BoxRec

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: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.

Agree. I do think Chavez was a great fighter but his best victories are over good but not great fighters (and I include Taylor in there as well, and that fight is more than a little controversial). His big chance vs Whitaker he got taken to school.

Care to name some fighters, D-Fire, who wouldn't get taken to school by that version of Whitaker when they were two, perhaps three, weightclasses above their natural division, had the better part of a hundred pro fights in their rear-view mirror (with Chavez's take-some-to-give-some style, no less) & thirteen years as a pro on their resume?

Pretty harsh marking, brojam. Whitaker could've schooled the best of them (ever), if they were at similar points in their careers.

dom74 wrote:Jeff Lacy pre Calzaghe was horrendously overated

That doesnt make sense. People thought Lacy would beat him before the fight and he won. That meens he was underrated. This win in turn gets undervalued because in many peoples eyes Lacy was overrated.

Anyone who says Calzaghe is the most overrated is confused. By definition of ''overrated '' Lacy should come higher in any list

Not only that he beat Kessler and Hopkins afterwards in fights which opinion was split over who would win. If he was expected to dominate in these 3 fights and lost then there could be claims for him being overrated, however close fights were expected and Joe won two of then convincingly

sg1985 wrote:

JDC wrote:

dom74 wrote:Jeff Lacy pre Calzaghe was horrendously overated

That doesnt make sense. People thought Lacy would beat him before the fight and he won. That meens he was underrated. This win in turn gets undervalued because in many peoples eyes Lacy was overrated.

Anyone who says Calzaghe is the most overrated is confused. By definition of ''overrated '' Lacy should come higher in any list

Not only that he beat Kessler and Hopkins afterwards in fights which opinion was split over who would win. If he was expected to dominate in these 3 fights and lost then there could be claims for him being overrated, however close fights were expected and Joe won two of then convincingly

He was saying Jeff Lacy was overrated........I think.

Oh yeah, oops. Read it backwards for some reason. Alot of people are saying Calzaghe though, so lets just pretend I was saying it to them DD

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Care to name some fighters, D-Fire, who wouldn't get taken to school by that version of Whitaker when they were two, perhaps three, weightclasses above their natural division, had the better part of a hundred pro fights in their rear-view mirror (with Chavez's take-some-to-give-some style, no less) & thirteen years as a pro on their resume?

Pretty harsh marking, brojam. Whitaker could've schooled the best of them (ever), if they were at similar points in their careers.

And Whitaker was not two weight classes above his best weight as well?

13 years as a pro? Chavez was in his 10th year and in 83 he only had one fight. And would Whitaker have done that to Duran, Williams, Ross, McClarnin, Ortiz etc.? I say no.


As I said, a great fighter but when your best victories are over Ramizez, Camacho, Taylor, Rosairo and you get taken to school in your career fight with the other best 135-140 lber of your generation, I don't rank you as one of the PFP best of all time, which is where many rank him.

Whitaker was two divisions above his best, which is why I said, "that version" instead of, "a prime Whitaker." He was still a hell of a lot more of a force at 147lbs. than Chavez, nonetheless.

Years aside (the fight was in '93, & Chavez turned pro in '80), he still had almost a hundred fights under his belt (more than one of which came in '83 --- don't know where your stats on that came from), achieved in a boxing style pretty much synonymous with short careers. He was also better-suited to the weight at the time they met there. Hey, Whitaker would've always bested him, at any weight, in my view, but there's no shame in that, & what happened favoured Whitaker.

Quite an irony, here. I'm such a Whitaker fanatic, I rank him in my top five favourites of all-time. The win over Chavez was absolutely tremendous, but not without flaws I'm compelled to point out, in defense of what I see as unfair marking of the man. However, I can't consider Chavez, "one of the very best pound-for-pound ever," as I agree with you on that. Still, I get the feeling if we compiled a long list of history's best, you & I would place him quite some distance apart.

I think he probably belongs in the 50-100 range and I know that's a strange spot for calling someone overrated. But those all time things are in tiers for me and he should be a tier below where most place him. I've seen him in top 10's and top20's on many lists and that's a complete joke.

Of course Julio Cesar Chavez should be listed among the all time greats. There is no way Chavez should be considered overrated. He beat a Who’s Who of fighters from 130-140 pounds in the 80s and 90s. Meldrick Taylor was considered the number 1 or 2 pound for pound fighter when Chavez beat him to a pulp and left him knocked out on his feet and consequently, had a profound influence on the course of boxing in the early 1990s.

Duran and Arguello were thumped when they moved up in weight also. At least Chavez’ losses and draws came well past his prime when he should have retired.

Julio Cesar Chavez is a first ballot induction into the Hall of Fame, and very much deservedly so.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I think he probably belongs in the 50-100 range and I know that's a strange spot for calling someone overrated. But those all time things are in tiers for me and he should be a tier below where most place him. I've seen him in top 10's and top20's on many lists and that's a complete joke.

