Fighters you disliked, but now like.

[Robinson]

Who are some guys that you disliked or even hated at one stage, but have
recently come to like.

And what turned you ?


For me it is Oscar De La Hoya

I used to like him in the late 1990s and then I became in-different towards him,
often routing against him.

I have started to like him again as I like how well he has done for himself as a
promoter and business man and I also enjoy his style.

Michael Moorer

I never really liked him, but was in-different to him, he seemed annoying and
was never the best HW to watch. Then I saw some film of him as a LHW.
Now I like the man, I also have rewatched a few of his HW fights. Can't go
past his war with Cooper.

[Ezzard]

Roberto Duran

Didn't like him when i was growing up but saw him in a different light once I got older.

[funso banjo baby]

i drifted away from boxing in the 90's due to sky/pay per view

dont laugh at this but the beebs gamble with Audley regenerated my interest in boxing (that for the record is the only reason why ive banged on about audley since the beginning....HE IS VERY BAD)

and initially i didnt like Danny Williams something about him..cant explain

but Danny quickly won me over by showing not only that he is one of the bravest active heavyweights in the world ...he is also won of the nicest people

i remember his second fight with Michael sprott (their best fight) Sprott was whipping Danny and then some borderline punches were thrown...Sprotty lost his rag ..turned away Sharkey-style and Danny Knocked him out cold..... i disagreed with the ref...and im still uncertain about the result

but sprotts corner man (cant remember names soz) climbed into the ring and was all up in Dannys face ....... Danny like a true professional made a point of tying his hands behind his back in the classic non threatening pose

its a small point but i noticed it

and ive seen that man engage in so many fantastic fights and he has nearly always prevailed

Danny has been on the very brink of the abyss in fights and turned it around..the spanish/german fiasco is a classic example

i consider Danny world class in every sense

[Jaywheel]

Didn't like Corrales at first, I remember being happy when PBF schooled him. It all change with the Casa and Freitas fights.

[Flump]

Herol Graham was somebody I always disliked but then when he came back in the 90's had to re-evaluate and admire greatly.

Oscar Bonavena - couldn't stand him at first but I've since come to marvel at how somebody with a sumo wrestlers stance and little classical boxing ability could have survived at a high level for so long.

Azumah Nelson - found his boastful rants irritating but couldn't deny his ability.

Brian London - Contrary to his image he's hilariously funny.

[Counter-puncher]

didn't use to like Jamie Moore, but after his sportsmanship after the macklin fight- going to all corners of the ring to quieten his fans whilst Matthew was down, going to hospital to see him instead of going to his own after-fight victory party- I am a fan of his for life now. absolute class. 8)

i've gone full circle with calzaghe, liked him, got annoyed with him, liked him again.

I now have a nagging soft spot for mayweather that I didn't have before and can't really explain even

i managed to stop hating SRL even if I don't particularly like him i respect him now

[My2Sense]

Calzaghe is a good example for me. I gained a lot of respect for him after the Kessler fight. I also thought he fought Hopkins about as good as anyone could fight such a cagey, defensive, rules-bending, clutching n' grabbing n' fouling ol' thug, and won convincingly.

The same pretty much goes for me.

It's funny, when Calzaghe was in his prime, it almost seemed like he didn't want to fight anyone. But now, when it looks like he's past it, he suddenly is fighting one megafight after another (Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins). Makes me wish he had stepped it up sooner and disposed of guys like Ottke, Mundine, Lucas, Beyer, etc. I'm certain he would've beaten all those guys.

[zslayton]

Mike Tyson, Marvin Hagler, Lennox Lewis although in each case it was that I liked their rivals more. (Holyfield, Leonard, and ......... I just don't like Lennox's accent, or the fact that he claims to be British, fought on the Canadia Olympic team, and was born or raised on some island.)

However, I still respect what each of them did in the ring. In fact, it really bothers me when people get on the boards and bash guys just because they don't like them personally. So many get on and base their opinions on things that have nothing to do with fighting. When talking about what a fighter is and isn't in the ring people should base it on what they do in the ring, not how they act, or what they do outside of the ring or their career.

Okay, rant is over now.

[Collins2000]

I didn't like Ali. Probably due to my old man's racist views (which I see echoes of in here on an almost daily basis).

Thankfully, when my balls dropped I started thinking for myself.

[joe kurtz]

Like Robo, I too TOTALLY disliked Delahoya. Damn near hated him for years.

Oh, I recognized his talent & all, but for some reason I couldn't stand him. Which, as a memorabilia collector didn't stop me from accumulating a lot of his stuff over the years, mind you, but ... I was FAR from a fan.

But, something changed over the past couple of years & ( much to my surprise ) I found myself actually cheering for him when he fought. Begining around the time of the Hopkins fight.

