BoxRec

Yes or no.

He could make a claim (tho i dont agree personally) for getting the better of both joe and sven. Yet he never gets much credit. I know he had a sticky period after losing the wbc.

I think its a shame there wasnt a round robin with Reid/Woodhall/Wharton/Catley.

I think Reid is rated fairly whenever his name comes up. Rightly earned big plaudits for winning a genuine world title the hard way by going over to Italy, but was also exposed as a bit one-dimensional on occasion - most notably when he fought Sugar Boy Malinga, which for me personally still rates as one of the worst world title fights I've ever seen.
Good fighter who was certainly up there with the likes of Woodhall, but despite pushing Calzaghe to the limit he never had that extra something to justify being regarded as a great.

Deserter wrote:I think Reid is rated fairly whenever his name comes up. Rightly earned big plaudits for winning a genuine world title the hard way by going over to Italy, but was also exposed as a bit one-dimensional on occasion - most notably when he fought Sugar Boy Malinga, which for me personally still rates as one of the worst world title fights I've ever seen.
Good fighter who was certainly up there with the likes of Woodhall, but despite pushing Calzaghe to the limit he never had that extra something to justify being regarded as a great.

so reid vs woodhall?

If you had to pick.....

I don't think he ever developed properly, he had a very average record against nobody of note before winning the WBC title, he was also a lazy fighter as well, letting fights which he could have won slip through his fingers.

Woodhall would have won fairly handily in my opinion - the wrong build and style for Robin Reid - we are talking about a prime Richie Woodhall of course.

He seemed to lose his motivation after he lost his WBC Title. It's as is he felt he had nothing to prove.

But, he did well against Calzaghe, giving him his toughest fight in my opinion. Also, lets face it, he was not allowed to fight against Ottke; the referee did everything but jump on his back in that fight. The ref did this all night =

In my opinion, he beat both Calzaghe and Ottke but as said could be a little one dimensional and one paced. Still a decent fighter, if slightly underrated.

I think Woodhall might just be a bit too busy and sharp (pre injury), after his injury, Woodhall had to adjust to a more aggresive style which would have probably suited Reid.

skelp wrote:He seemed to lose his motivation after he lost his WBC Title. It's as is he felt he had nothing to prove.

But, he did well against Calzaghe, giving him his toughest fight in my opinion. Also, lets face it, he was not allowed to fight against Ottke; the referee did everything but jump on his back in that fight. The ref did this all night =

the worst officiating I've ever seen the scoring was wack also... that wasn't just unfair that was corrupt.. I saw rodger tillerman judging a John Thaxton fight at york hall and shouted that he was a corrupt pudendum but I'm not sure he knew why... I had a tener on reid that night.

stevieb_8006 wrote:

Deserter wrote:I think Reid is rated fairly whenever his name comes up. Rightly earned big plaudits for winning a genuine world title the hard way by going over to Italy, but was also exposed as a bit one-dimensional on occasion - most notably when he fought Sugar Boy Malinga, which for me personally still rates as one of the worst world title fights I've ever seen.
Good fighter who was certainly up there with the likes of Woodhall, but despite pushing Calzaghe to the limit he never had that extra something to justify being regarded as a great.

so reid vs woodhall?

If you had to pick.....

Good question! Real 50/50 match-up... if I was forced to choose I'd give the edge to Woodhall as I think his jab may have caused Reid problems. Having said that, I'd favour Reid over the Woodhall that struggled against Catley...

Didn't Calzaghe have the flu when he fought Reid? D

I was always impressed with Reid when I saw him fight.

When he fought Joe, I knew more about Reid and thought that he was unlucky not to win that fight and also didn't think he fought as well as he did earlier in his career.

He didn't seem to dodge anyone and didn't think he was appreciated enough as a high class fighter when he was winning world titles. He seems to be higher rated now than then.

I think that him against Ritchie would be close good match up and it would depend on what part of their career they were at. I think Reid may of been too strong for Ritchie.

Good chin and a decent right hand.

He was game when motivated.

I think Woodhall would have beaten him and I think JC won despite being injured in a below par performance,
However I think he beat Ottke clearly. He was a genuine champion and deserves that accolade, but was never good enough to beat the elite in the division, nevertheless it is an epitaph that most would kill for.

charlieb wrote:Didn't Calzaghe have the flu when he fought Reid? D

why didnt he want the rematch,deffo had cold feet.

& woodhall's weight was middle like mcracken,reid would of chopped woodhall down mind the pun

Very average for a geniune world champion, if that makes any sense.

He beat one of the poorest fighters I have ever seen wearing the WBC belt...... people forget 1) How terrible Nardiello was and 2) How GENIUNALLY close the fight was at the time of the stoppage. Sky had the fight all square at the time.

He should never have got the decision vs Hasine Cherifi (and then used Princess Diana as an excuse) - and did two terrible showings against Malinga and Branco,

Woodhall would have boxed his brains off.