Most Under Rated Boxers?

[Syntax Error]

Definitely Joe bugner under rated. He beat a lot of good heavy s well in tu his forty s. I believe the Cooper fight was always held against him

Good shout.

Bugner is definitely a tad underrated.

[Crease]

Most Under Rated Boxers?

I would throw in: Rex Layne, Rocky Graziano & Jose Manuel Urtain into the discussion.
Each were good enough to do better in their careers than what they did, but poor management, rushed fights and inconsistency cost them dearly.

[evrenb]

Jose legra

[scartissue]

Let me throw out a couple of heavyweights that probably haven't been discussed in decades. They are Ernie Schaaf and Bob Baker.

Schaaf is better know as dying at the hands of Primo Carnera, but in all likelihood it had more to do with a bout with influenza than anything Carnera threw. Schaaf beat Max Baer, Jimmy Braddock, Tommy Loughran, Paolino Uzcudun, Tony Galento, Young Stribling, Tuffy Griffiths and Jimmy maloney. Some said it was his rematch with Baer, where he was ahead on points and was rendered unconcious just before the bell, that caused the damage prior to the Carnera bout. But I don't think so. He stopped the streaking Stanley Poreda after Baer, so i don't think there was any ill effects. However, he did have a lot of hard fights by the age of 24 when he died. So, don't know how much further he could have gone.

Bob Baker, always known as one of the guys Marciano should have fought before retiring. But really, he was his own worst enemy with not keeping himself as fit as he should have. However, along the way, he did beat Jimmy Bivins, Nino Valdez, Rex Layne, Joe Baksi, George Chuvalo, Dick Richardson, Jimmy Slade, Johnny Holman and Cesar Brion. Two highly disputed losses to Hurricane Jackson probably prevented him from meeting Patterson in the eliminator for the vacant title. Don't see him beating Marciano or Patterson but think they would have been good fights.

Both Schaaf and Baker were 6'2" and anywhere between 205-215. Good solid heavies that have really entered that underrated fighter category.

[Ambling Alp II]

I have brought up Schaaf several times. He had very busy career. Too bad what happened to him.

[Ambling Alp II]

Cornelius Boza-Edwards and Marvin Johnson seemed to have been almost forgotton.

[Give up]

Chris Eubank , Amir Khan, Ray Mancini, Bobby Chacon, Bozza Edwards.

[Kalan]

Watching the DeGale vs Jack fight at the weekend made me think that Badou Jack is probably the most under rated champion around at the moment. Has wins over Anthony Dirrell, George Groves, Lucien Bute (in reality) and arguably DeGale (although I thought a draw was fair). Yet the next time he fights a top fighter he'll probably go in as the underdog again.

It made me wonder about who people think are some of the other underrated fighters of the past? I'm personally more interested in the modern era, but all shouts are welcome. Also, I'm more speaking about underrated even within boxing rather than by casuals because their opinion doesn't matter.
Mike McCallum is one I see mentioned a lot as being under rated, who else have you guys got?

Anybody who thinks a draw was fair in Jack-DeGale needs a brain scan and an eye exam -- and Jack is a s underrated... Keith Thurman is an underrated boxer... Errol Spence is... Artur Beterbiev is... Olexsandr Usyk is... Luis Ortiz is... Gennady Golovkin is... Sergei Kovalev still is... Daniel Jacobs is... Chris Eubank is... Anthony Joshua is... The WBC is treating Gary Russell like they treated Gennady Golovkin when he was their mandatory for years... They don't want Russell to do anything big and aren't giving him appropriate challengers.

[davie]

Watching the DeGale vs Jack fight at the weekend made me think that Badou Jack is probably the most under rated champion around at the moment. Has wins over Anthony Dirrell, George Groves, Lucien Bute (in reality) and arguably DeGale (although I thought a draw was fair). Yet the next time he fights a top fighter he'll probably go in as the underdog again.

It made me wonder about who people think are some of the other underrated fighters of the past? I'm personally more interested in the modern era, but all shouts are welcome. Also, I'm more speaking about underrated even within boxing rather than by casuals because their opinion doesn't matter.
Mike McCallum is one I see mentioned a lot as being under rated, who else have you guys got?

