BoxRec

All the talk of Witter-Hatton got me remembering another Ingle fighter in a similar position. Graham was avoided like the plague just as Witter is now. Graham was a bit before my time but what a mesmorising boxer he was in his prime. You could argue he had true P4P ability.

So I wanted to ask the questions

1. What do you make of his legacy
2. Which fights was he robbed/jobbed in? Kalambay?McCallum?

How would he have fared if he got these fights:

1. Hagler - that Leonard fought. If Leonard could pip an ageing Hagler a bigger younger similar Graham may too

2. Eubank - 1988-1991 - Eubank didnt fancy the fight, maybe Eubank pulls out a late KO after being outboxed in the earlier rounds but isnt this is a 60-40 in Grahams favour?

3. Benn - 1988-1991 - we saw Benn having problems with boxers like Malinger (not to mention Watson/Eubank). either

4. Michael Watson - surely the superior boxer in Graham wins?

5. James Toney (at 160) - Toney had nightmares with RJJ and Nunn. Graham has the style to land on the counterpuncher without getting hit

6. Mike Nunn (at 160) - probably not the most exciting fight, both awkward rangy boxer types. Could graham have won?

I would make him a slight favourate against all but am sure he'd lose 2-3.

You would make him a slight favourite against Toney, Hagler, even Benn?!

Based on what?

Terry D wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:All the talk of Witter-Hatton got me remembering another Ingle fighter in a similar position. Graham was avoided like the plague just as Witter is now. Graham was a bit before my time but what a mesmorising boxer he was in his prime. You could argue he had true P4P ability.

So I wanted to ask the questions

1. What do you make of his legacy
2. Which fights was he robbed/jobbed in? Kalambay?McCallum?

How would he have fared if he got these fights:

1. Hagler - that Leonard fought. If Leonard could pip an ageing Hagler a bigger younger similar Graham may too

2. Eubank - 1988-1991 - Eubank didnt fancy the fight, maybe Eubank pulls out a late KO after being outboxed in the earlier rounds but isnt this is a 60-40 in Grahams favour?

3. Benn - 1988-1991 - we saw Benn having problems with boxers like Malinger (not to mention Watson/Eubank). either

4. Michael Watson - surely the superior boxer in Graham wins?

5. James Toney (at 160) - Toney had nightmares with RJJ and Nunn. Graham has the style to land on the counterpuncher without getting hit

6. Mike Nunn (at 160) - probably not the most exciting fight, both awkward rangy boxer types. Could graham have won?

I would make him a slight favourate against all but am sure he'd lose 2-3.

Nice post. no offence but I do not see Herol as on even the aging Leonard's level. No one could beat Hagler but the judges

I only watched Leonard-Hagler once when I was much younger and went more for the outlanding method of scoring so scored it something like 9-3 Leonard. I now prefer heavier more effective punches so perhaps I'd score it differently now?

I think Hagler can be a bit overrated and he did have problems with boxer mover types. Given Graham would be a bad style match up and that Haglers old tired legs would have to chase all night while getting picked off, was bigger than leonard, then I say its a possibility Bomber Graham could do the unthinkable and knocked the old man off his perch. I'm sure if Hatton never fought Tyszu the thought of him beating an albeit old Tyszu would be laughable but it happened

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:All the talk of Witter-Hatton got me remembering another Ingle fighter in a similar position. Graham was avoided like the plague just as Witter is now. Graham was a bit before my time but what a mesmorising boxer he was in his prime. You could argue he had true P4P ability.

So I wanted to ask the questions

1. What do you make of his legacy
2. Which fights was he robbed/jobbed in? Kalambay?McCallum?

How would he have fared if he got these fights:

1. Hagler - that Leonard fought. If Leonard could pip an ageing Hagler a bigger younger similar Graham may too

2. Eubank - 1988-1991 - Eubank didnt fancy the fight, maybe Eubank pulls out a late KO after being outboxed in the earlier rounds but isnt this is a 60-40 in Grahams favour?