[Seamus]

Hector Camacho. I was one of those who briefly called him a punk on the basis of his image, but then I saw how tough he was. Some of the fastest hands in the history of boxing, and don't believe there was ever a fighter who would have stopped him in his prime. And just to be different, I loved it when he blitzed fan favorite Bazooka Limon.

Julio Cesar Chavez. Didn't like him at the time of the Taylor fight, and thoroughly enjoyed it when Whitaker made him look like a guy who couldn't hit the side of a barn. Nowdays in retrospect I recognize him for being one of boxings alltime greats.

[Collins2000]

Hector Camacho. I was one of those who briefly called him a punk on the basis of his image, but then I saw how tough he was. Some of the fastest hands in the history of boxing, and don't believe there was ever a fighter who would have stopped him in his prime. And just to be different, I loved it when he blitzed fan favorite Bazooka Limon.

Julio Cesar Chavez. Didn't like him at the time of the Taylor fight, and thoroughly enjoyed it when Whitaker made him look like a guy who couldn't hit the side of a barn. Nowdays in retrospect I recognize him for being one of boxings alltime greats.

I'm the opposite with Chavez. Was a big fan when he burst on the scene. Cheered him wildly when he came on to stop Taylor. But went off him when he turned out to be a bit of a whiner when things didn't go completely his way.

I agree with you about how tough Camacho was. And unlike JCC he took his beatings without a constant annoying whine.

[I Feel Fine]

Calzaghe is a good example for me. I gained a lot of respect for him after the Kessler fight. I also thought he fought Hopkins about as good as anyone could fight such a cagey, defensive, rules-bending, clutching n' grabbing n' fouling ol' thug, and won convincingly.

Who was also 43 years old.

I do love the self-righteous boxing fan.

actually respect Floyd Mayweather Jr a lot more now, and hope he's sincere this time about staying out of the game (or will at least stay out as long as SRL did the first time he "retired" so as to at least make it more interesting and suspenseful should he choose to fight ever again). People complain about "oh you didn't fight Cotto, Margarito, Williams, Mosley, etc.", but the truth is, if PBF actually hung around and fought at least 1 or 2 of those guys, and won (by then the remaining 2 or 3 probably would fall off the top echelon losing to each other or someone else too) then retired, people would call him a wuss and say that he was ducking the likes of Andre Berto and Jackson Bonsu.

I'm a Mayweather fan, but that's a lame reason not to fight Cotto. It is true that every time some fighter in those weight classes does something -anything- there's always a bunch of people who will say "THIS guy will beat Mayweather" and will then senselessly accuse Mayweather of ducking that fighter. But Cotto is a credible fighter, and it would be a meaningful win. I hope Mayweather changes his mind; assuming Margarito doesn't tear Cotto apart.

Anyway... I used to dislike Leonard. I bought into a lot of the anti-Leonard hype that many boxing fans have bought into. I still think he did some unscrupulous things, but I can no longer say I dislike him. It's become fashionable to bash that kind of fighter, but not many fighters took the risks Leonard did or showed the abilities Leonard did.

[I Feel Fine]

Well I would agree that Hopkins should not have taken the fight, but I'm just saying that I find it hard to give Calzaghe all that much credit for beating a fighter who was so much older than him. If Hopkins at 36 (the same age he was in '01 when he beat Trinidad) had beaten a 43 year old Calzaghe it wouldn't have meant much for Hopkins' legacy.

I agree about Hopkins' clinching, but to be fair, he's only done it in his last two fights. I can't think of any Hopkins fights, prior to Wright and Calzaghe, where he did as much clinching. Not to make any excuses for it, but I don't think he should now be given the reputation of an excessive clincher just because he did a lot of it in his last two fights at 42 and 43.

He did promise his mother that he would stop fighting at 41. If I remember right, his excuse was that he thought that she would have understood. To be fair, though, he was coming off the Taylor losses, and I don't think anyone would want to retire off of that.

I didn't mention De La Hoya, I assume you were talking to someone else on that part. But as for me, I didn't like De La Hoya before the Vargas fight. After that I started to like him a little more. I still wouldn't call myself a fan, though, and I didn't like his bitching after the Mayweather fight. I also dislike the decisions he got against Whitaker, Quartey and Sturm. But I do give him credit for fighting most of the top fighters of his era; he's like Leonard in that way.