Thing with Jack is, apart from the clear Bute win, he hasnt won a fight decisivily since Direll. It's always majority decision or split. He hasnt won a fight via UD or knockdown. I think he's got skills, but underrated? That's just my opinion.

I do agree he is under rated, The above post is one reason.
And the other is his style, he isn't flash he isn't exceptional in any department.
He's solid, strong, good at most things and does what he needs to to win without looking devastating or a class above his opponent.

[davie]

Watching the DeGale vs Jack fight at the weekend made me think that Badou Jack is probably the most under rated champion around at the moment. Has wins over Anthony Dirrell, George Groves, Lucien Bute (in reality) and arguably DeGale (although I thought a draw was fair). Yet the next time he fights a top fighter he'll probably go in as the underdog again.

It made me wonder about who people think are some of the other underrated fighters of the past? I'm personally more interested in the modern era, but all shouts are welcome. Also, I'm more speaking about underrated even within boxing rather than by casuals because their opinion doesn't matter.
Mike McCallum is one I see mentioned a lot as being under rated, who else have you guys got?

Anybody who thinks a draw was fair in Jack-DeGale needs a brain scan and an eye exam -- and Jack is a s underrated... Keith Thurman is an underrated boxer... Errol Spence is... Artur Beterbiev is... Olexsandr Usyk is... Luis Ortiz is... Gennady Golovkin is... Sergei Kovalev still is... Daniel Jacobs is... Chris Eubank is... Anthony Joshua is... The WBC is treating Gary Russell like they treated Gennady Golovkin when he was their mandatory for years... They don't want Russell to do anything big and aren't giving him appropriate challengers.

Most of the names you have listed haven't achieved anything yet (or very little anyway)

These guys are respected for their talents, but not recognised or rated for their greatness. Because they have not yet earned those stripes.

Greatness has to be achieved, it has to be earned. Perhaps in a few years we will be speaking in different terms about each man in that list or perhaps we will always lament the fact they never got the chance to show their greatness (given the poor matchmaking of the current day)

But they can't yet be "rated" on their achievements

[Kalan]

Watching the DeGale vs Jack fight at the weekend made me think that Badou Jack is probably the most under rated champion around at the moment. Has wins over Anthony Dirrell, George Groves, Lucien Bute (in reality) and arguably DeGale (although I thought a draw was fair). Yet the next time he fights a top fighter he'll probably go in as the underdog again.

It made me wonder about who people think are some of the other underrated fighters of the past? I'm personally more interested in the modern era, but all shouts are welcome. Also, I'm more speaking about underrated even within boxing rather than by casuals because their opinion doesn't matter.
Mike McCallum is one I see mentioned a lot as being under rated, who else have you guys got?

Anybody who thinks a draw was fair in Jack-DeGale needs a brain scan and an eye exam -- and Jack is a s underrated... Keith Thurman is an underrated boxer... Errol Spence is... Artur Beterbiev is... Olexsandr Usyk is... Luis Ortiz is... Gennady Golovkin is... Sergei Kovalev still is... Daniel Jacobs is... Chris Eubank is... Anthony Joshua is... The WBC is treating Gary Russell like they treated Gennady Golovkin when he was their mandatory for years... They don't want Russell to do anything big and aren't giving him appropriate challengers.

Most of the names you have listed haven't achieved anything yet (or very little anyway)

These guys are respected for their talents, but not recognised or rated for their greatness. Because they have not yet earned those stripes.

Greatness has to be achieved, it has to be earned. Perhaps in a few years we will be speaking in different terms about each man in that list or perhaps we will always lament the fact they never got the chance to show their greatness (given the poor matchmaking of the current day)

But they can't yet be "rated" on their achievements

I didn't say they were great or had achieved a whole lot, did I ???? .... I said they're underrated boxers.. And considering their skills they are underrated... For instance Keith Thurman beat Robert Guerrero by and aggregate 14 points wider margin than Floyd beat RG... Guerrero won 3 rounds vs Floyd from each of the judges... Guerrero was allowed to butt and shove Thurman by Floyd's favorite referee Kenny Bayless...but RG took a savage beating, took a 9-count, and was nearly stopped... And Chris Eubank hasn't achieved a lot, but he can box well. A lot better than during his only loss over 2 years ago.. Gary Russell has great skills and is being avoided by the other top Featherweights.. It's hard to make your mark when that happens.

