Your Top 5 overrated fighters...

First topic message reminder :

Pretty simple, and should be a good way of revealing more on fighters the board may not have been aware of you not rating.

Mine, in order:

01) Roy Jones Jr: Unfortunately didn't stretch himself, looked good against pap opposition, fought bum after bum and almost bought boxing to its knees.

02) Manny Pacquiao: For someone so highly rated i find it a bit random that he has such a huge problem with a counterpuncher style of fighter.

03) Tito Trinidad: Stuffed by Bhop, robbed DLH and is still seen by some to be a great.

04) Mike Tyson: Prime this prime that. 2 years we should judge him on? I don't think so.

05) Barry Mcguigan: Seems to get rated as a great for his out of ring exploits rather than what he did in the ring.

Scottrf wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Ruiz pushed Holyfield in 3 fights don't forget and Holy hasn't been all that bad since.

He lost to Toney, Byrd and Donald the next year from memory.

Sparkling stuff.

Corbett got disqualified then knocked out. Sparkling stuff.

Wasn't he DQd for his corner entering the ring or something silly?

And getting knocked out by Sullivan in their return match trumps being beaten by Larry "I don't rank in the top 200 heavies of all time" Donald. And Toney. And Byrd.

Sparkles.

. In theoretical terms, Fitzsimmons beating "the man" at the weight is more impressive than what Jones did.

But in practical terms I think the difference is alot smaller. Corbett was a small heavyweight, not convinced he was all that great and had picked up his title by beating a semi retired, partially alcoholic bare knuckle fighter in Sullivan.

I dont think Corbett would survive on the modern heavyweight scene and Id give Ruiz every chance of beating him.

Were Jones back in the 1890s I dont think Corbett poses any difficulty for him.

Thing is Jeff you have to look at the other great light heavyweights for me to guage the achievement.

Foster- Ali and Frazier
Moore- Marciano and Patterson
Conn and Henry Lewis- Louis

Spinks beat an ageing but still good Holmes

Then you have the potentially two greatest light heavyweights of all time in Tunney and Charles who only ever held the heavyweight title.

Gives an indication into the overall situation.

This is really really weird.

I'd been planning a Fitz article for a couple of weeks - and was busy writing it whilst you lot were debating something similar here.

As for the Corbett loss - Scott - he was outboxing Jeffries for 23 rounds before the stoppage. Which is pretty impressive for a man who'd seen better days.

Fitzsimmons achievement in defetaing Corbett is always going to get him more kudos than Jones beating Ruiz.

Regardless of what you think about Corbett, he was the best (white)heavyweight around when Fitzsimmons beat him and we can't say the same about Ruiz.

Still, as jeff has said, the fact that it has only been done twice suggests that it isn't all that easy. Consider the number of weak heavyweight champions there have been and then consider the lack of ex-middleweights and light heavyweights to have won the heavyweight title.

paperbag_puncher wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Martinez isn't an all time great middleweight is he, should compare him to fighters on a level footing not those a good couple of levels below.

Audleys far worse than Ruiz. It balances itself out.

Again the implication of what you're saying here Ghosty is that only an ATG middleweight would be able to achieve what Jones did. Martinez is a very good champion and he would have no chance of even beating someone like Arreola, a fringe contender in a poor era.

Of course it is correct to compare what Jones achieved and ask if very good champions could also have achieved it. That is the best way to gauge how good Jones is, by comparing him directly with other champions.

Men like Charles make it even trickier, he should have got shots at the middleweight and light heavyweight titles but didn't because he was too good and black, see his achievement in becoming heavyweight champion as greater than Jones' for instance.

Gent01

Not every middleweight has the ability to weight jump, most aren't corrupt enough to do so with the help of naughty substances (allegedly)

You couldn't mark down Kostya T because he didn't bounce up the weights against some great fighters.

The way i see is that RJJ beat a guy most half decent LHWs would've beaten, he really wasn't any good and wasn't exactly like he carried pop, speed or any real technical ability. Bhop would've done the same job on him, JC as well (from recent times). Hence why i don't find it all that amazing. If he'd beaten Lewis then by all means we wouldn't be having this conversation.

superflyweight wrote:Fitzsimmons achievement in defetaing Corbett is always going to get him more kudos than Jones beating Ruiz.

Regardless of what you think about Corbett, he was the best (white)heavyweight around when Fitzsimmons beat him and we can't say the same about Ruiz.

Still, as jeff has said, the fact that it has only been done twice suggests that it isn't all that easy. Consider the number of weak heavyweight champions there have been and then consider the lack of ex-middleweights and light heavyweights to have won the heavyweight title.

In a theoretical sense yes, but in a practical sense not massively.

The question always seems to be approached from the perspective that Jones was lucky that Ruiz was an option to win the title. I appreciate that point and agree with it.

