BoxRec

Paul "Silky" Jones

Jim Watt was a great shout.

Dave McCauley (sp)

J wrote:yeah nice stu...agree with woods probablty the best example of a man making the most of his talent and burns coud go on to do even better..not sure bout bruno though..molly coddled wrapped up in cotton wool for 20 fights, then successful at the 3rd attempt to win a title....
neverhave been a fan found him a bit of an embarressment to be honest.

the loverble loser...always was firmly in the lennox camp meself.

4th attempt

I'd say Gavin Rees, and if you include Irish boxing I'd add Bernard Dunne in there.

Mathew Hatton

Steve Robinson by a mile

Matthew Hatton, Matt Skelton, Steve Robinson (though it pains me to say it), Glen Catley...

dr_devious wrote:Matt Skelton
Martin Rogan

Jim Watt??

Good shouts all three

I'll add Dave Boy Green

winkveron wrote:I don't agree with all this 'over achiever' stuff. 99% of the time you either win because you deserved it, or lose because you didn't deserve to win. I think it's a bit unfair to some of these lads.

I agree, in the toughest sport of all you have to have something special to achieve anything like some of the names mentioned,yes fighters can sometimes get lucky and win a title on the night but still have to put in years of training beforehand,for instance steve robinson was called in last minute for his title challenge and won,however he was extremely fit,strong and a decent boxer with good defensive skills,Frank Bruno,was very strong,always fit and had a an excellent jab and decent power,every fighter has at least one good thing in their favour,whether it's supreme fitness,good chin or a big punch,but i can't see how anyone could overachieve,they just beat the man on the night.

Chris Saunders just came to mind

lloyd honeyghan ?

simon fox wrote:Chris Saunders just came to mind

What a banger

Always exciting to watch

Captain Hook wrote:Glen Catley...

For me, this is the answer by a mile. Glen seemed to have found his level after he got stopped by Colarusso and Galfi, but even though he was never a natural super-middle he moved up and won two world titles through late stoppage on foreign turf against decent opposition.
No-one could have predicted that in the wake of the Galfi KO and he did so despite not having any apparent world-class attributes - his chin had been questionable, his skills were solid rather than spectacular etc... he became the biggest over-achiever in British boxing through sheer heart and will.

stujones wrote:Clinton Woods.

UMmmmmmm .... I am sure you could qualify your opinion why you feel Clinton Woods over achieved??

I keep looking at his record:

Area Titles
British Title
Commonwealth Title
European Title
IBF World Title

Involved in a number of high profile fights and always face his mandatories!!! - I dont see how you can justify him being an over achiever!!!! - He lost against David Starie mainly because he was starving himself to make the weight and other than that he lost against world class opponents.

Personally I think all Clinton Woods achieved he did so by hard graft and living the life and thoroughly deserved all he got - certainly did not over achieve - and if we are talking over achieving - is that we say that about all boxers once they lose -we can then state "knew he was over achieving".

Over achieving is about a boxer somehow surviving in company he clearly looked out of place in - or who got his arse whooped when he stepped up to the mark and somehow got a decision - dont think Clinton Woods falls into that category.

Clinton Woods did not look out of place in world class company like say Matthew Hatton will.

Over to you!!!

deadpan wrote:Chris Eubank.

Overachieved? Great chin, power awkward counterpuncher, looked after himself. If anything he underachieved through lack of workrate and could have won a bit more spectacularly in some fights.

Anthony Farnell - massive overachievment to win a 'World' championship

Black Sam Bellamy wrote:Anthony Farnell - massive overachievment to win a 'World' championship

i never saw him as a world champion. although the w.b.u had some really credible champion's.

dr_devious wrote:Martin Rogan

I don't think that is fair. Rogie is as tough as old boots.

enzo calzaghe.

In my opinion it has to be Frank Bruno.

Spud wrote:

stujones wrote:Clinton Woods.

UMmmmmmm .... I am sure you could qualify your opinion why you feel Clinton Woods over achieved??

I keep looking at his record:

Area Titles
British Title
Commonwealth Title
European Title
IBF World Title

Involved in a number of high profile fights and always face his mandatories!!! - I dont see how you can justify him being an over achiever!!!! - He lost against David Starie mainly because he was starving himself to make the weight and other than that he lost against world class opponents.

Personally I think all Clinton Woods achieved he did so by hard graft and living the life and thoroughly deserved all he got - certainly did not over achieve - and if we are talking over achieving - is that we say that about all boxers once they lose -we can then state "knew he was over achieving".

Over achieving is about a boxer somehow surviving in company he clearly looked out of place in - or who got his arse whooped when he stepped up to the mark and somehow got a decision - dont think Clinton Woods falls into that category.

Clinton Woods did not look out of place in world class company like say Matthew Hatton will.

Over to you!!!

Spud, I think that you're missing the point a bit on this. Saying that someone overachieved is far from a criticism. I have to admit that my first thought on reading the thread title was Clinton. What people are talking about is a guy who wasn't a Nas Hamed type of natural talent from the off, but who nevertheless got to the top by sheer strength of will, determination, guts, whatever else you want to call it. Clinton did that, and has everyone's deserved respect for it.

woods is incredibly underrated. mainly because he came through the backdoor boxing on the small show circuit.

GB - your dead right.

Clinton was a good boxer, but it was his will determination and sheer bloody mindedness that got him the title. He was a stubborn old so and so, he would not let up on his mandatory - but I'm sure he will be the first to admit, not blessed with lightening hands, dynamite one punch KO or Sugar Ray esque reflexes.

Your definition of an over achiever there Spud, is being a lucky git..... well that Luis Santana - but I don't think that is really an over achiever.

Steve Robinson is a difficult one, given his resources I would say yes - completely agree. However, i do remain adamant, that had things been a bit different he would have been an even more solid champion..... He was no Hamed, but I think the boy had more Natural talent than given credit for, and if he worked differently - I think he would have really given some of the other champions a fair fight.

I would have loved to have seen Robinson get some US sparring, and train with a big name trainer..... but with what he had and what you saw, yeah he sort of over achieved.

Crease wrote:In my opinion it has to be Frank Bruno.

The reason I say this is because he wasn't quite onthe same level as Lewis, Tyson or Holyfield. Yet he managed to squeeze in there to become a Heavyweight World Champion.