[davie]

Anybody who thinks a draw was fair in Jack-DeGale needs a brain scan and an eye exam -- and Jack is a s underrated... Keith Thurman is an underrated boxer... Errol Spence is... Artur Beterbiev is... Olexsandr Usyk is... Luis Ortiz is... Gennady Golovkin is... Sergei Kovalev still is... Daniel Jacobs is... Chris Eubank is... Anthony Joshua is... The WBC is treating Gary Russell like they treated Gennady Golovkin when he was their mandatory for years... They don't want Russell to do anything big and aren't giving him appropriate challengers.

Most of the names you have listed haven't achieved anything yet (or very little anyway)

These guys are respected for their talents, but not recognised or rated for their greatness. Because they have not yet earned those stripes.

Greatness has to be achieved, it has to be earned. Perhaps in a few years we will be speaking in different terms about each man in that list or perhaps we will always lament the fact they never got the chance to show their greatness (given the poor matchmaking of the current day)

But they can't yet be "rated" on their achievements

I didn't say they were great or had achieved a whole lot, did I ???? .... I said they're underrated boxers.. And considering their skills they are underrated... For instance Keith Thurman beat Robert Guerrero by and aggregate 14 points wider margin than Floyd beat RG... Guerrero won 3 rounds vs Floyd from each of the judges... Guerrero was allowed to butt and shove Thurman by Floyd's favorite referee Kenny Bayless...but RG took a savage beating, took a 9-count, and was nearly stopped... And Chris Eubank hasn't achieved a lot, but he can box well. A lot better than during his only loss over 2 years ago.. Gary Russell has great skills and is being avoided by the other top Featherweights.. It's hard to make your mark when that happens.

Fair enough, think we were talking about different things

I would say however, CEJ can perhaps flatter to deceive. The posing and posturing makes him look comfortable in there against weaker opposition.
His shots look heavy but I don't think he is really that heavy handed. A lot of eye catching stuff from him that wont come off at the top level.
He might have another strategy or have another gear to go through, but I think he has a lot to prove.

[ElJefe]

Watching the DeGale vs Jack fight at the weekend made me think that Badou Jack is probably the most under rated champion around at the moment. Has wins over Anthony Dirrell, George Groves, Lucien Bute (in reality) and arguably DeGale (although I thought a draw was fair). Yet the next time he fights a top fighter he'll probably go in as the underdog again.

It made me wonder about who people think are some of the other underrated fighters of the past? I'm personally more interested in the modern era, but all shouts are welcome. Also, I'm more speaking about underrated even within boxing rather than by casuals because their opinion doesn't matter.
Mike McCallum is one I see mentioned a lot as being under rated, who else have you guys got?

Anybody who thinks a draw was fair in Jack-DeGale needs a brain scan and an eye exam -- and Jack is a s underrated... Keith Thurman is an underrated boxer... Errol Spence is... Artur Beterbiev is... Olexsandr Usyk is... Luis Ortiz is... Gennady Golovkin is... Sergei Kovalev still is... Daniel Jacobs is... Chris Eubank is... Anthony Joshua is... The WBC is treating Gary Russell like they treated Gennady Golovkin when he was their mandatory for years... They don't want Russell to do anything big and aren't giving him appropriate challengers.

My brain and eyes are fine, thanks. You've listed a lot of good boxers, but I think most people rate those fighters quite highly despite a lot of them not being properly tested (Spence, Beterbiev, AJ) or coming up short when they have been (Jacobs, Eubank).