He'd never make my top ten or twenty, to be clear. However, when you're talking about the top ten or twenty, irrespective of weight, ever, that's at least as much a praising of those men as it is a criticism of the ones, such as Chavez, you're excluding. Probably moreso, in my book.

I don't think chavez is overrated at all. No, he did not beat any legends. But he beat so many really good fighters (many of them easily) that there should be no doubt that he was a great fighter.

There are other fighters who never beat a legend but beat enough really good fighters that there is little doubt that they were great. For example, Tony Zale never beat any ATG's. Joe Louis didn't either. (Not including Conn, who was a weight class below him.) Neither did Ruben Olivares.

Hard to say who is the most overrated. Most people just name the guys they don't like and say they are overrated.

Ambling Alp wrote:I don't think chavez is overrated at all. No, he did not beat any legends. But he beat so many really good fighters (many of them easily) that there should be no doubt that he was a great fighter.

There are other fighters who never beat a legend but beat enough really good fighters that there is little doubt that they were great. For example, Tony Zale never beat any ATG's. Joe Louis didn't either. (Not including Conn, who was a weight class below him.) Neither did Ruben Olivares.

Hard to say who is the most overrated. Most people just name the guys they don't like and say they are overrated.

Kostya Tszyu another instance of your second paragraph, Alp? What you think?

Ambling Alp wrote:I don't think chavez is overrated at all. No, he did not beat any legends. But he beat so many really good fighters (many of them easily) that there should be no doubt that he was a great fighter.

There are other fighters who never beat a legend but beat enough really good fighters that there is little doubt that they were great. For example, Tony Zale never beat any ATG's. Joe Louis didn't either. (Not including Conn, who was a weight class below him.) Neither did Ruben Olivares.

Hard to say who is the most overrated. Most people just name the guys they don't like and say they are overrated.

Has anyone doubted he was a great fighter? I certainly never have. The whole term overrated in a forum such as this is asking for something subjective when it's probably coming down to a great fighter that is still overrated to you. Boxers of the past indicates career over, so you can't just pluck out a Livingstone Bramble that was considered top 5 p4p at a time.

Chavez was definitely great, but when I see 70 or 80% of this forum saying he was greater than Thomas hearns. That's overrated to me when Tommy has him definitively in accomplishments & arguably in talent. And by arguably I mean overwhelmingly to me.

Now that last paragraph, I don't agree with.

I think, as incredible as this sounds, I view Duran similarly to how you view Chavez. Duran was definitely greater than Chavez in both competition & ability, but too many people on forums grew up watching him (I didn't), & I feel his legacy is swollen beyond reality --- I think it's one of the most tremendous in history, before anyone starts on me, but the guy is partly held in such high regard because a lot of people of forum-age have the fondest memories of him, & of the times in their lives when they were watching him.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Now that last paragraph, I don't agree with.

I think, as incredible as this sounds, I view Duran similarly to how you view Chavez. Duran was definitely greater than Chavez in both competition & ability, but too many people on forums grew up watching him (I didn't), & I feel his legacy is swollen beyond reality --- I think it's one of the most tremendous in history, before anyone starts on me, but the guy is partly held in such high regard because a lot of people of forum-age have the fondest memories of him, & of the times in their lives when they were watching him.

I didn't grow up in Duran era, but from seeing his fights, he's better than Chavez. Chavez was great but his biggest wins are against Taylor and Camacho. Hearns and Chavez don't belong in the same sentence.

I don't see how you can fault a guy who faced against top opposition. Chavez was what he was. I don't see the Whitaker fight destroying his legacy. Whitaker didn't have a clear loss until he was 35!

The problem I have with alot of fans in general is that they put too much factor in the resume. Is resume important? Hell yeah!! I'm not doubting the fact that competing against your contemporaries is 100% important. But you guys have to watch the fights and see how he won. Chavez put an all-time performance against Rosario. Talk about text book infighting, Hatton or any fighter for that matter can learn a thing or nine from Chavez that day.

I don't think Hamed was overrated as well. Nobody's putting him in the Hall of Fame or even think he was an all-time great for that matter. He was entertaining to say the least, and Hamed/Kelley was the mini Foreman/Lyle.

Chavez was indeed savagely splendid against Rosario. Brilliant performance.

I rank Chavez above Hearns for achievements. Call me nuts.

You're nuts

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Chavez was indeed savagely splendid against Rosario. Brilliant performance.

I rank Chavez above Hearns for achievements. Call me nuts.

