Most Overrated Non-Heavyweight Of Alltime

[Ezzard]

Calzaghe is a fair call but you can’t accuse him and not the other guys of his era.

There are posters here who regularly vote for Roy Jones to beat Tunney, Archie Moore, Mike Spinks, Bob Foster and even Ezzard Charles. Yet this guy sat back on a soft HBO contract so much that even Americans signed up for Roycott.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Calzaghe is a fair call but you can’t accuse him and not the other guys of his era.

There are posters here who regularly vote for Roy Jones to beat Tunney, Archie Moore, Mike Spinks, Bob Foster and even Ezzard Charles. Yet this guy sat back on a soft HBO contract so much that even Americans signed up for Roycott.

Uh, you're aware BJerm is as big a nuthugger of Roy as he is a hater of Joe, right?

Now you've done it... D

[Ezzard]

Bjer is a good guy who I don't often agree with. We have shared a few barbed words over Roy as well as his disdain for Brits and Europeans. BUT with this forum I always end up liking guys I disagree with.

He knows his boxing. We just reach different conclusions.

[bjermaine]

Bjer is a good guy who I don't often agree with. We have shared a few barbed words over Roy as well as his disdain for Brits and Europeans. BUT with this forum I always end up liking guys I disagree with.

He knows his boxing. We just reach different conclusions.

thanks for the nice words ezzard. the feeling is mutual. yes, i love roy and hate when people think calzaghe is an atg and i also retaliate when brits start bad mouthing the US but for the most part the people on here know the sport and its history, even irene sometimes.

as for roy, sure he fought some chumps. he also fought some decent and very good fighters and made them look like chumps as well. part of the problem was that roy was in a bad era in a bad weight division. any potential opponents during that time would have been heavy underdogs vs jones. it would have been nice if he had a few more names on his resume but at his best jones was a special fighter.

[giacomino]

Not sure McGuigan is overrated so much as overhyped. Kind of like Ray Mancini. I remember the McGuigan hype in the 1980s. He was like Mancini, a guy with a terrific punch and a good story to tell. Also, like Mancini, he seemed like a good guy. But I don't know that anybody rated him one of the all-time greats or anything

- Good comparison even though their styles were different.

Mancini was putting together a Rocky type of career before being derailed by the Duk Kim tragedy as McG was putting together what was shaping up as perhaps a Ken Buchanan type of career where it seems they had enough going to make people believe greatly in them.

I never got what was the proper explanation for McG's sudden decline, almost Cooney like.

McGuigan was going strong. He beat LaPorte. He then beat the great Pedroza (who was over the brow of the hill but still a special fighter). He beat Taylor who was ranked in KO magazine's p4p top 10 when they fought... Then it all started to unravel. He beat the game substitute Cabrera but failed to impress.

He then turned down a fight with Wildredo Gomez at 130 - at that time a fight Barry would surely have won.
Took the fight with tainted prospect, Cruz. Barry was a busy, super fit fighter, with loads of energy and non-stop punching. Many British fighters are like this. They tend to have short peaks because many over train.

Anyway, the story was he got fried in the desert by a capable Cruz in the fight of the year. McGuigan did brilliantly to come back in that one. He’d turned the fight around only to get caught in the last round and lose by a point. The momentum swings in that one remind me of Leonard-Hearns I.

After that he was out of the ring for 2 years. Barry, who had always played on having this great relationship with his manager, then fell out with his manager. British media turned against him.

He made a decent comeback but then got stopped on a cut against McDonell. A real shame (nothing against Jim, but thought Barry looked to be edging it).

Barry really should have kept his title in Ireland and had the challengers come to him.

He was a top fighter though. Those 2 years out of the ring post Cruz really hurt him. McGuigan was the kind of guy who’d go down fighting no matter who he fought.

Excellent wrap up, but I have to quibble with one statement. You said, "He beat Taylor who was ranked in KO magazine's p4p top 10 when they fought."
While Bernard Taylor was undefeated and considered the best contender at the time among featherweights, I find it hard to believe KO magazine ranked him in the top 10 p4p at the time. In fact, he hadn't beaten anyone of note since his draw with Pedroza three years earlier. Azumah Nelson was the other featherweight champion at the time, coming off a KO of Gomez, so it's hard to believe Taylor was ranked any higher than third best in the division, let alone top 10 p4p.
I stand corrected if I'm wrong, but I would be surprised if that's right.
P.S. I remember enjoying McGuigan's beat-down of Taylor at the time because I wasn't a big fan of Taylor's style. Taylor later made me a little more of a fan near the end of his career with an excellent performance and a spectacular late-round KO of Calvin Grove. If he'd fought like that against Pedroza, he might have beaten him. McGuigan? Not in 1985

[Seamus]

In regards to the names that have been mentioned.