[IKSRTFO]

Watching the DeGale vs Jack fight at the weekend made me think that Badou Jack is probably the most under rated champion around at the moment. Has wins over Anthony Dirrell, George Groves, Lucien Bute (in reality) and arguably DeGale (although I thought a draw was fair). Yet the next time he fights a top fighter he'll probably go in as the underdog again.

It made me wonder about who people think are some of the other underrated fighters of the past? I'm personally more interested in the modern era, but all shouts are welcome. Also, I'm more speaking about underrated even within boxing rather than by casuals because their opinion doesn't matter.
Mike McCallum is one I see mentioned a lot as being under rated, who else have you guys got?

Anybody who thinks a draw was fair in Jack-DeGale needs a brain scan and an eye exam -- and Jack is a s underrated... Keith Thurman is an underrated boxer... Errol Spence is... Artur Beterbiev is... Olexsandr Usyk is... Luis Ortiz is... Gennady Golovkin is... Sergei Kovalev still is... Daniel Jacobs is... Chris Eubank is... Anthony Joshua is... The WBC is treating Gary Russell like they treated Gennady Golovkin when he was their mandatory for years... They don't want Russell to do anything big and aren't giving him appropriate challengers.

They treated Russell the same way they've always treated him....like a prospect. Really, he never got out of the prospect stage and when he stepped up, he lost. It's partly Russell and his handler's fault. If they would've stepped up sooner, he would've had plenty of big fights.

[BitPlayer]

Sonny Liston, and Larry Holmes, just shadowed by Ali.

[elmersalsa]

Rafael Herrera
Chucho Castillo
Johnny Famechon
Gilberto Roman
Raul Perez

[elmersalsa]

I think the great Eder Jofre was the most underrated fighter of them all.

Other greats like Emile Griffith and Luis Manuel Rodriguez don't get any love at all. They were some terrific fighters!

Great call on Rodriguez, Emile and jofre are rated plenty.

Griffith and Jofre in more ways than one are forgotten. Same with Rodriguez. Griffith nor Rodriguez received NO LOVE in the welterweight ranking of this forum. To me, Griffith is a top 10 all time welterweight and a top 25 pound per pound all time fighter. Rodriguez wasn't even mentioned very much in the welterweight ranking of this forum.
Jofre? We don't even talk about him at all. Maybe because he was in the shadow of The Greatest in the 1960s. Maybe he didn't come to fight in American soil very often. But, by looking at his videos and overall career, that guy was extraordinary and extremely talented. One of the most complete fighters I have seen on film.

[elmersalsa]

The great Emile Griffith. Too many people forgot that he was a triple crown world champion. To me, he is a top 5 welterweight, but we in this forum completely dismissed him from that top 5 ranking. It really makes me think if we really ranked the all time welterweight class accordingly.

Another one that we don't talk about him much was The great Cuban Hawk Kid Gavilan.

Maybe time is making us forget these gems of boxing greats.

[Tomasino]

I think the great Eder Jofre was the most underrated fighter of them all.

Other greats like Emile Griffith and Luis Manuel Rodriguez don't get any love at all. They were some terrific fighters!

Great call on Rodriguez, Emile and jofre are rated plenty.

Griffith and Jofre in more ways than one are forgotten. Same with Rodriguez. Griffith nor Rodriguez received NO LOVE in the welterweight ranking of this forum. To me, Griffith is a top 10 all time welterweight and a top 25 pound per pound all time fighter. Rodriguez wasn't even mentioned very much in the welterweight ranking of this forum.
Jofre? We don't even talk about him at all. Maybe because he was in the shadow of The Greatest in the 1960s. Maybe he didn't come to fight in American soil very often. But, by looking at his videos and overall career, that guy was extraordinary and extremely talented. One of the most complete fighters I have seen on film.

Elmer, Emile Griffith finished up 4th on the Welterweight poll. That's quite high enough and is indeed inside the top 5....

[elmersalsa]

Great call on Rodriguez, Emile and jofre are rated plenty.