3. Benn - 1988-1991 - we saw Benn having problems with boxers like Malinger (not to mention Watson/Eubank). either

4. Michael Watson - surely the superior boxer in Graham wins?

5. James Toney (at 160) - Toney had nightmares with RJJ and Nunn. Graham has the style to land on the counterpuncher without getting hit

6. Mike Nunn (at 160) - probably not the most exciting fight, both awkward rangy boxer types. Could graham have won?

I would make him a slight favourate against all but am sure he'd lose 2-3.

One thing Watson and Eubank did, was to hit hard enough to keep their opponents honest, Benn would have struggled with Graham though, no doubt, but he was a warrior through and through, and i suspect the pre-damaged version who lost to Malinga would have found the punch.

Nunn, did everything Graham did, dull fight, either could have won, but Nunn could punch when he chose to.

Hagler, again, Leonard hit Hagler with plenty of hard flush shots in that fight, Hagler might have said they didn't hurt, but they stopped him dead in his tracks.

Eubank, - possibly, Eubank blew hot and cold, and wasn't the quickest of fighters.

Toney - at that weight, Toney wasn't struggling with people, he was annihilating them, would have gone the sam way as the Nunn fight.

jamesmcdonnell wrote: Benn would have struggled with Graham though, no doubt, but he was a warrior through and through, and i suspect the pre-damaged version who lost to Malinga would have found the punch.

.

Did you see the first Benn-Mallinger fight? It was a few years before when Benn was in his prime, the commentotors called it a robbery. There is a good case that Mallinger won but it was pretty dull cat and mouse action. Maybe Benn wasnt up for that one or maybe Mallinger is better than hes given credit for

jamesmcdonnell wrote: Toney - at that weight, Toney wasn't struggling with people, he was annihilating them, would have gone the sam way as the Nunn fight.

Toney had close controversal calls with Tiberi, Johnson and McCallum at 160 though

The problem with a thread like this is that, despite all the "what if's, buts & maybes" Herol got knocked out in 2 of the 3 world title fights he fought in... That is a fact. Master boxer or not, he still couldn't keep out of harms way when it counted.. The proven world champions you list and match him against above were all proven world champions, with established title reigns - and they could hit at least on a par with the likes of Charles Brewer... With that in mind, you have to say its likely Herol would fall short against any of them in a mythical match up scenario.. Yes he could box and against McCallum it may be argued he was unlucky - certainly McCallum didn't want to know of a rematch.. But the record books don't lie - its achievements that count on a fighters resume and Herol's doesn't match up against the names you've listed... He had his chances and he couldn't take them - again, against lesser fighters than those you state.

You mention the Hatton/Witter angle in your post too and I spose the same argument holds in that Hatton has taken his chances to get to the top and the fact is that he beat Tszyu, Castillo etc etc .. you know how it goes... Witter has either struggled to take his opportunites or (for the most part) not delivered when it counted... Think Chop Chop, Moura, Pinto, Judah etc... And he will continue to play second fiddle until his achievements start to match up or he is given the chance to fight Hatton... The rest is all speculation - if's but's and maybes.

chief wrote:The problem with a thread like this is that, despite all the "what if's, buts & maybes" Herol got knocked out in 2 of the 3 world title fights he fought in... That is a fact. Master boxer or not, he still couldn't keep out of harms way when it counted.. The proven world champions you list and match him against above were all proven world champions, with established title reigns - and they could hit at least on a par with the likes of Charles Brewer... With that in mind, you have to say its likely Herol would fall short against any of them in a mythical match up scenario.. Yes he could box and against McCallum it may be argued he was unlucky - certainly McCallum didn't want to know of a rematch.. But the record books don't lie - its achievements that count on a fighters resume and Herol's doesn't match up against the names you've listed... He had his chances and he couldn't take them - again, against lesser fighters than those you state.

You mention the Hatton/Witter angle in your post too and I spose the same argument holds in that Hatton has taken his chances to get to the top and the fact is that he beat Tszyu, Castillo etc etc .. you know how it goes... Witter has either struggled to take his opportunites or (for the most part) not delivered when it counted... Think Chop Chop, Moura, Pinto, Judah etc... And he will continue to play second fiddle until his achievements start to match up or he is given the chance to fight Hatton... The rest is all speculation - if's but's and maybes.