1.Ricardo Lopez. Had plenty of fights against soft oppostion, but proved himself more than enough times against solid contenders to show he was for real.

2.Wilfredo Gomez. Overrated at JLW, but outstanding at his best weight.

3.Naseem Hamed. Very overrated before the Barrera fight, but I don't believe he's held that high esteem anymore.
4.Tony Ayala. Overrated. Some guys have this untested commodity beating Hall of Famers.
5.Barry McGuigan. Didn't achieve that much and subsequently doesn't belong in the IBHOF. Skills wise though, he was not overrated.
6.Carlos Palomino. Shouldn't be in the IBHOF.
7.Floyd Mayweather. Until someone beats him decisively it's a pointless claim.
8.Joe Calzaghe. For every Brit that calls him a great fighter, there's three Americans who will say he isn't. Resume could be better, but honestly, a prime Calzaghe would be a difficult test for any fighter in history.
9.Roy Jones Jr. He's one of those guys like Tyson and Chavez. In his prime we occasionally heard how he'd beat any fighter in history. After a couple losses though people quickly forgot how good he was.

[giacomino]

In regards to the names that have been mentioned.

1.Ricardo Lopez. Had plenty of fights against soft oppostion, but proved himself more than enough times against solid contenders to show he was for real.

2.Wilfredo Gomez. Overrated at JLW, but outstanding at his best weight.

3.Naseem Hamed. Very overrated before the Barrera fight, but I don't believe he's held that high esteem anymore.
4.Tony Ayala. Overrated. Some guys have this untested commodity beating Hall of Famers.
5.Barry McGuigan. Didn't achieve that much and subsequently doesn't belong in the IBHOF. Skills wise though, he was not overrated.
6.Carlos Palomino. Shouldn't be in the IBHOF.
7.Floyd Mayweather. Until someone beats him decisively it's a pointless claim.
8.Joe Calzaghe. For every Brit that calls him a great fighter, there's three Americans who will say he isn't. Resume could be better, but honestly, a prime Calzaghe would be a difficult test for any fighter in history.
9.Roy Jones Jr. He's one of those guys like Tyson and Chavez. In his prime we occasionally heard how he'd beat any fighter in history. After a couple losses though people quickly forgot how good he was.

Wilfredo Gomez was the greatest junior featherweight ever. Period. By a wide margin. Unfortunately he probably spent too much time at that weight and should have moved up earlier, but it's hard to consider him overrated. I don't think anyone rated him highly at junior lightweight.

Re: Chavez. The man won titles at three divisions. He pretty much dominated those divisions over more than a decade. He was just short of 34 when he finally lost his last title. Hard to consider him overrated. Jones was the same at light heavyweight - a very dominant champion for a long time. It's hard to consider them overrated when both should legitimately be considered somewhere among the p4p greats. They are harshly criticized because they stayed in the game too long and got slap around by young fighters. Not saying they are top 10 p4p or anything like that, but they were both great fighters for a long time and their end-of-the-career losses should be discounted just as much as the end-of-the-career loses should be discounted for the all-time greats like Sugar Ray Robinson, Ezzard Charles, Willie Pep, Henry Armstrong, etc.

[jaclem2]

over rated, as mentioned, does not mean they weren't good fighters. more than that..very good fighters with a touch of greatness. so:

thomas hearns
azumah nelson

(box buzz has again saved me from my retirement)

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Chavez got thumped every time he stepped up and fought great fighters. He beat enough very good fighters to be considered great. But when I hear him mentioned in the same breath with guys like Duran & arguello, I have to call him overrated.

Is Edwin rosario as your best legitimate win enough to get you in the conversation with Thomas hearns? From the thread here, evidently it is.

[Ezzard]

While Bernard Taylor was undefeated and considered the best contender at the time among featherweights, I find it hard to believe KO magazine ranked him in the top 10 p4p at the time. In fact, he hadn't beaten anyone of note since his draw with Pedroza three years earlier. Azumah Nelson was the other featherweight champion at the time, coming off a KO of Gomez, so it's hard to believe Taylor was ranked any higher than third best in the division, let alone top 10 p4p.
I stand corrected if I'm wrong, but I would be surprised if that's right.
P.S. I remember enjoying McGuigan's beat-down of Taylor at the time because I wasn't a big fan of Taylor's style. Taylor later made me a little more of a fan near the end of his career with an excellent performance and a spectacular late-round KO of Calvin Grove. If he'd fought like that against Pedroza, he might have beaten him. McGuigan? Not in 1985

Got the magazines in the loft. In the run up to the fight he was on that list. BUT it might have been a top 12 they did instead of a top 10.

[oliverfennell]

Chris Eubank.

Brits think back on his reigns as some sort of golden era, and while they were in box office terms, he was very much an archetypcal WBO water-treader whose defences were for the large part inferior to Calzaghe's, and his biggest wins against domestic opposition (albeit world class Brits).

