BoxRec

The one guy that springs to mind is Roger Mayweather. At times he looked like an all time great and other times very ordinary. A suspect chin did'nt help him. Anybody have any fighters they can think of?

kick asner wrote:The one guy that springs to mind is Roger Mayweather. At times he looked like an all time great and other times very ordinary. A suspect chin did'nt help him. Anybody have any fighters they can think of?

Brit heavyweight Danny Williams springs to mind. He fights well one night then doesn't throw any punches or even trys in his next fight.

British heavy...how about Julius Francis?

The 1980s were littered with inconsistent fighters who were actually very good on their best nights.

Eddie Mustpaha Muhammed
Marlon Starling
Greg Page
Tim Witherspoon
Edwin Rosario

Currently active Zab Judah springs to mind straight away.

Ezzard wrote:The 1980s were littered with inconsistent fighters who were actually very good on their best nights.

Eddie Mustpaha Muhammed
Marlon Starling
Greg Page
Tim Witherspoon
Edwin Rosario

Good choices, I remember Eddie Mustpha Muhamed was starting to go on a bit of a roll until he move up to heaveyweight to fight Renaldo Snipes and he looked terrible barley throwing a punch. He sucked so bad in that fight you thought he was shot, but right after that he fought Michael Spinks and even though he lost he looked like he regained his form.

Tim Witherspoon was another guy who looked horrible against Snipes even though he won the decsision. Right after that he fought Larry Holmes and fought his best fight ever. Snipes was one of those fighters who could make you look bad. He had the ability to bring a fighter down to his skill leavel much the same way Treavor Berbick and Bonecrusher Smith used to do. They were never great or impressive fighters, just difficult oppenents to fight.

I nominate Jack Sharkey.
In fact, Joe Louis was rather inconsistent too.

pundit wrote:In fact, Joe Louis was rather inconsistent too.

Yeah, right. How many consecutive defenses?

NO ONE looks great in every fight. If Joe Louis was notable for being inconsistent, then it’s pretty safe to simply list every fighter in history…

The Great John L wrote:

pundit wrote:In fact, Joe Louis was rather inconsistent too.

Yeah, right. How many consecutive defenses?

NO ONE looks great in every fight. If Joe Louis was notable for being inconsistent, then it’s pretty safe to simply list every fighter in history…

Louis was always good enough to win (well, except once); but he tended to look great against great fighters and ordinary against ordinary fighters.

Jimmy Carter was inconsistent, although that may be down to several fixed affairs involving Frankie Carbo and his cronies. Carter, despite the thirty one losses on his record, was actually a fantastic boxer-puncher, and when he wanted to win, he could look like a top five lightweight of all time.

Fritzie Zivic.
He is one of my favorites but the guy could beat all time greats and than next time out drop one to a clubfighter.

Eddie Mustapha has to be up there. Incredibly inconsistant, but tended up sleepwalk some nights.

Jack Sharkey, of course. All time great some nights, looked like he didn't care on others.

I wouldn't really say Louis. Anyone who fought as much as he did would have off-nights, but even then (Godoy I, Pastor I, Conn I) he did enough to clearly win.

Off the top of my head I'd say Iran Barkley.

pundit wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

pundit wrote:In fact, Joe Louis was rather inconsistent too.

Yeah, right. How many consecutive defenses?

NO ONE looks great in every fight. If Joe Louis was notable for being inconsistent, then it’s pretty safe to simply list every fighter in history…

Louis was always good enough to win (well, except once); but he tended to look great against great fighters and ordinary against ordinary fighters.

how untrue this statement is!

expug wrote:Fritzie Zivic.
He is one of my favorites but the guy could beat all time greats and than next time out drop one to a clubfighter.

Zivic might be the best choice. He beat so many great fighters and lost to so many ordinary fighters. Johnny Risko was sort of like that.
Ray Mercer was another guy who looked great sometimes and awful other times. (Sometimes in the same fight!)

..jersey joe walcott. first louis fight and first walcott fight.....looked remarkable. against rex layne...dreadful... a look at his record shows this up and down factor throughout his career.

Bert Cooper ... tough as hell when he actually showed up to fight.

...i'll expain why i listed walcott (i knew i'd get disagreements) at a bit more length...but first i have to get some preparation h.....

walcott was more consistent than people think. walcott completley cleaned out the division 1945-47 pre title....beating a slew of top 10 contenders including the top dangerous black contenders jimmy bivins, lee Q Murray, and Elmer Ray and other ranked contenders maxim, gomez, baksi, oma, hatchetman sheppard. After the louis fights, walcott lost to charles. however walcott then won 6 in a row vs the likes of strong opposition like omelio agrmaonte, harold johnson, hein ten hoff, ollie tandberg, johnny skhor before losing to a peak rex layne. then walcott lost to charles, then put up great preformances vs charles and marciano.




outside of the layne fight, walcott was quite consistent 1945-52

Hold on Brocky.....his overall record is a testament to inconsistency. If your are going to carve out a period of it and claim consistency I suppose you might have a point. But overall....who can you name that has a more inconsistent record and still made it to the top?

BoxBuzz wrote:Hold on Brocky.....his overall record is a testament to inconsistency. If your are going to carve out a period of it and claim consistency I suppose you might have a point. But overall....who can you name that has a more inconsistent record and still made it to the top?

Walcott is an example of a gifted fighter who circumstances made a clubfighter before he got the right management. There were several cases during and after the great depression. Archie Moore is one, Jim Braddock another. I wouldn't call this "inconsistency".

i'll take lennox lewis.
you'd get 2 A-level preformances, followed by C's and possibly even F's.

......as usual, the buzzmeister gets here to shore up my case until i can get my breath for my additional comments.

while we are all waiting .....i'll point out that walcott was one of my favorite fighters.......

barry wrote:British heavy...how about Julius Francis?

WRONG!!! Francis was consistently ordinary.

Lennox Lewis - to the eternal dismay of his fans, and to the eternal delight of his detractors.