Current Underachievers

[Weebler I]

Really?. I disagree, although I did expect him to be competitive against Klitschko. Haye was the undisputed cruiserweight champ and did win a title at heavyweight. He's still the best heavyweight not named Klitschko.

He could and should be doing much more at HW

[Dr Rumack]

Is Khan really an underachiever? I think people mistake his often spectacular offence with the broader idea of superb talent. He has some very significant weaknesses that have eventually caught up with him, and with those weaknesses it's hard to see how much higher the guy could go. He's a title holder, and maybe a divisional champ if gets the right opponents. But he's not going to rule a division, there's too much stuff he doesn't know how to deal with.

[jonesroy]

Is Khan really an underachiever? I think people mistake his often spectacular offence with the broader idea of superb talent. He has some very significant weaknesses that have eventually caught up with him, and with those weaknesses it's hard to see how much higher the guy could go. He's a title holder, and maybe a divisional champ if gets the right opponents. But he's not going to rule a division, there's too much stuff he doesn't know how to deal with.

But if guys like Hatton and Malignaggi - fighters who are shorter and slower than Khan - were able to win titles at 140 and 147, then shouldn't Khan be able to do at least that much?

[jonesroy]

He could and should be doing much more at HW

He did beat Valuev. I'm not sure if a win over Adamek or Povetkin would be more impressive than Valuev - perhaps as impressive, but not more.

[White_Knight]

You can say anyone is an underachiever. Lewis shouldn't have lost the fights he did and Tyson shouldn't have lost to Douglas. Therefore, Lewis and Tyson must be underachievers.

[New England]

good ones so far. andre dirrell might be my number one.

jorge linares

yuriorkis gamboa (he's an odd case. he spent much of his prime as an amateur.)

joan guzman

[New England]

Is Khan really an underachiever? I think people mistake his often spectacular offence with the broader idea of superb talent. He has some very significant weaknesses that have eventually caught up with him, and with those weaknesses it's hard to see how much higher the guy could go. He's a title holder, and maybe a divisional champ if gets the right opponents. But he's not going to rule a division, there's too much stuff he doesn't know how to deal with.

the guy is crazy fast. he has a few flaws that turn into game changers.


defense and chin, mainly. if he fixed his defense he'd be a much rougher go. if he had an iron chin and a great defense he'd be very hard to beat at 140 lbs. he's crazy fast, tall at the weight, and he's got some steam.

[White_Knight]

He did beat Valuev. I'm not sure if a win over Adamek or Povetkin would be more impressive than Valuev - perhaps as impressive, but not more.

Valuev was beaten by Chagaev, whereas Povetkin has beaten Chagaev, Byrd, and Chambers. Adamek has beaten Arreola and has only ever lost to Vitali and Chad Dawson. Both Adamek and Povetkin are bigger wins.

[jonesroy]

You can say anyone is an underachiever. Lewis shouldn't have lost the fights he did and Tyson shouldn't have lost to Douglas. Therefore, Lewis and Tyson must be underachievers.

I'm not talking about fighters getting upset by other fighters, I'm talking about their accomplishments. Lewis and Tyson were both undisputed heavyweight champions. If you start your career at heavyweight, that's about as far as you can go.

[Alonzo Harris]

Joan Guzman
Oladier Solis
Andre Berto
Victor Ortiz

Just off the top of my head.