New Game-Overrated or Underrated

[My2Sense]

Joe Jeanette

IMO, he gets overrated because of his association with the other supposedly "blacklisted" (no pun intended) black contenders of his era, and because of his legendary battle with Sam McVey. In fact, he consistently came often second best against fighters like Langford, Johnson, and Wills, and in one of his few fights against a top white fighter, he only came away with a disputed decision win against Georges Carpentier, who was basically only a super-middleweight at that time.


Next up: Brian Mitchell.

[Big Bad John]

Joe Jeanette

IMO, he gets overrated because of his association with the other supposedly "blacklisted" (no pun intended) black contenders of his era, and because of his legendary battle with Sam McVey. In fact, he consistently came often second best against fighters like Langford, Johnson, and Wills, and in one of his few fights against a top white fighter, he only came away with a disputed decision win against Georges Carpentier, who was basically only a super-middleweight at that time.


Next up: Brian Mitchell.

See, I'd disagree. Jeanette had 200 or 300 fights, and just look at who he beat:

• George Cole (Jeanette clearly won the series)
• Jack Johnson (The much larger Johnson clearly won the series)
• Sam Langford (Sam Langford won a close series that saw two fights even, three wins for Jeanette and the rest Langford)
• Sam McVea (Jeanette won the series)
• Sandy Ferguson (Jeanette clearly won the series)
• Al Kubiak (Jeanette clearly won the series)
• Battling Jim Johnson (Jeanette swept the series)
• Jeff Clark (1-0)
• Georges Carpentier (1-0)
• "Big" Bill Tate (Jeanette swept the series)
• Porky Dan Flynn (1-0)
• Kid Norfolk (1-0-0-1)

Between Jeffries and Dempsey, he was clearly the third-best heavyweight, behind only Langford and Johnson, against whom he has a combined four victories.

Mitchell, again, is a tough one, because he gets so much love in South Africa, and that's pretty much all you hear of him. I'm going to say he's overrated, though. Sure. 39 straight victories, beat every man he stepped into the ring with over 49 fights, 13-0-2 in title bouts. Beat no one of worth aside from Toney Lopez (shout out to the West Coast Boxing thread!).

[HomicideHenry]

Since BBJ didnt post up a person to be rated as over-rated or under-rated, I imagine this thread needs to be...


BUMPED!!!

[Big Bad John]

Sorry, forgot again.

Erik Morales

[Harvey Levy]

Sorry, forgot again.

Erik Morales

Between Jeffries and Dempsey, he was clearly the third-best heavyweight, behind only Langford and Johnson, against whom he has a combined four victories.


I think you forgot Harry Wills.

Erik Morales beat Barrera and Paquiao, was champion of three different divisions. Tough Mexican fighter who didn't take a step backwards. A crowd pleaser. As Paquiao's stature grows so will Morales victory over him be seen as one incredible accomplishment.

IMO, underrated.

Next,

Freddie Steele

[Big Bad John]

Morales wasn't the champion of 122 or 126, just a title holder. He was close to it at 130, though.

Steele had a legendary undefeated streak, from September of 1932 to January of 1938. His only losses before 1938 were against fighters he beat on multiple occassions. Because of title confusion, he was not universally recognized as World Middleweight Champion. He's not only badly underrated, but he's arguably one of the 20 or 25 greatest middleweights of all time.

And Harry Wills did a lot of his best work after Dempsey won the title.

Baby Arizmendi

[My2Sense]

Sorry, forgot again.

Erik Morales

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! :x

You just did this one on Page 2! :x

Morales is overrated. At 126, he didn't do much. At 130, he lost more than he won. And at 122, he didn't really face that many great fighters. He's no Marco Antonio Barrera.

Dude, you are singlehandedly going to be the death of this thread!!

[Big Bad John]

Bullshit. While I may have forgotten what's been posted on this topic, I've also forgotten more about boxing than you could ever dream of knowing. Further, you are compromising the thread by not talking about Baby Arizmendi.

[Evander]

Spinks is so underrated, it hardly bears thinking.

That's it I'm not playing

[Seamus]

Underrated. If you consider Henry Armstrong one of the best ever, then you have to rate Arizmendi for beating him twice, even if it was relatively early in Armstrong's career. Plenty of other wins, LaBarba, Newsboy Brown twice, Freddie Miller, Davey Day, Chalky Wright twice, Speddy Dado, etc, not to mention that he had 20 pro fights before he was 16.

Next (I'll try it again)
Jim Braddock

[Harvey Levy]

And Harry Wills did a lot of his best work after Dempsey won the title.

Baby Arizmendi

Harry Wills was 9 - 1 - 1 against Sam Langford between 1914 and 1919 and was recognized as Black HW champion by 1918. He also defeated Joe Jeanette a few months after the Dempsey - Willard fight. He was clearly the best of the HW during the era you mentioned and should have been HW champ as Wills, IMO, would have crushed Willard. I can understand omitting Wills do to an honest oversight but to then claim than you left him out on purpose just diminishes your status as an accreditable boxing historian.

