Grade Sergio Martinez' resume

[4Corners]

I know Sergio is one of the top 2 or 3 fighters in the world, and I agree. But, how would you grade his resume???

Sergio Martinez' notable resume:

2000: Antonio Margarito (20-3)- L TKO7
2007: Saul Roman (27-2)- W KO4
2008: Alex Bunema (30-5-2)- W RTD8
2009: Kermit Cintron (30-2)- D MD12
2009: Paul Williams (37-1)- L MD12
2010: Kelly Pavlik (36-1)- W UD12 (Won WBC and WBO Middleweight titles)
2010: Paul Williams (39-1)- W KO2
2011: Serhiy Dzinziruk (37-0)- W TKO8
2011: Darren Barker (23-0)- W KO11

He fought an up and coming Margarito and lost, than really didn't fight anyone of note for about 7-8 years. He was robbed of a win against Cintron, who was still good when Sergio fought him, and lost to Williams. He beat Pavlik, avenged his loss against Williams by KO, and had 2 decent wins over Dzinziruk and Barker in 2011.

What do you think???

[-MAKAVELLI-]

C+

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

[WARQUEZ]

Well...he's better than your average bum.

[Dedication]

C/c-..................

[4Corners]

Agreed. He should have a win over Cintron, as well as wins over Pavlik, Williams, Dzinziruk, and Barker, but there's so many wasted years in his career. He's probably in his peak right now, at age 36, so lets see where his career goes from now.

I'd give him a C-/C.

[Khalid X]

Agreed. He should have a win over Cintron, as well as wins over Pavlik, Williams, Dzinziruk, and Barker, but there's so many wasted years in his career. He's probably in his peak right now, at age 36, so lets see where his career goes from now.

I'd give him a C-/C.

Which is why I find it comical that he questions guys like Mayweather, Cotto and Pacquiao's career....even calling them cherry pickers.

[ИATAS]

he had a great 2009/2010 and an OK 2011 but that's really it. So, C is fair.

[nachorjj]

in my opinion he is overranted, and I am from argentina. I put pacquiao, mayweather, Márquez, hopkins, ward, donaire and probably bradley in better pocition than Martínez. And I think that are boxers like rigondeaux, sillakh, o solis that I think that are going to be better.

[Dick Smokefield]

Which is why I find it comical that he questions guys like Mayweather, Cotto and Pacquiao's career....even calling them cherry pickers.

Exactly. The funny thing is that next to the most notable names on his resume, he has L's and D's. You can say he beat Cintron or Williams(the first time) but officially on boxrec, it says Draw and Loss, meaning he didn't do enough to win. It's kinda bad when his best win(KO of Williams) looks worse every day because of how shot Williams is.

I give his resume a big C.

[jrosales13]

Exactly. The funny thing is that next to the most notable names on his resume, he has L's and D's. You can say he beat Cintron or Williams(the first time) but officially on boxrec, it says Draw and Loss, meaning he didn't do enough to win. It's kinda bad when his best win(KO of Williams) looks worse every day because of how shot Williams is.

I give his resume a big C.

That's unfair because he did more than enough to win against Cintron. More than enough, he should have had a KO victory over Cintron. He got robbed twice in the same fight.

When a fighter does more than enough to win and still doesn't get a victory than that's a robbery and I don't see how you can fault him or say he didn't do enough to win. I understand that line of thinking for close fights that could have gone either way. But, went the opposite from the general public had. But, not when it's a robbery.

And, no the KO to P-Will doesn't look worse by the day. Sure you can say P-Will is shot but how did he become shot in the first place?