That's my philosophy as well. Nigel Benn, for all his shortcomings, turned the form book on it's head against McClellan.

Graham lacked that little bit of spite in him, which would probably have meant he stopped Julian Jackson rather than get stopped himself.

Graham was not robbed against either McCallum or Kalambay.

Despite the biased commentary that had Graham in front, i thought he was thoroughly outclassed by Kalambay in their first fight.The African put on a defensive masterclass and Graham landed very few meaningful punches, before almost being knocked out in the last round.

Nobody thought Graham won the fight in the aftermath, though there seems to be some revisionism slowly creeping in.A lot of people did say that it was because of Barney Eastwood and his trainers trying to make Graham fight in a more aggressive manner that he lost, but i've never bought that, as Kalambay just had a lot more technique and finesse.

McCallum fight was a legit decision in a close hard-fought bout.Graham lost a point for spinning him that cost him a draw.Mike was also just a better fighter than Graham.

He should have got the decision against Kalambay second time around, due to an early 10-7 round and managing to keep things relatively close from there on.The ref was crooked and took a few points from Herol for no reason to even things up

However both men were clearly well past their pomp and it was more of a war than a chessmatch.Graham took a beating in some rounds and was badly staggered at least 4 or 5 times.

I'd rather have seen Graham with someone like Eddie Futch or George Benton-old-school technical trainers that would have improved him considerably.he was just too sloppy with Ingle, who never seemed to do anything to improve his telegraphed jab or incorporate some glove defence\parrying and blocking into his defence.All things that would not have stunted what he was already capable of with Ingle.

When Graham was on form, he was a joy to watch - I really enjoyed watching his fights, but I think chief pointed it out nicely...

Herol had his chances, and lost them.

On saying that I think he would have hung with the likes of Collins, Watson and Eubank - Benn would have been a real interesting fight.

To be fair i don't see Benn, Eubank or Watson doing much different than Graham had they been forced to follow his career path.

The one main difference being i doubt they would have blown it against Jackson, but then again Graham had been a pro for about 11 or 12 years by that point...all of those men were rapidly fading or finished by that time.

chief wrote:The problem with a thread like this is that, despite all the "what if's, buts & maybes" Herol got knocked out in 2 of the 3 world title fights he fought in... That is a fact. Master boxer or not, he still couldn't keep out of harms way when it counted.. The proven world champions you list and match him against above were all proven world champions, with established title reigns - and they could hit at least on a par with the likes of Charles Brewer... With that in mind, you have to say its likely Herol would fall short against any of them in a mythical match up scenario.. Yes he could box and against McCallum it may be argued he was unlucky - certainly McCallum didn't want to know of a rematch.. But the record books don't lie - its achievements that count on a fighters resume and Herol's doesn't match up against the names you've listed... He had his chances and he couldn't take them - again, against lesser fighters than those you state.

You mention the Hatton/Witter angle in your post too and I spose the same argument holds in that Hatton has taken his chances to get to the top and the fact is that he beat Tszyu, Castillo etc etc .. you know how it goes... Witter has either struggled to take his opportunites or (for the most part) not delivered when it counted... Think Chop Chop, Moura, Pinto, Judah etc... And he will continue to play second fiddle until his achievements start to match up or he is given the chance to fight Hatton... The rest is all speculation - if's but's and maybes.

The ko losses can be misleading though, Jackson was a phenominal puncher and noone in their right mind would hold that loss against Herol, the Brewer fight on the other hand came when Herol was in his late 30s and considered washed up by most people, and Brewer himself was a good puncher. The truth is that with a bit more luck Herol would have been world champion... if he was around now he would probably have 20 odd defences behind him like the likes of Hatton and Calzaghe....

You can just see Herol-Benn going the same way as some of the Bombers other big fights. Graham boxing Benn silly for 5/6 rounds before getting nailed.

Goz wrote:You can just see Herol-Benn going the same way as some of the Bombers other big fights. Graham boxing Benn silly for 5/6 rounds before getting nailed.

I doubt it, Benn didnt have the one punch power that Jackson had... in his prime Graham would have stood Benn on his head imo...

'86 Graham beats '86 Hagler.