[bollox]

I can't see how anyone can call Chavez over-rated. At his best he simply beat anyone and everyone in sight

As for Eubank, some of his defences were against rather average fighters. Anyone remember the name of the Canadian? guy that he headbutted using the back of his head?

[oliverfennell]

Dan Sherry

[Datsue]

Chris Eubank.

Brits think back on his reigns as some sort of golden era, and while they were in box office terms, he was very much an archetypcal WBO water-treader whose defences were for the large part inferior to Calzaghe's, and his biggest wins against domestic opposition (albeit world class Brits).

Thank you.

I say this on the Brit scene from time to time & TerryD & I can barely be heard over Autobarn & co.'s barrage of "Eee, he were champion, they were great days of glorified British title fights & novices & South American taxi drivers for a million quid a go..."

[bollox]

Ah yes Dan Sherry. Poor bastard copped a good one and Eubank should have been DQ'd

Was Michael Nunn over-rated? (probably) There were a few murmurs at the time of Eubank possibly fighting him but ah ahem, nothing came of it

[oliverfennell]

Sherry over-acted like a Thai soap opera star but yes, Eubank should have been DQ'd for that. It was one of the most blatant fouls I have seen and there could be no explanation for it bar it being deliberate.

[Seamus]

Chris Eubank overrated ? Must have been a British thing. No one rated him too highly over here.

[giacomino]

Chavez got thumped every time he stepped up and fought great fighters. He beat enough very good fighters to be considered great. But when I hear him mentioned in the same breath with guys like Duran & arguello, I have to call him overrated.

Is Edwin rosario as your best legitimate win enough to get you in the conversation with Thomas hearns? From the thread here, evidently it is.

"Chavez got thumped every time he stepped up?" By your definition, his draw/loss to Whitaker when he was 31 and had been champion for nine years was his first "step up" fight. Then I guess you're talking about DeLaHoya and Tsyzu being his only other "step up" fights, which occurred when he 34, 36 and 38 and clearly should have been retired.
So, moving from junior lightweight to lightweight and thumping Rosario wasn't a step up? Or KOing fellow junior welterweight champion Meldrick Taylor (twice) wasn't a step up?
Chavez was 17-4-2 against champions or former champions, with three of those losses coming when he was well past it. Among the guys he beat were Roger Mayweather (2X), Rocky Lockridge, Jose Luis Ramirez, Lonnie Smith, Hector Camacho, Greg Haugen, Frankie Randall, Tony Lopez and the earlier-mentioned Rosario and Taylor. That doesn't include several other undefeated or once-defeated top contenders. The fact is that with very few exceptions, he fought the best available, and failed only a few times.
I am a huge fan of Tommy Hearns, but he fought some of his most memorable rival matchups in his prime (and didn't always come out on top). I have a hard time discounting Chavez because he lost late in his career to DeLaHoya and Tzysu when he should have been retired, or because he got a questionable draw against Whitaker when he was 31 and had, at the time, been a three-division champion over the course of nine years.

[giacomino]

While Bernard Taylor was undefeated and considered the best contender at the time among featherweights, I find it hard to believe KO magazine ranked him in the top 10 p4p at the time. In fact, he hadn't beaten anyone of note since his draw with Pedroza three years earlier. Azumah Nelson was the other featherweight champion at the time, coming off a KO of Gomez, so it's hard to believe Taylor was ranked any higher than third best in the division, let alone top 10 p4p.
I stand corrected if I'm wrong, but I would be surprised if that's right.
P.S. I remember enjoying McGuigan's beat-down of Taylor at the time because I wasn't a big fan of Taylor's style. Taylor later made me a little more of a fan near the end of his career with an excellent performance and a spectacular late-round KO of Calvin Grove. If he'd fought like that against Pedroza, he might have beaten him. McGuigan? Not in 1985

Got the magazines in the loft. In the run up to the fight he was on that list. BUT it might have been a top 12 they did instead of a top 10.

Wow, I stand corrected. Ludicrously high ranking for Taylor by KO. I got the magazine during the 1980s but don't remember that. Wonder if there was a U.S. bias because I could name 30 fighters off the top of my head in 1985 who deserved to be ranked higher than Taylor

[finchy36]

Eubank and Calzaghe - deffo. I can understand why non-Brits never really knew too much about Eubank. Very similar to Calzaghe in that he claimed to be a 'world' champion while hiding behind the WBO belt and avoiding the other champions and big name fighters of the day.

Nigel Benn was different - a true warrior that fans around the world appreciated. He fought world class fighters in different countries as well as at home. I guess Eubank's legacy is based on the way he took apart Benn in their first fight...

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Chavez got thumped every time he stepped up and fought great fighters. He beat enough very good fighters to be considered great. But when I hear him mentioned in the same breath with guys like Duran & arguello, I have to call him overrated.

