BoxRec

Decagon wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Since you added Michael Spinks, how about giving the Light-Heavyweight version of Michael Moorer a mention?

Not mentioned nearly enough amongst the great 175lbers.

Wouldn't a great World Light Heavyweight Champion have to take on top-10 fighters?

Tunney and Charles were great fighters, but not great World Heavyweight Champions. Here are some underrated World Champions:

• Chang Jung-koo: He never unified the title, but he was unstoppable at 108.
• Sandy Saddler: Given who he beat, how he fought and the length of his title reigns, he could easily be one of the top-10 fighters of all time, pound-for-pound. You could make an argument that he was the greatest fighter ever.
• Miguel Canto: About once every two or three years, we talk about the greatest flyweights of all time, and wonder if he's #2 or #1. We usually give Jimmy Wilde the nod, along with the top-10 pound-for-pound ranking that goes with it, but I can't help but think that Canto was a lot better.
• Henry Armstrong: He gets all the pound-for-pound talk, but he was a great World Featherweight Champion and a great World Welterweight Champion. He didn't make many defenses at 126, but he unified the title, something that great fighters do (the borderline cases are Kostya Tszyu and Donald Curry). 19 defenses at 147, weighing 133 pounds a lot of the time. The quality of his greatness is overrated, perhaps, but the substance of his greatness is often ignored.
• Maxie Rosenbloom:If they hadn't stolen the title from him, he might've been the best ever.

silkov wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:First of all, I want to reply to Silkov's comment about Kalambay being almost 40 when he got knocked out in the first round by Nunn. He was only 32. This was 3 years before he beat the great Herol Graham. Kalambay was very close to his prime when he got knocked out by Nunn.

2nd, losing to Kalue isn't an embarrassment. But when you are saying that a guy is one of the most underrated fighters in history, then this has to count against him. Kalue wasn't a great fighter.

Kalambay's positives and negatives should be weighed when evaluating him. Obviously his two close fights with McCallum would be a positive. However, I can't see why wins over people like Doug DeWitt and Robbie Sims should mean much. They were very limited fighters. Iran Barkley is a nice win, but nothing spectaular. Barkley was a very inconsistent fighter who lost to a lot of people.

I'm not saying that Kalambay was a stiff or anything like that. He was obviously a good fighter. However, there is no way that he is one the top 10 underrated fighters in the more history of the sport. We are talking about a span of over 100 years here.

To me, Kalambay was one of several good but not great middleweights/super middleweights of the late 1980's and early 1990's. He certainly doesn't stand out as clearly the best of these guys.

As for Eddie Mustapha Muhammad- Well of course he has some negatives as well. However, a points loss to James Scott isn't nearly as bad a a first round knockout loss to Michael Nunn. Mustapha also beat Mathew Saad Muhammad who is in the Hall of Fame and Marvin Johnson who probably should be. He also had several nice wins against good contenders. Mustapha gave a prime Michael Spinks a tough fight as well. In another era, Mustapha Muhammad would have been a dominaint lightheavyweight champion for several year. When you at his entire career, it was a Hall of Fame type career.

Its well known that Kalambay was rumoured to be at least 5 years older than his offical age. As for his win over Graham, you seem to only be seeing their second fight in '92, Kalambay first beat Graham in '87 when both were at their peaks and Graham was unbeaten in 38 fights. Holding the Nunn fight against Kalambay is harsh, he got caught cold by a guy who at the time was reputed by some to be the best p4p in the world.
As for there being other fighters who could have made my underrated list I agree, fighters like Freddie Miller, Louis Kid Kaplan, Benny Bass etc are just a few who could make it, but my aim was to compose a list of fighter whom most people will recognise and that most people have seen, its pretty self explanatory really.....
And my main point is Kalambay does stand out as one of the best of his era, his record speaks for itself, he beat guys that the other guys avoided yet he gets no credit.... people go on about how good Mccallum and Graham were (and they were) but hardly anyone mentions the only guy who beat them both when they were in their primes, hence Kalambay belongs in my underrated list.... 8)

Decagon wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Since you added Michael Spinks, how about giving the Light-Heavyweight version of Michael Moorer a mention?

Not mentioned nearly enough amongst the great 175lbers.

Wouldn't a great World Light Heavyweight Champion have to take on top-10 fighters?