[HomicideHenry]

Jim Braddock is under-rated overall as a fighter, how can you not rate a man highly overall when he was one of the best light heavies in the world, and then became heavyweight champion? Wins over John Henry Lewis, one of the best 175 pounders ever, and heavies like Lasky and Baer, no matter how you look at it, is fairly good among the greatest fighters of all time. No he wasnt no Loughran or Foster or Spinks, let alone Moore and Tunney and Conn and Charles as a 175 pounder, and no he wasn't an ATG heavyweight either, but he was durable, he was crafty, he had power at both weights, and how many men can you really name who seemed to "peak" twice in their careers?


George Foreman

[My2Sense]

Jim Braddock is under-rated overall as a fighter, how can you not rate a man highly overall when he was one of the best light heavies in the world, and then became heavyweight champion? Wins over John Henry Lewis, one of the best 175 pounders ever, and heavies like Lasky and Baer, no matter how you look at it, is fairly good among the greatest fighters of all time. No he wasnt no Loughran or Foster or Spinks, let alone Moore and Tunney and Conn and Charles as a 175 pounder, and no he wasn't an ATG heavyweight either, but he was durable, he was crafty, he had power at both weights, and how many men can you really name who seemed to "peak" twice in their careers?


George Foreman

I hate it when someone beats me to the punch, but since I spent all this time writing it, I might as well post my response anyway:

Jim Braddock

After careful thought, I'll say underrated.

He's often portrayed as just a journeyman fighter who "got lucky" against an overconfident Bear.

His career was temporarily derailed by injuries and (possibly) taking dives, but when he showed up in shape and determined to fight, he seemed like one of those fighters that could almost be as good as he wanted to be. He was an excellent light-heavyweight contender with a host of early round knockouts, before losing to Tommy Loughran, one of the best light-heavyweights ever. In his career, he beat Pete Latzo, Tuffy Griffiths (unbeaten at the time, I believe), Jimmy Slatterly, Jack Roper, John Henry Lewis (who most people consider a great fighter), and Tommy Farr, in addition to Baer, so he wasn't just a "one hit wonder" like he's often portrayed. He also must've had an iron chin, as he was never genuinely stopped (that is, not by cuts) until he fought Louis, and even then Louis had to pummel him for eight rounds until he finally got him out of there. Louis was also very unexpectedly dropped by Braddock, which further shows how dangerous he could be.

However, I don't agree that he belongs in the Hall of Fame, as he simply blew too many fights in the middle of his career.


As for Foreman...

I'll say overrated. People rate him in his prime based on his accomplishments that he had during his "second career", but in his prime he was terribly flawed. He obviously showed tremendous strength and two-fisted punching power in beating Frazier and Norton, but his limitations were very much exposed by Ali, Young, and even Lyle. His stamina was lousy, his defense almost non-extsietnce, and he generally lacked imagination. He was thoroughly embarassed by an aging Ali, who made him look like total amateur.


Next up: Max Baer.

[Seamus]

I'm coming around to that line of thinking about Foreman as well, My2Sense. He could look awful at times with wild swinging, poor balance etc, as in the second Peralta fight for instance.

As for Max Baer, I'd say he's very overrated. An undisputed champion with 81 fights, and still not a whole lot of impressive wins. A good puncher, but he clearly falls short of being the ferocious hitter he's sometimes been made out to be.

NEXT
Benny Briscoe

[My2Sense]

I'm coming around to that line of thinking about Foreman as well, My2Sense. He could look awful at times with wild swinging, poor balance etc, as in the second Peralta fight for instance.

As for Max Baer, I'd say he's very overrated. An undisputed champion with 81 fights, and still not a whole lot of impressive wins. A good puncher, but he clearly falls short of being the ferocious hitter he's sometimes been made out to be.

NEXT
Benny Briscoe

Agreed on Baer. I view him the same way as Foreman, a big puncher who managed to score a few big wins (in this case, over Schmeling and Carnera), but with too many limitations to call "great".


I've often felt Briscoe was overrated. He often gets lumped in with fighters like Charley Burley and Lloyd Marshall, great middleweights who never won the title. But unlike those fighters, who were shut out of title shots because of the war, Briscoe had several chances to win a title and simply wasn't good enough. Not only did he lose to Monzon, but all three fights with Rodrigo Valdez, who falls short of being a genuine Hall of Fame champion IMO. Plus he also lost to remnants of the '60s like Luis Rodriguez and Emile Griffith, both blown up welterweights to boot. I've always felt Briscoe's presence at the top of the '70s middleweight rankings was a reflection of the drop off in overall quality between the '60s middleweight era and the '70s.


Next up: Georges Carpentier.

[HomicideHenry]

BUMP!!!


Because the thread looked a little too far down the line

Btw, the Hypothetical Match-Up Game as well as this thread should become stickies as a permanent fixture here on the forum

[Ambling Alp]

Georges Carpentier- Can a guy just be "rated" ? Does everyone have to be overrated or underrated?

It seems like you used to more about Carpentier than you do now. He had success at many weight classes against many different tough opponents over a long career. However, he wasn't really a legend.