Eubank told people after his fights with Melfah and Cronin that he knew the way to beat Herol Graham. I often wonder what he meant. Someone said Eubank meant 'a lot of side-stepping and chess-playing'.

I don't see Eubank beating Graham at all.


I don't care how fast you move, Nigel Benn in his physical peak back then will catch you. Benn takes Graham.


Graham outboxes Watson for the most part, though Watson does pick holes in him at times. Graham.


I think Bomber's peppering punches can keep clipping Toney and he can elude Toney's short returns. Graham.


Nunn at his best is about the closest thing to unbeatable boxing has ever seen - tall, rangey, mobile, smooth southpaw who had speed of both hand and foot and could land 100 right jabs a round and 20-30-punch flurries. I mean come on.

And he barely took a punch in his entire career until Toney knocked him down. Frank Tate, undefeated Olympic Gold Medalist world champion and expected to be the next dominant middleweight, didn't land one punch on Nunn in 15 rounds. Bomber was hit plenty against Kalambay and McCallum to be honest - Frank Tate was not Mark Kaylor, neither were Roldan (who KD'd Hagler), Barkley (who KO'd Hearns), Curry or Kalambay.

Nunn.

silkov wrote:

Goz wrote:You can just see Herol-Benn going the same way as some of the Bombers other big fights. Graham boxing Benn silly for 5/6 rounds before getting nailed.

I doubt it, Benn didnt have the one punch power that Jackson had...

He had more. Jackson's KO's were beautiful, because they were through speed, accuracy and timing. Benn's were ugly, because they were through raw power.

STP wrote:

silkov wrote:

Goz wrote:You can just see Herol-Benn going the same way as some of the Bombers other big fights. Graham boxing Benn silly for 5/6 rounds before getting nailed.

I doubt it, Benn didnt have the one punch power that Jackson had...

He had more. Jackson's KO's were beautiful, because they were through speed, accuracy and timing. Benn's were ugly, because they were through raw power.

No, Benn needed to land more shots, while Jackson could take you out with one shot... Benn didnt have the one shot power of Jackson....

silkov wrote:

STP wrote:

silkov wrote: I doubt it, Benn didnt have the one punch power that Jackson had...

He had more. Jackson's KO's were beautiful, because they were through speed, accuracy and timing. Benn's were ugly, because they were through raw power.

No, Benn needed to land more shots, while Jackson could take you out with one shot... Benn didnt have the one shot power of Jackson....

Benn has more one-punch KO's than Jackson does, albeit against a lesser standard of opposition bar Robbie Sims/Dan Sherry. But Jackson's few are better, such as the Buster Drayton one which is one of the best left-hand punches I've ever seen thrown, if not the best.

STP wrote:

silkov wrote:

STP wrote: He had more. Jackson's KO's were beautiful, because they were through speed, accuracy and timing. Benn's were ugly, because they were through raw power.

No, Benn needed to land more shots, while Jackson could take you out with one shot... Benn didnt have the one shot power of Jackson....

Benn has more one-punch KO's than Jackson does, albeit against a lesser standard of opposition bar Robbie Sims/Dan Sherry. But Jackson's few are better, such as the Buster Drayton one which is one of the best left-hand punches I've ever seen thrown, if not the best.

This is not even open for debate.

Julian Jackson is one of the purest one shot KO merchants to have ever boxed. The power he carried in both hands was simply frightening.

His punch power was greater then Nigel's although his poor eyesight and sometimes shaky chin cost him.

I disagree. Benn is the hardest-hitting middleweight for me.

And as for 'standard of opp' (not that noise and effect of a punch on a human doesn't mean anything) - remember Benn stopped Barkley and McClellan which Hearns and Jackson failed to do. Though Hearns and Jackson were the two 'best' one-punch KO artists I've seen, along with Bob Foster.

Iron-chinned Doug DeWitt conceeded after the fight: "I've never been hit anywhere near that hard before and I don't want to be hit anywhere near that hard again. I retire." Before the fight he was shouting how Benn's power was overrated. He'd taken all of Hearns's best right hands and all of Matt Hilton's pulverising left hooks.