[elmersalsa]

Wilfred Benitez
Mike Tyson (ever since he fired Kevin Rooney)
Juan Manuel Marquez
Rafael Marquez
John Ruiz (don't fight and do not let others fight....And still wins or get a draw)
Oscar De La Hoya
Salvador Sanchez (when he opted to fight the great Alexis Arguello INSTEAD of the great Eusebio Pedroza).
Jermaine Taylor (In my view, he never beat Bernard Hopkins)

[elmersalsa]

Others that I did not like were:
Terry Norris (Either he BEAT UP washed up legends or great champions smaller than he...I was glad when Simon Brown knocked him out)

Jesse James Leija

[dempseyfire]

Well I would agree that Hopkins should not have taken the fight, but I'm just saying that I find it hard to give Calzaghe all that much credit for beating a fighter who was so much older than him. If Hopkins at 36 (the same age he was in '01 when he beat Trinidad) had beaten a 43 year old Calzaghe it wouldn't have meant much for Hopkins' legacy.

I agree about Hopkins' clinching, but to be fair, he's only done it in his last two fights. I can't think of any Hopkins fights, prior to Wright and Calzaghe, where he did as much clinching. Not to make any excuses for it, but I don't think he should now be given the reputation of an excessive clincher just because he did a lot of it in his last two fights at 42 and 43.

He did promise his mother that he would stop fighting at 41. If I remember right, his excuse was that he thought that she would have understood. To be fair, though, he was coming off the Taylor losses, and I don't think anyone would want to retire off of that.

I .

That makes no sense. Regardless of Hopkins' age, he was the light HW champion and had just fought even with the middleweight champ Taylor twice and beaten Tarver and Wright. No it's not the same as beating a 35 year old Bernard, but to claim one shouldn't give him 'all that much credit' is absurd.

Hopkins has only clinched a lot his last two fights?? What?? Have you been watching Bernard Hopkins the past 5 years? Hopkins has been fighting with that mauling brusing style for a long time, the last fight in which Hopkins had what you could call a high punchout was vs Joppy in 2003.

[raylawpc]

How about fighters we used to like, but don't like now?

[I Feel Fine]

Well I would agree that Hopkins should not have taken the fight, but I'm just saying that I find it hard to give Calzaghe all that much credit for beating a fighter who was so much older than him. If Hopkins at 36 (the same age he was in '01 when he beat Trinidad) had beaten a 43 year old Calzaghe it wouldn't have meant much for Hopkins' legacy.

I agree about Hopkins' clinching, but to be fair, he's only done it in his last two fights. I can't think of any Hopkins fights, prior to Wright and Calzaghe, where he did as much clinching. Not to make any excuses for it, but I don't think he should now be given the reputation of an excessive clincher just because he did a lot of it in his last two fights at 42 and 43.

He did promise his mother that he would stop fighting at 41. If I remember right, his excuse was that he thought that she would have understood. To be fair, though, he was coming off the Taylor losses, and I don't think anyone would want to retire off of that.

I .

That makes no sense. Regardless of Hopkins' age, he was the light HW champion and had just fought even with the middleweight champ Taylor twice and beaten Tarver and Wright. No it's not the same as beating a 35 year old Bernard, but to claim one shouldn't give him 'all that much credit' is absurd.

Hopkins has only clinched a lot his last two fights?? What?? Have you been watching Bernard Hopkins the past 5 years? Hopkins has been fighting with that mauling brusing style for a long time, the last fight in which Hopkins had what you could call a high punchout was vs Joppy in 2003.

In other words, you thought Jones deserved a lot of credit for beating McCallum? Alright. I didn't particularly feel that way.

Hopkins has never really clinched as excessively as he did in his last two fights. I do not need to be lectured to about Hopkins' fights, thank you.

[Ezzard]

Well I would agree that Hopkins should not have taken the fight, but I'm just saying that I find it hard to give Calzaghe all that much credit for beating a fighter who was so much older than him. If Hopkins at 36 (the same age he was in '01 when he beat Trinidad) had beaten a 43 year old Calzaghe it wouldn't have meant much for Hopkins' legacy.

I agree about Hopkins' clinching, but to be fair, he's only done it in his last two fights. I can't think of any Hopkins fights, prior to Wright and Calzaghe, where he did as much clinching. Not to make any excuses for it, but I don't think he should now be given the reputation of an excessive clincher just because he did a lot of it in his last two fights at 42 and 43.

He did promise his mother that he would stop fighting at 41. If I remember right, his excuse was that he thought that she would have understood. To be fair, though, he was coming off the Taylor losses, and I don't think anyone would want to retire off of that.

I .

That makes no sense. Regardless of Hopkins' age, he was the light HW champion and had just fought even with the middleweight champ Taylor twice and beaten Tarver and Wright. No it's not the same as beating a 35 year old Bernard, but to claim one shouldn't give him 'all that much credit' is absurd.

Hopkins has only clinched a lot his last two fights?? What?? Have you been watching Bernard Hopkins the past 5 years? Hopkins has been fighting with that mauling brusing style for a long time, the last fight in which Hopkins had what you could call a high punchout was vs Joppy in 2003.