You're right. The Rosario fight catapulted Chavez to Fighter of the Year over Sugar Ray Leonard and Mike Tyson by the Boxing Writers. That how brilliant Chavez' performance was.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:I don't think chavez is overrated at all. No, he did not beat any legends. But he beat so many really good fighters (many of them easily) that there should be no doubt that he was a great fighter.

There are other fighters who never beat a legend but beat enough really good fighters that there is little doubt that they were great. For example, Tony Zale never beat any ATG's. Joe Louis didn't either. (Not including Conn, who was a weight class below him.) Neither did Ruben Olivares.

Hard to say who is the most overrated. Most people just name the guys they don't like and say they are overrated.

Kostya Tszyu another instance of your second paragraph, Alp? What you think?

No. Tszyu didn't beat anywhere near the overall competition that Zale, Louis, Olivares and others did. Almost all of the good fighters that he beat were way past it when he fought them.

No, he didn't, but what's fundamentally wrong with the case that Tszyu beat enough good fighters --- taking into account his actual in-ring talent, to be considered a great fighter, without a true A-lister on his resume?

To clarify, "Great," I'm talking HOF-material, not necessarily on-par with the men you mentioned.

..azumah nelson....a good fighter...but i think "the professor" is stretching it.

Aftermath wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Chavez was indeed savagely splendid against Rosario. Brilliant performance.

I rank Chavez above Hearns for achievements. Call me nuts.

You're right. The Rosario fight catapulted Chavez to Fighter of the Year over Sugar Ray Leonard and Mike Tyson by the Boxing Writers. That how brilliant Chavez' performance was.

It was one of those nights that Chavez could've beaten almost anyone. Rosario fought as tough as he wanted to be, but Chavez put a A+ class whooping to him. Just you doubters call him overrated and then watch this fight.

As for Hearns, if it werent for his legs, he could've been at the other side of history. His heart, his skills, his talent, his intangibles was there, but there's still something about coming so short...... its not as good as a win. But Hearns is another one of those guys who's a HOFer by just aesthetically watching him and he, underratedly, gave alot to the sport. I mean, c'mon if there was a guy as dangerous as Hearns today, you'd give him a shot against any Welterweight now.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:No, he didn't, but what's fundamentally wrong with the case that Tszyu beat enough good fighters --- taking into account his actual in-ring talent, to be considered a great fighter, without a true A-lister on his resume?

To clarify, "Great," I'm talking HOF-material, not necessarily on-par with the men you mentioned.

Well, I don't think he beat a lot "B-listers", either given the stage of the career of the fighters.
I was never overly impressed with his "in the ring talent." Very good, but not that special.

As for the HOF, sure he will make it. Will he deserve it? Depends on how you look at things. There are certainly fighters already in the Hall of Fame that he was better than. However, there are some that aren't in that were better than him.

i've been waiting for someone to make some "chavez was overrated" comments. well, let's see here:

* 107-6-2 86 KO's overall record as a pro
* Fought for 26 years, 7 months as a pro
* 115 pro fights
* 27 successful title defenses (1st all-time)
* 23 successful title defenses before losing first fight
* 37 world title fights (1st or 2nd all-time)
* 31-4-2 22 KO's record in world title fights
* 89-0-1 75 KO's before losing his first fight
* had 16 successful title defenses as jr. welterweight champion (record)
* three division titlist before losing first fight
* 9 years as a world champion before losing first fight
* fought 16 different former world champions - (21 total fights) - 15-4-2 record. (most of these losses (3) were when he was already
way past his prime. (oscar de la hoya twice and kostya tszyu).
* fought 5 hall of famers (de la hoya, hector camacho, pernell whitaker, kostya tszyu, edwin rosario). de la hoya, camacho and tszyu are future HOFers.
* rated by most boxing experts as the number one jr. welterweight of all-time!

* notable opponents:
oscar de la hoya (2) pernell whitaker meldrick taylor (2) kostya tszyu hector camacho edwin rosario
miguel angel gonzalez juan la porte rocky lockridge jose luis ramirez frankie randall (3) tony "the tiger" lopez
ruben castillo roger mayweather (2) greg haugen joey gamache david kamau rafael "bazooka" limon
mario miranda

* not bad for someone with no or very little amateur experience!
* name another boxer today with these stats and numbers
* a prime chavez beats de la hoya and kostya tszyu. the only fighter he would have lost in his prime is pernell whitaker.

STILL THINK CHAVEZ WAS OVERRATED?

Definitely was overrated, mainly because of rabid fans like yourself. Joey Gamache? Please tell me you didn't just list that as some sort of win worth mentioning. You even list the third Randall fight as something of significance.

The best thing I can say about that post is that it was quite long and you must have spent a good deal of time on it. Doesn't change a thing about Chavez career, sorry.

He was a surefire HOFer that many place tags of greatness on him that he never earned in the ring. Somebody that was completely owned by Frankie Randall, really has some short comings.