But on the other side, which largely seems to be ignored, is that I think there are plenty of middleweights historically capable of beating a small heavyweight champion of Corbetts ability.I would back virtually any of the top 10 middleweight champions in history to beat Corbett and probably a few more on top of that. So Fitzsimmons is equally lucky in my view that someone like Corbett had been the guy to beat the ageing bare knuckle specialist in Sullivan.

I actually think Jones is better equipped to beat Corbett than Fitzsimmons is to beat Ruiz.

Couldn't disagree more with you there Manos, Fitzsimmons I can't imagine struggling with Ruiz in the slightest nor can I Jones with Corbett but a middleweight beating THE heavyweight champion is a far greater achievement than a former middleweight beating one of the heavyweight belt holders.

coxy0001 wrote:Gent01

Not every middleweight has the ability to weight jump, most aren't corrupt enough to do so with the help of naughty substances (allegedly)

You couldn't mark down Kostya T because he didn't bounce up the weights against some great fighters.

The way i see is that RJJ beat a guy most half decent LHWs would've beaten, he really wasn't any good and wasn't exactly like he carried pop, speed or any real technical ability. Bhop would've done the same job on him, JC as well (from recent times). Hence why i don't find it all that amazing. If he'd beaten Lewis then by all means we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I'll leave the PED issue alone here.

With regards to the weight hopping point, I actually agree with you to an extent and would go as far as to say that sometimes weight-hopping is given too much emphasis, often over dominating a weight class.

I am not tryin to argue that RJJ beating Ruiz was the greatest performance / achievement of all time. However, it is still a special feat and i rate RJJ for having done it. Winning a middleweight title and a heavyweight title is difficult. I accept that Ruiz was a poor champ but RJJ is still great for beating him at heavy. the same would go for B-Hop had it been him, and JC (although JC never won a 160lb strap so not quite the same thing)

With regards to Ghosty's point about Charles, I also agree that circumstance plays a big part in any legacy. RJJ was fortunate to a degree that Ruiz was champ but, as previously stated Ruiz was hardly the only weak champ in history yet only Fitz and Jones have achieved what they did. That in itself makes it special.

I rate Charles well above RJJ in the all-time stakes

Given that Corbett outboxed Jeffries - a top10 HW for 23 rounds - I think we may be underrating Corbett's ability somewhat.

oxring wrote:Given that Corbett outboxed Jeffries - a top10 HW for 23 rounds - I think Manos may be underrating Corbett's ability somewhat.

That's better

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Couldn't disagree more with you there Manos, Fitzsimmons I can't imagine struggling with Ruiz in the slightest nor can I Jones with Corbett but a middleweight beating THE heavyweight champion is a far greater achievement than a former middleweight beating one of the heavyweight belt holders.

The distance between Middleweight and average sized Heavyweight has increased a lot over that century.

That said, Fitz's is the better achievement.

coxy0001 wrote:

oxring wrote:Given that Corbett outboxed Jeffries - a top10 HW for 23 rounds - I think Manos may be underrating Corbett's ability somewhat.

That's better

Subtle coxy. In fairness - manos and I have had the debate re: Corbett's ability before. Anyone who could take Jackson 60 and come within a whisker of beating Jeffries has something as far as I can tell.

oxring wrote:Given that Corbett outboxed Jeffries - a top10 HW for 23 rounds - I think we may be underrating Corbett's ability somewhat.

A top 10 heavyweight because of his stamina and punching i.e. the reason he won in the end. I don't see many picking Jeffries to outbox great heavies.

Scottrf wrote:

oxring wrote:Given that Corbett outboxed Jeffries - a top10 HW for 23 rounds - I think we may be underrating Corbett's ability somewhat.

A top 10 heavyweight because of his stamina and punching i.e. the reason he won in the end. I don't see many picking Jeffries to outbox great heavies.

Jeffries didn't just win by standing still and adopting the defence of "punch yourself out on my head and I'll KO you later..." He outboxed plenty of challengers - but had great feats of stamina and power. For Corbett to outbox, outfeint, and inflict a beating on Jeffries until Jeffries adapted and used body work to catch up with the old and wily challenger - still says a lot for Corbett's work. People at the time felt it was one of Corbett's most impressive performances. Tunney himself - a guy whose opinions I really respect as a boxing historian was amazed at Corbett's skillset even at the age of 60 and wearing a suit.

Film of the 2 sparring is pretty educational actually - Corbett is able to outbox/spar Tunney, in spite of age and wear and tear.

To defend Jeffries, as I find myself doing quite a bit round here, whilst I am not going to pretend he was Willie Pep skills wise, he was a little better than often portrayed, worth remembering he won the title after a relatively small number of fights and so was very much a work in progress and if anyone reads the round by round reports of his fights, as I have, it is clear his skills were improving with every passing fight, to a point where he was outboxing Corbett for large parts of their second fight.