In other words, you thought Jones deserved a lot of credit for beating McCallum? Alright. I didn't particularly feel that way.

Hopkins has never really clinched as excessively as he did in his last two fights. I do not need to be lectured to about Hopkins' fights, thank you.

Fine, I know what youy're saying but McCallum was not coming off 2 of his career best wins and was not the current champion.

[Counter-puncher]

I'm the opposite with Chavez. Was a big fan when he burst on the scene. Cheered him wildly when he came on to stop Taylor. But went off him when he turned out to be a bit of a whiner when things didn't go completely his way.

I agree with you about how tough Camacho was. And unlike JCC he took his beatings without a constant annoying whine.

thats a good point, much as i liked JCC he didn't show much class once he was on the slide.

[Smokin'Moe]

i used to hate joe frazier, as when i was younger i loved the flashy, dancing, willie pep - ray leonard style. but as i began boxing with friends around my neighborhood i realized that styles depend on your body dimensions. i was short and stocky for my height of 5'7 so i had less reach but good power. i remember after having watched some famous fights, most memorable was Ali Frazier I, in which i saw the little guy manhandle a big man for 15 incredible rounds, i was completely sold after that.

[I Feel Fine]

I wouldn't call Frazier a "little guy." Height is important, but its a bit overrated. How did you like the rematches, by the way?

Ezzard... yes he was. He wasn't the linear Light Heavyweight champion, but he was one of the belt holders. He wasn't coming off the two best wins in his career; few fighters are at 40. Which is why its impressive enough that Hopkins was able to beat Tarver and Wright. Yet, we're going to be surprised that he couldn't beat Calzaghe at 43? Calzaghe isn't Tarver or Wright. If you look at it, which few people do because they dislike Hopkins, Calzaghe was 36 and at his peak, as Hopkins was at that age; in 2001, seven years earlier. And yet Hopkins still dropped him and lost by a SD. Could Calzaghe have done even that much if the situation was reversed? Not likely.

How many times have you heard people discredit Calzaghe's win over Eubank on the basis that it was "an old Eubank"? Eubank was in his early 30s. Archie Moore was still a top fighter in his 40's and was able to fight to a draw with Pastrano in one of his last fights. Impressive. But its impressive for Moore, its not all that impressive for Pastrano; it just shows that Pastrano would have gotten beat by a younger Moore.

Many boxing fans are incredibly selective about what fighters are allowed to get old and what fighters aren't.

[Ambling Alp]

"Many boxing fans are incredibly selective about what fighters are allowed to get old and what fighters aren't."
Surely not on the Boxers of the Past Forum! Here everyone is always judged the same, whether they are liked or not!

I think that it's a nice win for Calzaghe over Hopkins. Most other fighters wouldn't have been able to do that.
However, that doesn't mean that Calzaghe was better or would beat Hopkins if they were the same age. If they were both say 36, Hopkins would win.

As for the orignal post, I didn't like Larry Holmes at all when he was the champ. I never became a fan, but I now think he is ok, outside of the occasional case of him going nuts.

As a kid, I didn't like Gene Tunney. What I first read and heard about him made me think that he just got lucky against Dempsey. However, the more I learned about him and his career, the more I was impressed.

[Ezzard]

I wouldn't call Frazier a "little guy." Height is important, but its a bit overrated. How did you like the rematches, by the way?

Ezzard... yes he was. He wasn't the linear Light Heavyweight champion, but he was one of the belt holders. He wasn't coming off the two best wins in his career; few fighters are at 40. Which is why its impressive enough that Hopkins was able to beat Tarver and Wright. Yet, we're going to be surprised that he couldn't beat Calzaghe at 43? Calzaghe isn't Tarver or Wright. If you look at it, which few people do because they dislike Hopkins, Calzaghe was 36 and at his peak, as Hopkins was at that age; in 2001, seven years earlier. And yet Hopkins still dropped him and lost by a SD. Could Calzaghe have done even that much if the situation was reversed? Not likely.

How many times have you heard people discredit Calzaghe's win over Eubank on the basis that it was "an old Eubank"? Eubank was in his early 30s. Archie Moore was still a top fighter in his 40's and was able to fight to a draw with Pastrano in one of his last fights. Impressive. But its impressive for Moore, its not all that impressive for Pastrano; it just shows that Pastrano would have gotten beat by a younger Moore.

Many boxing fans are incredibly selective about what fighters are allowed to get old and what fighters aren't.

Fine that wasn't my point. My point was that Calzaghe's win over Hopkins is a good win. Hopkins had beaten 2 of his best opponents in previous fights and was top 10 P4p still. When McCallum fought Jones, Mike was not in the same state at all. Mike really was washed up. IMO that version of McCallum was not comparable to the Hopkins Calzaghe beat. Bernard was not in his prime but he was still a very, very stern test.