I would say that If I have to pick one, I would say that Carpentier is slightly underrated today.

Next:
Cornielius Boza-Edwards

[Borinken25]

A little overrated. He lost most of his major fights (Arguello, Camacho, Lockridge, and Ramirez) Have to give him credit on his fight vs Arguello he tried damn hard but he was not on Arguello’s league. His best win was against Limon and he went 1-1 vs Chacon. He had decent power and decent technique but he was not an elite fighter. His second fight vs Chacon was thrilling and very entertaining.



Louis Cocoa Kid

[Seamus]

Underrated. His 10-7-3 record against HOF'ers is better than alot of guys who are already in. He's hurt alot by his 50+ losses, but several of those could probably be attributed to his often taking fights on very short notice.

NEXT
Terry Norris

[My2Sense]

Underrated. His 10-7-3 record against HOF'ers is better than alot of guys who are already in. He's hurt alot by his 50+ losses, but several of those could probably be attributed to his often taking fights on very short notice.

NEXT
Terry Norris

Overrated.

He's the definitive example of a fighter whose record was better than he was. He had quite a few big names on his resume, but all of them were past their primes to some degree - Mugabi, Leonard, Curry, Blocker, Taylor, and Brown, with Curry and Brown being flat out shot IMO. In addition, most of those names were fighting above their best weight class. Norris also had a very shaky chin and lacked discipline, both of which were his undoing in the first Brown fight. He had to box the fight of his life in order to beat Brown in a rematch, even though Brown was only supposed to be a showcase for him in the first place (not to mention the fact that Buddy McGirt had already outboxed him much more impressively down at 147). IMO, it's one of the few instances I've seen in which a fighter did not fully redeem himself after winning a rematch. Throw in the fact that he crumbled only two rounds into his fight with Julian Jackson, perhaps the only genuine top quality fighter he fought (after which he switched to a much lesser regarded champion in John Mugabi in order to win a title), and also was embarassingly KO'd by journeyman Keith Mullings in another fight that was supposed to be a set up for him.

Norris was/is often rated based on the apparent talent and skill he showed, but his actual performances do not match his ability.


Next up: John John Molina.

[Seamus]

Underrated. And, John John Molina could have been an even better fighter than he was. Unfortunately though he sometimes stood and traded with guys he should have boxed. The 3 Lopez bouts are a prime example. Molina often went toe to toe with Tony The Tiger in the 1st bout, and ended up a clear loser. In there second bout though, for at least one performance in his career, Molina looked like a HOF'er. He boxed circles around the stronger more rugged Lopez and stopped him on cuts. For the 3rd bout, Molina went back to what had already failed. He stood in front of Lopez, and was again clearly beaten in a bout in which never should have been a SD. For his whole career, Molina has a quite respectable record with several dominant performances against solid opposition (Suarez, Taylor, Vargas) and he was competitive into his mid 30's.

NEXT
Rocky Lockridge

[giacomino]

Underrated, but not by much
Rocky was one of my favorite fighters to watch in the 1980s. He was a guy who came up just short in a lot of his biggest fights. In two, his second loss to Pedroza and his MD to Wilfredo Gomez, I scored him the winner in close fights. Rocky gave Chavez his toughest fight as a super featherweight, he Ko'd Roger Mayweather when Mayweather was the undefeated hot shit of the junior lights, outpointed Boza-Edwards when he was still near the top of his game, knocked off a highly-thought-of undefeated Harold Knight and, late in his career, gave IBF champion Barry Michael a fierce beating over eight rounds. He stayed around a little too long, losing decisions to Rafael Ruelas and Shambra Mitchell, but even then he went the distance against two up-and-comers.

Next

Eusebio Pedroza

[My2Sense]

Eusebio Pedroza

I always thought he was a bit overrated, although it's hard to tell IMO. Record-setting title reign, yes, but the best fighter he beat was probably Juan LaPorte, and he had to fight (and foul) the fight of his life just to edge him out. That came sandwiched between LaPorte losing decisively to Sal Sanchez and a comebacking Wilfredo Gomez. IMO, his chin and his ability to handle pressure were both somewhat questionable.


Next up: Rodrigo Valdez.

[Minotauro]

Eusebio Pedroza

I always thought he was a bit overrated, although it's hard to tell IMO. Record-setting title reign, yes, but the best fighter he beat was probably Juan LaPorte, and he had to fight (and foul) the fight of his life just to edge him out. That came sandwiched between LaPorte losing decisively to Sal Sanchez and a comebacking Wilfredo Gomez. IMO, his chin and his ability to handle pressure were both somewhat questionable.


Next up: Rodrigo Valdez.

I think Valdez is underrated he is one of the biggest punchers at 160lbs and although he could be outboxed I don't see any middle out fighting him maybe Tiger but that’s probably 50/50.

Next up: Tony Canzoneri

[Seamus]

As a LW, Canzoneri probably does receive the recognition he deserves, typically at around 5th alltime if my memory is correct. However if you assess his entire career, he was also a World class Featherweight and Junior Welterweight, and I'd say that makes him perhaps a little underrated.

NEXT
Matthew Saad Muhammad