Griffith and Jofre in more ways than one are forgotten. Same with Rodriguez. Griffith nor Rodriguez received NO LOVE in the welterweight ranking of this forum. To me, Griffith is a top 10 all time welterweight and a top 25 pound per pound all time fighter. Rodriguez wasn't even mentioned very much in the welterweight ranking of this forum.
Jofre? We don't even talk about him at all. Maybe because he was in the shadow of The Greatest in the 1960s. Maybe he didn't come to fight in American soil very often. But, by looking at his videos and overall career, that guy was extraordinary and extremely talented. One of the most complete fighters I have seen on film.

Elmer, Emile Griffith finished up 4th on the Welterweight poll. That's quite high enough and is indeed inside the top 5....

Did he? What about Kid Gavilan? He should have been top 5 in our views. Putting The Hitman above him was ludicrous. I don't consider The Hitman a better boxer than this Cuban giant. No way! I believe Gavilan was better than Hearns at welterweight and also pound per pound.

[Give up]

Winky Wright

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I think the great Eder Jofre was the most underrated fighter of them all.

Other greats like Emile Griffith and Luis Manuel Rodriguez don't get any love at all. They were some terrific fighters!

Great call on Rodriguez, Emile and jofre are rated plenty.

Griffith and Jofre in more ways than one are forgotten. Same with Rodriguez. Griffith nor Rodriguez received NO LOVE in the welterweight ranking of this forum. To me, Griffith is a top 10 all time welterweight and a top 25 pound per pound all time fighter. Rodriguez wasn't even mentioned very much in the welterweight ranking of this forum.
Jofre? We don't even talk about him at all. Maybe because he was in the shadow of The Greatest in the 1960s. Maybe he didn't come to fight in American soil very often. But, by looking at his videos and overall career, that guy was extraordinary and extremely talented. One of the most complete fighters I have seen on film.

[cfang]

If you want to talk about under rated fighters, particularly on the net, look no further than Jose Napoles. His crime is quite simple, he is NOT American. For every mention of him, there are a thousand mentions of Leonard, or Tommy Hearns who are certainly no better than him. The guy avenged all of his defeats save for the Middleweight Monzon, and lastly Stracey, ( which doesn't count anyway because Jose had been in the game 18 years and was well past his best ) and fought all comers.

Oh yeah, also the great Mike McCallum who through no fault of his own is forced by popular mythology to live in the " shadow " of the so called fab 4 who wanted about as much to do with him as they did with cancer.

Mike McCallum was not ducked by the big four - its a total urban myth. I remember those days and he wasn't even mentioned as a super fight for any of the big four at the time. With Hagler, well Hagler fought hearns in april 1985 - at that time Mike had one one portion of the lt middle crown beating sean mannion on points and defended it once. Defo not a possible opponent for hagler who wanted mega fights and retired two fights later. By the time McCallum fought at middle for the first time (losing to kalambay), hagler was retired a year.

McCallum came into his own at middle in 1990/91 when he beat graham, collins and won the rematch with kalambay. At that time, Hearns was fighting at super middle/lt heavy and leonard was finished by then. Suppose you could make a case for duran fighting McCallum but he was finished in really big fights after losing to leonard in 1989. McCallum wasn't ducked by the big four, he wasn't a huge fight for any of them and also wasn't a big draw either. When considering Leonard, hearns and duran as lighter men all took on hagler who was totally fearsome - i don't think they'd be afraid to take on mccallum - it just didn't make sense most of the time.

[cfang]

If you want to talk about under rated fighters, particularly on the net, look no further than Jose Napoles. His crime is quite simple, he is NOT American. For every mention of him, there are a thousand mentions of Leonard, or Tommy Hearns who are certainly no better than him. The guy avenged all of his defeats save for the Middleweight Monzon, and lastly Stracey, ( which doesn't count anyway because Jose had been in the game 18 years and was well past his best ) and fought all comers.

Oh yeah, also the great Mike McCallum who through no fault of his own is forced by popular mythology to live in the " shadow " of the so called fab 4 who wanted about as much to do with him as they did with cancer.