Is Edwin rosario as your best legitimate win enough to get you in the conversation with Thomas hearns? From the thread here, evidently it is.

"Chavez got thumped every time he stepped up?" By your definition, his draw/loss to Whitaker when he was 31 and had been champion for nine years was his first "step up" fight. Then I guess you're talking about DeLaHoya and Tsyzu being his only other "step up" fights, which occurred when he 34, 36 and 38 and clearly should have been retired.
So, moving from junior lightweight to lightweight and thumping Rosario wasn't a step up? Or KOing fellow junior welterweight champion Meldrick Taylor (twice) wasn't a step up?
Chavez was 17-4-2 against champions or former champions, with three of those losses coming when he was well past it. Among the guys he beat were Roger Mayweather (2X), Rocky Lockridge, Jose Luis Ramirez, Lonnie Smith, Hector Camacho, Greg Haugen, Frankie Randall, Tony Lopez and the earlier-mentioned Rosario and Taylor. That doesn't include several other undefeated or once-defeated top contenders. The fact is that with very few exceptions, he fought the best available, and failed only a few times.
I am a huge fan of Tommy Hearns, but he fought some of his most memorable rival matchups in his prime (and didn't always come out on top). I have a hard time discounting Chavez because he lost late in his career to DeLaHoya and Tzysu when he should have been retired, or because he got a questionable draw against Whitaker when he was 31 and had, at the time, been a three-division champion over the course of nine years.

I didn't mean to imply that he ducked anyone. I can't control the circumstances of when he faced great fighters, only the results. You're including his age and then trumping the second taylor fight? Really?

I'm not discounting him, I said he was great. but he keeps company better than his resume. He didn't beat the caliber of fighters that hearns did, not even close.

He never legitimately beat Randall, to mention that is shameful and imo Taylor was blatantly robbed in what most would consider his greatest win. You've just listed a bunch of good wins against good fighters. That's my whole premise to begin with. He was no more past it than Pea, Whitaker is just another league of fighter.

Life and death with solid fighters like laporte & lockridge certainly isn't embarrassing. Euesebio pedroza did it as well. But those two are considered very far apart in terms of greatness. I don't rate fighters on what they were capable of, just what they did. And Chavez fell short of where most people place him imo.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

I'm not discounting him(Duran), I said he was great. but he keeps company better than his resume. He didn't beat the caliber of fighters that hearns did, not even close.

- EXCELLENT!!!!!

Since it ain't close, than it's easy for you to list the " caliber of fighters " that Hearns beat that are so much better than what Chavez beat.

EXCELLENT!!!!!

[Knucklez]

In regards to the names that have been mentioned.

1.Ricardo Lopez. Had plenty of fights against soft oppostion, but proved himself more than enough times against solid contenders to show he was for real.

2.Wilfredo Gomez. Overrated at JLW, but outstanding at his best weight.

3.Naseem Hamed. Very overrated before the Barrera fight, but I don't believe he's held that high esteem anymore.
4.Tony Ayala. Overrated. Some guys have this untested commodity beating Hall of Famers.
5.Barry McGuigan. Didn't achieve that much and subsequently doesn't belong in the IBHOF. Skills wise though, he was not overrated.
6.Carlos Palomino. Shouldn't be in the IBHOF.
7.Floyd Mayweather. Until someone beats him decisively it's a pointless claim.
8.Joe Calzaghe. For every Brit that calls him a great fighter, there's three Americans who will say he isn't. Resume could be better, but honestly, a prime Calzaghe would be a difficult test for any fighter in history.
9.Roy Jones Jr. He's one of those guys like Tyson and Chavez. In his prime we occasionally heard how he'd beat any fighter in history. After a couple losses though people quickly forgot how good he was.

For every Brit that says Calzaghe is an all time great, there are 3 other Brits that say he wasn't. Trust me, I'm one of them. But remember how many Americans were expecting Jeff Lacy to knock Calzaghe out, simply because Lacy is from the good ol' USA. These are the same Americans who will pontificate at length about the greatness of Riddick Bowe in the same breath as saying Lennox Lewis was a B-class fighter.

[oliverfennell]

Chris Eubank overrated ? Must have been a British thing. No one rated him too highly over here.

That's true. It's just that him and Benn, due to their rivalry, are always held up as a golden standard to which anyone who has followed them is compared, e.g. "it's not like the good old Benn and Eubank days". They were both household names and Benn-Eubank 2 drew something like 40,000 spectators and 15 million viewers. But only one of them - Benn - made a true impact beyond British shores. It's just that Eubank's fame and personality lead many people - general public and knowledgeable fans alike - to don the rose-tinted glasses with regards to his world standing.

[dom74]

Jeff Lacy pre Calzaghe was horrendously overated