Fritizie Zivic: how good was he?

[Ambling Alp II]

I know that you had mentioned that you had seen Pryor before and that you lived in that area when he was fighting.
One thing that I have noticed about a lot of people when it comes to what they think of someone from their area: They tend to go go to one extreme or another as to whether like him and how they rate him.

For me, I saw Pryor growing up and watched him on film a lot. (like many people here.) He was not one of the very best. However, he was a tenacious fighter who had some pop. That a lone makes you pretty good. I do wish he would would have fought tougher competition (Mamby, Haley, Costello etc. ) I think he would have beaten those guys, but thinking it and him actually doing are tow different things.
However, beating Arguello has to carry some weight. Maybe Pryor gets too much credit for it; but it has to count for something. A fraud doesn't beat Alexis Arguello.

Zivic had a completely different kind of career. He fought in a different era. Even in his own era, he fought a lot. His victims list is a obviously better than Pryor's. However, Zivic just lost so many fights to ordinary fighters.
This is why I have always thought that he was so interesting. He is one of the most extreme examples that you are going to find. (Johnny Risko was similar, but since he never fought for the title, nobody cares about him.)

If Zivic was in Pryor's place, how well would he done? I think he may have beat Arguello. I also think he would have found a way to lose at least 5 fights to guys that we would never pick to beat him.
Pryor may be overrated by some, but he was the better of the two.

[BoxBuzz]

Sort of has a the vibe of an Oliver McCall....as far as the hot and cold aspects. Though Oliver was far more dramatic..in his bad moments....and those bad moments came far less often. He had "V" shaped up and downs....where as Zivic had " U" shaped up and downs.