Iron-chinned Eubank on Benn's power from his autobiog:

People used to talk about Benn as, pound-for-pound, the hardest puncher in the game. I can vouch for that - in my opinion, he was equal to what Tyson is reputed to be. Benn's power was simply astonishing. Fight fans ask me which punch of Benn's was the hardest - I say, 'Simple, all of them.' Every shot. The jab to the head was like a huge battering ram, his left hook was devastating. When Benn hit you, you stayed hit. Most boxers hit you and even if it is a good shot its damage is fleeting; it's just a punch. When Benn hit you, it was a lucid, lingering punch; it was almost like a living entity whose sole purpose was to wreak havoc inside your skull. That degree of shocking power cannot be trained into someone, it is just within them. The equation is speed + strength = power, but there is a natural factor as well. Benn had the lot, he was so strong, so lightning fast. He is by far the hardest puncher I have ever come across.


Iron-chinned Collins on Benn's power from here:

"He didn't hit the hardest though; that was Nigel Benn."

"I'm not gonna describe it to you, but it's like having your teeth broken."

"Yeah, sickening. That's what it felt like, it was sickening."

"Oh no, you feel the searing pain, then it's gone in an instant."

STP wrote:I disagree. Benn is the hardest-hitting middleweight for me.

You are entitled to your opinion but you are wrong..

Can you think of, say, 4 Nigel Benn one punch KOs that stack up in comparison to Julian Jackson's howitzers against:

Herol Graham, ,Buster Drayton, Agostino Cardamone and Terry Norris(the last one not strictly a single shot I suppose but a mind numbing KO all the same)?

I all honesty I can't.

Whilst Julian Jackson was at his best at 11st, his power came with him up to 11st6 where as Benn's fell off considerably with his move to super middle IMO.

Herrol's best win came against Lindell 'dont call me Larry' Holmes,imo. Kalule looked shot to bits against McCallum about five yrs previous. Yes Herrol looked good against Commonwealth Africans and Peckhams James Cook,but whenever he stepped up to the plate he was not good enough.

Kalambay gave him a boxing lesson,though admittedly Kalambay didn't start training in his life until the Herrol fight,and went on to give McCallum a boxing lesson too. McCallum looked poor in the Herrol fight,very worse for wears for some reason,maybe settling in at the weight and abroard/condition or something,and still won v.clearly and that was peak Herrol.

He shipped alot of shots against Kalambay and Frank Grant,and was stopped against Charles Brewer too. He was not the defensive wizard everyone made out he was,other than against Commonwealth Africans and so on. Just like Nigel Benn was not the humungous puncher everyone made out he was,other than against Commonwealth Africans or Mexican Roadsweepers ;)

Without any doubt Jackson's one punch KO power was by way more significant than Benn's especially at world title level. That's not saying that Benn didn't have immeasureable power. But he did it on the frontfoot and gave his opponents a split second or two to think about it, whilst Jackson's shots could come seemingly out of nowhere.

Interesting debate about Benn v Graham. I could envisage a prime for prime matchup where Graham would stand Benn on his head or an outcome where Benn lands a shot that turns the fight. As chief posts it's all ifs, buts and maybes. Both fighters had their weaknesses, even in their prime. Benn's undeniable agression and Graham's tendency to lose concentration/switch off when the going's good.

Undoubtedly though Graham is very unlucky not to have become a World Champ. But I am sure there are many fighters that people could say that about.

Nigel looked poor against Sanderline and Sugarboy because he simply didn't train for them and wasn't up for them,and due to those poor showings he was a massive underdog in his abroard world title challenges. He trained mighty for De Witt and mighty for Galvano,and both times it was a completely different animal than in his previous bout. He obliterated De Witt and Galvano,but was slow,sluggish and outboxed against Sanderline and Sugarboy.

I think Benn at his v.best,the Benn who fought Noel,Barkley,Eubank the 2nd time(when he trained),De Witt and Galvano could catch Herrol with plenty of stuff and do him. Not the Benn who fought Logan,Sanderline,Sugarboy,Eubank the 1st time or Giminez when mentally or physically he was inproper,that Benn gets a frustrated tapping from Herrol.