop, I felt Taylor won almost by default. Winky I think has had an inflated rep for a while now, and has long been past his best. So after considering these results I'd say we have a slightly better than average (in elite terms) boxer.

Then move onto Taylor's game itself. I've said many times before that to me he is a guy who does a lot of things well, but nothing excellently, with the closest thing he has to a major weapon being his jab. He also gasses and appears to be somewhat mentally fragile. To me he is again above average, but not much more than that.

So, I don't say Taylor is bad, but I really don't think he's that good either. I'd pick Kessler and Zaghe to beat him easily. If Froch proves not to be nursing any hidden weaknesses then I think he would too, since Taylor has already been beaten twice by a slow boxer whose main weapon is power.

Like I said, I hope you can see what I'm saying and that I'm not trying to 'discredit' him, just giving my opinion.

No offense but your boy Cal is in the same spot if you ask me. He has fought few reputable opponents. So you have to throw that at Cal if you are going to throw that at Taylor. Though I do agree with your stand point in a lot of ways, it seems to me you are being pretty biased.

[abadger]

No offense but your boy Cal is in the same spot if you ask me. He has fought few reputable opponents. So you have to throw that at Cal if you are going to throw that at Taylor. Though I do agree with your stand point in a lot of ways, it seems to me you are being pretty biased.

Maybe I am, if so not intentionally. The main difference in my assessment of Calzaghe and Taylor comes down to how I assess their fighting ability. To me Calzaghe's major weapons are clear (if perhaps beginning to slip in some cases), speed, tactical ability, workrate and chin. I think most would agree that in these departments Calzaghe is a cut above almost all other boxers around his weight class. This is what sets him apart from someone like Taylor in my eyes, he's a more rounded fighter with fewer weaknesses.

[Zocalo]

I think he is much better than people give him credit for. At the end of the day he still won 5 out of the 6 cards vs an all time great.

[ALT-Assassin]

Maybe I am, if so not intentionally. The main difference in my assessment of Calzaghe and Taylor comes down to how I assess their fighting ability. To me Calzaghe's major weapons are clear (if perhaps beginning to slip in some cases), speed, tactical ability, workrate and chin. I think most would agree that in these departments Calzaghe is a cut above almost all other boxers around his weight class. This is what sets him apart from someone like Taylor in my eyes, he's a more rounded fighter with fewer weaknesses.

Maybe your problem is you compare every boxer to Calzaghe.

I would like to know how you rated Pavlik before the Taylor fight and who you picked to win?

[Chunk..]

Honestly I though both Hopkins fights and the Winky Wright fight were gifts that could have easily went the other way. Jermaine is a good boxer, but he's also very lucky, the scorekeepers tend to lean his way a bit more than I thought was legit. Winky beat Taylor and got robbed on the decision, and Hopkins should have won their second fight.

I got to go with lucky, but Taylor's luck ran out against Pavlik.

[Zocalo]

hate is strong here and european bias
laugh the ****ing out loud

Sometimes you need to lower your expectations of some posters...

[abadger]

Maybe your problem is you compare every boxer to Calzaghe.

I would like to know how you rated Pavlik before the Taylor fight and who you picked to win?

I had never seen Pavlik box prior to the Taylor fight, that was the first time I heard about him. I am from the UK and didn't used to follow American boxing that closely. I do now. If I had seen Pavlik box previously I would likely have picked Taylor based on his jab and superior boxing ability. My view would have been more or less as it still is, that Pavlik is slow and one-dimensional, and at that time I wouldn't have expected him to be able to KO Taylor. I would have been wrong.

As for comapring people to Zaghe, well, we are talking about a SMW, and I also pick Taylor to lose to Kessler and maybe Froch, and he's already lost to Pavlik so thats four boxers in his weight class(es) that I'm comparing him to and think may beat him.