What all time great fighter had the weakest opposition?

[Goodnight, Irene]

I can't claim to understand you, Keith. You make rank-amateur assertions, & then you get upset for being called on them.

If you say something stupid, people might call you stupid. Be forewarned...

[Aftermath]

I can't claim to have a vast knowledge of the European scene in those days. But Cerdan's record seems lacking until the very end. Especially for where I see him placed.

heres some of cerdans best opponents:

saverio turiello (w - feb. '39)
saverio turiello (w - june '39)
holman williams (w - june '46)
georgie abrams (w - dec. '46)
jean walzack (w - feb '48)
laverne roach (w - march '48)
cyrille delannoit (w - june '48)
tony zale (w - sept '48)
dick turpin (w - sept '49)
jake lamotta (l - june '49)

as u can see he has some decent competition but unfortunately these were his best opponents and he finished with a career record of : 111 - 4 (1) - 0. tho its not bad.

You forgot Bert Gilroy.

Him along with Williams, Abrams, Zale and LaMotta ensure he should not be in the running here.

Ricardo Lopez, Bob Foster, and John L Sullivan come to mind here. Also honorable mention to Julio Cesar Chavez (in relation to the status he's routinely given).

I disagree with listing Chavez. He fought the best of the best during his prime era that lasted longer than most in the last few dacades. From 130-140 Chavez fought and beat quality opponents for a consistant number of years.

I would nominate Joe Calzghe.

[Goodnight, Irene]

I can see Dempsey's point, though. Chavez is pretty heavily over-rated by a lot of Mexican fight fans. The fact that he'll receive about 90% of the votes in any, "Greatest Mexican Of All-Time" Poll, to me, indicates he's over-rated by many (we have Saad on a one-man mission to counter-act that, thankfully ), & Demps isn't saying Chavez didn't fight quality men --- only that he's over-rated within context. Chavez definitely beat some very, very good fighters (without having a true superstar on his victim ledger), as I'm sure Demps will agree.

At the same time, I'm not really sure I'd call Calzaghe a true all-timer.

[palooka]

Jack Dempsey has a fantastic reputation and is an all time great but he didn't face the very best of his time and some of the fabled bouts were against limited brawlers and smaller men

[Jaywheel]

I can see Dempsey's point, though. Chavez is pretty heavily over-rated by a lot of Mexican fight fans. The fact that he'll receive about 90% of the votes in any, "Greatest Mexican Of All-Time" Poll, to me, indicates he's over-rated by many (we have Saad on a one-man mission to counter-act that, thankfully ), & Demps isn't saying Chavez didn't fight quality men --- only that he's over-rated within context. Chavez definitely beat some very, very good fighters (without having a true superstar on his victim ledger), as I'm sure Demps will agree.

Still, the thread is asking for who had the weakest competition. JCC fought his lot of stiffs, but also fought DLH, Pernell, Taylor, Rosario etc... he did not have the weakest opposition.
Compare that to Lopez's resume and you see he doesn't belong in this thread...

[Goodnight, Irene]

Fair.

[Ezzard]

Don’t get many Mexicans where I live but even so I do disagree on Chavez.

There are 2 gripes against him.

(1) The Taylor stoppage – regardless of your views Chavez (like Leonard against Hearns at 147) was losing the rounds but winning the fight. What is more he gave Taylor a rematch so he didn’t take his controversial win and refuse to fight again. Meldrick was a great fighter who was mismanaged in my opinion. Taylor was also naturally bigger. Beating a bigger man who is also quicker and more athletically gifted than you is quite some feat.

(2) The Whittaker draw – come on guys… getting outmanoeuvred by Whittaker is nothing to be ashamed of. Pernell was naturally bigger, fresher and one of the greatest ever fighters to lace up a glove. The man was a genius in the ring. He was a better welterweight than Chavez was, I don’t see this is a reason to think Chavez is overrated. I even think Chavez fought better competition.

[Diamond WEAPON]

Don’t get many Mexicans where I live but even so I do disagree on Chavez.

There are 2 gripes against him.

(1) The Taylor stoppage – regardless of your views Chavez (like Leonard against Hearns at 147) was losing the rounds but winning the fight. What is more he gave Taylor a rematch so he didn’t take his controversial win and refuse to fight again. Meldrick was a great fighter who was mismanaged in my opinion. Taylor was also naturally bigger. Beating a bigger man who is also quicker and more athletically gifted than you is quite some feat.

(2) The Whittaker draw – come on guys… getting outmanoeuvred by Whittaker is nothing to be ashamed of. Pernell was naturally bigger, fresher and one of the greatest ever fighters to lace up a glove. The man was a genius in the ring. He was a better welterweight than Chavez was, I don’t see this is a reason to think Chavez is overrated. I even think Chavez fought better competition.

Hear hear, saying Chavez is overrated based on Whitaker is almost like saying Marquez is overrated based on Mayweather.

Anyway, I agree on Ricardo Lopez, 105 has never been a firebrand division and he was only at 108 for a short time. I'd comfortably back him against any of the best 108 or 112 pounders through history or even today, weight draining advantages or not, he was just that damn good and the only guy who gave him trouble was a clearly heavier and very physical Rosendo Alvarez.

[elmersalsa]

I gotta say:
Terry Norris...At Jr. Middleweight, he fought guys that were not on the level. Fighting old legends or blownup welterweights
Roy Jones, Jr....He totally dissapointed me. With that type of talent that he had, he could have been the greatest ever if he would have beaten convincingly Gerald McClelllan, Nigel Benn, Chris Eubanks, and Dariuz Michaelchewski...Would have no doubt be the best ever if he'd beaten Lennox Lewis at hw. He wasted his prime fighting police men and school teachers
Bernard Hopkins...Held the middleweight crown for 10 years, but what fighter in that ten year period was worthy of greatness? Not the guy that rolled over like a cabaret girl. Ok?

[elmersalsa]

Another one:
Joe Calzaghe

[dempseyfire]

Not sure Calzaghe is an "all-time great" . . he probably is #1 at super middle but that's just b/c the division is so new and most elite fighters have used it as a transitory stop from middle or move up to light hw . . .it's rare historically for an elite fighter to have fought an entire career at 168 like Joe did (save those two final fights).

[snoopbee]

ORLANDO CANAZALES

[Ambling Alp]

Overall, Canazales' opposition doesn't seem to be that good. However, he did fight a few very good fighters like Vazquez, Junior Jones, and Bones Adams.

Khaosai Galaxy's opposition was pretty weak. Seemed like he could have moved up to bantamweight and fought better opponents.

However, Laszlo Papp might be the winner here. (He is in the Hall of Fame)
Zero fights against Top 10 opponents or the champion. Probably the biggest name he ever fought was a washed up Tiger Jones.