Mike McCallum was not ducked by the big four - its a total urban myth. I remember those days and he wasn't even mentioned as a super fight for any of the big four at the time. With Hagler, well Hagler fought hearns in april 1985 - at that time Mike had one one portion of the lt middle crown beating sean mannion on points and defended it once. Defo not a possible opponent for hagler who wanted mega fights and retired two fights later. By the time McCallum fought at middle for the first time (losing to kalambay), hagler was retired a year.

McCallum came into his own at middle in 1990/91 when he beat graham, collins and won the rematch with kalambay. At that time, Hearns was fighting at super middle/lt heavy and leonard was finished by then. Suppose you could make a case for duran fighting McCallum but he was finished in really big fights after losing to leonard in 1989. McCallum wasn't ducked by the big four, he wasn't a huge fight for any of them and also wasn't a big draw either. When considering Leonard, hearns and duran as lighter men all took on hagler who was totally fearsome - i don't think they'd be afraid to take on mccallum - it just didn't make sense most of the time.

Firstly, McCallum was a Light Middle champion from 84 - 88, when he tried to go up for the 160 title losing to Kalambay, then he tried again and won it against Graham in 89. So yes, Leonard, Hearns, and Duran could have fought him at 154 within that time frame if they had chosen to.

There is also the documented meeting between Leonard and MM at Ceasars Palace when both were attending a fight in which SRL told Mike the reason he was not being entertained by the 3 mentioned above was because he was considered high risk for low reward, with SRL also saying he couldn't speak for Hagler on the matter.

So yes, there is ample reason to believe that certainly Hearns Leonard and Duran wanted less than ferk all to do with MM, and possibly Hagler too, because it was NO secret that McCallum was a lot better fighter than Mugabi, who gave Marvin more than enough trouble in their fight circa 86.

At the time that wasn't the case at all. Looking back now mugabi wasn't as good as McCallum but at the time he fought hagler he was 25-0 with 25kos. He looked unstoppable and it was a big fight. McCallum wasn't in the frame for that fight. At that time he'd won the lt middle title and defended it against a couple of guys who weren't big names. He was considered a good fighter but this was before he beat Jackson or mccrory or curry. He wasn't a big name at all so wasn't an opponent for hagler who was into super fights.

Also Leonard was retired from 84-87 and only came back for hagler.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

If you want to talk about under rated fighters, particularly on the net, look no further than Jose Napoles. His crime is quite simple, he is NOT American. For every mention of him, there are a thousand mentions of Leonard, or Tommy Hearns who are certainly no better than him. The guy avenged all of his defeats save for the Middleweight Monzon, and lastly Stracey, ( which doesn't count anyway because Jose had been in the game 18 years and was well past his best ) and fought all comers.

Oh yeah, also the great Mike McCallum who through no fault of his own is forced by popular mythology to live in the " shadow " of the so called fab 4 who wanted about as much to do with him as they did with cancer.

Mike McCallum was not ducked by the big four - its a total urban myth. I remember those days and he wasn't even mentioned as a super fight for any of the big four at the time. With Hagler, well Hagler fought hearns in april 1985 - at that time Mike had one one portion of the lt middle crown beating sean mannion on points and defended it once. Defo not a possible opponent for hagler who wanted mega fights and retired two fights later. By the time McCallum fought at middle for the first time (losing to kalambay), hagler was retired a year.

McCallum came into his own at middle in 1990/91 when he beat graham, collins and won the rematch with kalambay. At that time, Hearns was fighting at super middle/lt heavy and leonard was finished by then. Suppose you could make a case for duran fighting McCallum but he was finished in really big fights after losing to leonard in 1989. McCallum wasn't ducked by the big four, he wasn't a huge fight for any of them and also wasn't a big draw either. When considering Leonard, hearns and duran as lighter men all took on hagler who was totally fearsome - i don't think they'd be afraid to take on mccallum - it just didn't make sense most of the time.

Duran 'ducked' McCallum to unify with hearns. Telling that Mike moved up to middle after hagler retired. He never mentioned Marvin's name. Not surprised this moron subscribes to those myths. Maybe if you're lucky he can tell you about how Leonard ducked Pryor next.