Tunney and Charles were great fighters, but not great World Heavyweight Champions. Here are some underrated World Champions:

• Chang Jung-koo: He never unified the title, but he was unstoppable at 108.
• Sandy Saddler: Given who he beat, how he fought and the length of his title reigns, he could easily be one of the top-10 fighters of all time, pound-for-pound. You could make an argument that he was the greatest fighter ever.
• Miguel Canto: About once every two or three years, we talk about the greatest flyweights of all time, and wonder if he's #2 or #1. We usually give Jimmy Wilde the nod, along with the top-10 pound-for-pound ranking that goes with it, but I can't help but think that Canto was a lot better.
• Henry Armstrong: He gets all the pound-for-pound talk, but he was a great World Featherweight Champion and a great World Welterweight Champion. He didn't make many defenses at 126, but he unified the title, something that great fighters do (the borderline cases are Kostya Tszyu and Donald Curry). 19 defenses at 147, weighing 133 pounds a lot of the time. The quality of his greatness is overrated, perhaps, but the substance of his greatness is often ignored.
• Maxie Rosenbloom:If they hadn't stolen the title from him, he might've been the best ever.

Ambling Alp wrote:

silkov wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:First of all, I want to reply to Silkov's comment about Kalambay being almost 40 when he got knocked out in the first round by Nunn. He was only 32. This was 3 years before he beat the great Herol Graham. Kalambay was very close to his prime when he got knocked out by Nunn.

2nd, losing to Kalue isn't an embarrassment. But when you are saying that a guy is one of the most underrated fighters in history, then this has to count against him. Kalue wasn't a great fighter.

Kalambay's positives and negatives should be weighed when evaluating him. Obviously his two close fights with McCallum would be a positive. However, I can't see why wins over people like Doug DeWitt and Robbie Sims should mean much. They were very limited fighters. Iran Barkley is a nice win, but nothing spectaular. Barkley was a very inconsistent fighter who lost to a lot of people.

I'm not saying that Kalambay was a stiff or anything like that. He was obviously a good fighter. However, there is no way that he is one the top 10 underrated fighters in the more history of the sport. We are talking about a span of over 100 years here.

To me, Kalambay was one of several good but not great middleweights/super middleweights of the late 1980's and early 1990's. He certainly doesn't stand out as clearly the best of these guys.

As for Eddie Mustapha Muhammad- Well of course he has some negatives as well. However, a points loss to James Scott isn't nearly as bad a a first round knockout loss to Michael Nunn. Mustapha also beat Mathew Saad Muhammad who is in the Hall of Fame and Marvin Johnson who probably should be. He also had several nice wins against good contenders. Mustapha gave a prime Michael Spinks a tough fight as well. In another era, Mustapha Muhammad would have been a dominaint lightheavyweight champion for several year. When you at his entire career, it was a Hall of Fame type career.

Its well known that Kalambay was rumoured to be at least 5 years older than his offical age. As for his win over Graham, you seem to only be seeing their second fight in '92, Kalambay first beat Graham in '87 when both were at their peaks and Graham was unbeaten in 38 fights. Holding the Nunn fight against Kalambay is harsh, he got caught cold by a guy who at the time was reputed by some to be the best p4p in the world.
As for there being other fighters who could have made my underrated list I agree, fighters like Freddie Miller, Louis Kid Kaplan, Benny Bass etc are just a few who could make it, but my aim was to compose a list of fighter whom most people will recognise and that most people have seen, its pretty self explanatory really.....
And my main point is Kalambay does stand out as one of the best of his era, his record speaks for itself, he beat guys that the other guys avoided yet he gets no credit.... people go on about how good Mccallum and Graham were (and they were) but hardly anyone mentions the only guy who beat them both when they were in their primes, hence Kalambay belongs in my underrated list.... 8)

I never heard that Kalambay was supposedly 5 years older than his official records. Is there any hard evidence of this? Or is this BS like Sonny Liston and Marvin Hagler being older than their official birthdate given?
If there is hard evidence that he is really 5 years older than listed that would make a difference.
I never buy the "got caught cold" excuse. When you get knocked out, you got knocked out. It's about as a lame of an excuse as you can come up with. Nunn was a good fighter, but to get knocked out by him in the first round is embarrassing. It has to count aganinst you.
I guess you thought I was serious when I referred to Herold Graham as a great fighter. I certainly don't. He was far from it. I consider Kalambay better than him and he proved it. Are there many people out there who think Graham is better?
If there really is, then maybe Kalambay is vastly underrated (or more likely that Graham is overrated).

Yes, Kalambay does deserve a lot of credit for his two close fights with McCallum. However, if you look at the rest of their careers, McCallum was the better fighter. Though you may be right that perhaps the gap is closer than many people think.

As for your list only including fighters that most people have seen and that it's rather self explanatory- I don't think it is. You have me confused. You have Tunney and Jeffries on it. Most people have seen very little or no film of either of them. Therefore I thought you were including every fighter in history.
I think we talked enough about Kalambay. I will give you the last word.