Who are British Boxings biggest underachievers??

thepocketrocket · Post by **thepocketrocket** » 04 Jul 2007, 05:31

After doing a few Hot Prospect articles it got me thinking..who are British Boxings biggest waste of talent?? Who has really not lived up to their potential??

And why do they flop?? Are todays young fighters trainging hard enough??

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 04 Jul 2007, 06:54

In recent years:

Danny Williams, David Starie, Adrian Dodson, Crawford Ashley,Ryan Rhodes, James Hare, David Barnes, Steve Murray, Anthony Maynard, Patrck Mullings, Ian Napa.

deadpan · Post by **deadpan** » 04 Jul 2007, 07:00

Unequivocably Kirkland Laing and arguably Herol Graham

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 04 Jul 2007, 07:11

These threads pop up every now and again and the first name that always springs to my mind is Adrian Dodson.

Another one, all be it a controversial choice would be Colin McMillan - What a beautful boxer, but he was never the same after the dislocation injury.

Chambers2 · Post by **Chambers2** » 04 Jul 2007, 07:25

deadpan wrote:Unequivocably Kirkland Laing

Excellent call. Saw an interview with 'The Gifted One' where he admitted smoking a spliff on the way to a British title fight

, I think he still won. He oozed talent as the Duran result shows, but lacked the commitment, hence why he's being mentioned on here.

I heard from a mate that Kirkland died from his injuries when he fell from a balcony, can anyone confirm??

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 04 Jul 2007, 07:30

Errol Christie/Rod Douglas.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 04 Jul 2007, 07:36

Twinkle Toes wrote:These threads pop up every now and again and the first name that always springs to my mind is Adrian Dodson.

Another one, all be it a controversial choice would be Colin McMillan - What a beautful boxer, but he was never the same after the dislocation injury.

I agree on McMillan, however what I don't necessarily agree with is that he could be defined as an underachiever.... it was primarily rotten luck not through a fault of his own.

Part of the reason why I didn't include him, Dean Francis and Spencer Oliver on my list.

STP · Post by **STP** » 04 Jul 2007, 07:45

George and Tony Collins were under-achievers

It's a shame they had an amateurish manager/promoter in allegedly

Flump · Post by **Flump** » 04 Jul 2007, 07:48

STP wrote:George and Tony Collins were under-achievers

It's a shame they had an amateurish manager/promoter in allegedly

True about the promoter but I don't think either of them were really up to it, especially George.

Cannibal · Post by **Cannibal** » 04 Jul 2007, 07:54

Michael Brodie... Just couldn't get his hands on that world title.

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 04 Jul 2007, 08:07

Audley Harrison
Damaen Kelly
Bobby Vanzie

101boxing · Post by **101boxing** » 04 Jul 2007, 08:19

although he achieved great status during his career, surely naz could be considered to have under achieved considering his amazing talent. what he could have gone on to do with his talent could have surpassed any other uk fighter's legacy.

chris s · Post by **chris s** » 04 Jul 2007, 08:24

Mario Culpepper then Errol Christiea and Herol Graham

Scrap · Post by **Scrap** » 04 Jul 2007, 08:50

Mc Mllan had 3 ops on hjs shoulder non a success. Near the end both shoulders were Knackered He had some bottle Colin.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 04 Jul 2007, 08:53

Wayne Alexander (although with that chin), Takaloo and Eamonn Magee could have achieved alot more with the talent that they had.

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 04 Jul 2007, 09:03

I always thought Gary Mason could have maybe gone further.

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 04 Jul 2007, 09:06

Howard Eastman is the biggest underachiever in recent years

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 04 Jul 2007, 09:17

dr_devious wrote:Howard Eastman is the biggest underachiever in recent years

Yes its a hard one to call that, Eastman has achieved alot. Britsh, Euro and Commonwealth titles, and has challenged twice for a world title losing on points both times (once to a HOFer), but most would say he has underachieved.

Compare him to Michael Watson , he only won the commonwealth title and came up short in 3 tries at a world title, losing 2 of those by KO. But would you say he underachieved?

Whats the difference?

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 04 Jul 2007, 09:25

Old bones Ian wrote:
dr_devious wrote:Howard Eastman is the biggest underachiever in recent years
Yes its a hard one to call that, Eastman has achieved alot. Britsh, Euro and Commonwealth titles, and has challenged twice for a world title losing on points both times (once to a HOFer), but most would say he has underachieved.

Compare him to Michael Watson , he only won the commonwealth title and came up short in 3 tries at a world title, losing 2 of those by KO. But would you say he underachieved?

Whats the difference?

Hard to say if Watson underachieved, because who knows what he might or might not have done had his career not been cut short.

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 04 Jul 2007, 09:30

oliverfennell wrote:
Old bones Ian wrote:
dr_devious wrote:Howard Eastman is the biggest underachiever in recent years
Yes its a hard one to call that, Eastman has achieved alot. Britsh, Euro and Commonwealth titles, and has challenged twice for a world title losing on points both times (once to a HOFer), but most would say he has underachieved.

Compare him to Michael Watson , he only won the commonwealth title and came up short in 3 tries at a world title, losing 2 of those by KO. But would you say he underachieved?

Whats the difference?
Hard to say if Watson underachieved, because who knows what he might or might not have done had his career not been cut short.

yes thats true to an extent, but he had 3 tries at a world title.
Or how about Tony Sibson? He also won the same titles as Eastman, and also came up short in 3 world title tries, but no-one mentions him as a underacheiver.

Chambers2 · Post by **Chambers2** » 04 Jul 2007, 09:35

Old bones Ian wrote:I always thought Gary Mason could have maybe gone further.

May have done if it wasn't for his detached retina. Mason Vs Bruno would have been a cracker

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 04 Jul 2007, 09:39

Old bones Ian wrote:
oliverfennell wrote:
Old bones Ian wrote: Yes its a hard one to call that, Eastman has achieved alot. Britsh, Euro and Commonwealth titles, and has challenged twice for a world title losing on points both times (once to a HOFer), but most would say he has underachieved.

Compare him to Michael Watson , he only won the commonwealth title and came up short in 3 tries at a world title, losing 2 of those by KO. But would you say he underachieved?

Whats the difference?
Hard to say if Watson underachieved, because who knows what he might or might not have done had his career not been cut short.
yes thats true to an extent, but he had 3 tries at a world title.
Or how about Tony Sibson? He also won the same titles as Eastman, and also came up short in 3 world title tries, but no-one mentions him as a underacheiver.

I think the thing is with Sibbo that you felt he acheived the maximum of his potential, gave all he could.

I think people are now confusing the original question.

I don't think anybody ever thought Sibson or Eastman would go to become undisputed world champions of their division so therefore they didn't really fail to live up to their potential.

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 04 Jul 2007, 09:44

Yes its a fine line isn't it, I remember reading that Eastman trained like a madman, and keeps himself in shape between fights. So maybe he has reached his full potential.

E · Post by E » 04 Jul 2007, 10:37

I remember a fighter who was meant to be an exceptional talent - lower weight, I think Danny something. HE got into some trouble poss drugs etc and it just never happened...

Was it Danny Costello???

And on a lighter note, if you listen to Brendan Ingle, Khalique Shaffiq and Daniel Teasdale...

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 04 Jul 2007, 10:58

Pat Barrett