As I said earlier would be pushing things to suggest he was slick but by the same token would be unfair to suggest anyone who knew the difference between a hook and a jab could run rings round him.

Easy to say Hopkins or Calzaghe could have dealt with Ruiz. Fact is they didn't. RJJs achievement may or may not be as impressive as Fitz but that doesn't take away from the fact that it was impressive. Don't let your hate for the man cloud that..

paperbag_puncher wrote:Easy to say Hopkins or Calzaghe could have dealt with Ruiz.

Sums it up nicely for me.

Jeffries was hardly the toughest guy to outbox in fairness.

Jones was lucky Ruiz was around to pick up a title but Fitzsimmons was also lucky Corbett was around for him to win his title. How many heavyweight world champions do we realistically see either guy beating. Corbett and Ruiz are probably two of a small handful which is also another factor. It just seems that Jones is considered lucky but Fitzsimmons not at all when in reality they both were.

oxring wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

oxring wrote:Given that Corbett outboxed Jeffries - a top10 HW for 23 rounds - I think we may be underrating Corbett's ability somewhat.

A top 10 heavyweight because of his stamina and punching i.e. the reason he won in the end. I don't see many picking Jeffries to outbox great heavies.

Jeffries didn't just win by standing still and adopting the defence of "punch yourself out on my head and I'll KO you later..." He outboxed plenty of challengers - but had great feats of stamina and power. For Corbett to outbox, outfeint, and inflict a beating on Jeffries until Jeffries adapted and used body work to catch up with the old and wily challenger - still says a lot for Corbett's work. People at the time felt it was one of Corbett's most impressive performances. Tunney himself - a guy whose opinions I really respect as a boxing historian was amazed at Corbett's skillset even at the age of 60 and wearing a suit.

Film of the 2 sparring is pretty educational actually - Corbett is able to outbox/spar Tunney, in spite of age and wear and tear.

Adding further fuel to my "Peter Jackson would have wiped the floor with the lot of 'em" argument.

If anything its Ruiz being underrated. As all time heavyweights go he doesnt feature but he still managed to split a trilogy with Holyfield shortly after Holyfield gave a near peak Lewis a great fight. Hed hold a 60 pound weight advantage on Fitzsimmons and has the durabilty to cope with Fitzsimmons power so I dont think Fitzsimmons has nearly an easy time of it as Jones does - if he even wins at all.

If anything its Ruiz being underrated

Seriously Manos, you're going to get me admitted to a mental institute!

coxy0001 wrote:

If anything its Ruiz being underrated

Seriously Manos, you're going to get me admitted to a mental institute!

Hes no great shakes but its being made out by some sections that its not that hard for a middleweight to beat him because he was "rubbish". He was rubbish in comparison with the top heavyweights of all time but he was average by regular heavyweight standards and its going to pretty damn difficult for a middleweight to beat him giving away 60 odd pounds.

The whole Fitzsimmons/Jones thing highlights the inconsistencies in these kind of comparisons. Jones is supposedly lucky that Ruiz was champion yet realistically at how many other points in history would Fitzsimmons have won the heavyweight title?

The fact that Corbett was the recognised world champion seems to brush over this when in reality I dont think theres much difference between the two acheivements in a practical sense and think they were similarly lucky to have the opportunity at the time they did.

I give Jones weighing 165 a better chance of beating Corbett than I do of Fitzsimmons weighing at 165 beating Ruiz.

RJJ was a light heavy when he moved up, Fitz was a middleweight when he moved up (and yes i know LHW wasn't around). Stop saying RJJ was a middleweight, he wasn't, he was a light heavy.

And i'd give a 165lb version of Fitz a massive chance of knocking Ruiz the spark out. You don't get rated in the top 10 punchers of all time without carrying a serious whack. His crack was legendary.

If Jones Jr could shake Ruiz, Fitzsimmons certainly could shake Ruiz. If essentially dancing around the guy and landing a jab and following it with a right beats Ruiz - I'd back Fitzsimmons to be able to do that. Ruiz doesn't throw sufficient leather to win. Much as he did against RJJ and then Toney.

Right well Il add Fitzsimmons to my top 5 overrated guys in that case.

The guys power was massive in the context of him being a middleweight. At heavyweight level its not neccessarily anything special. Does he hit harder than Holyfield? Thunder? Rahman? Haye? I doubt it.

Jones was a former middleweight than won a heavyweight title. He was a cruiserweight by definition when he beat Ruiz.

manos de piedra wrote:Right well Il add Fitzsimmons to my top 5 overrated guys in that case.

.

Please don't.

rowley wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Right well Il add Fitzsimmons to my top 5 overrated guys in that case.

.

Please don't.

Im just waiting for someone to tell me he could fly and wore his pants outside his tights.

coxy0001 wrote:RJJ was a light heavy when he moved up, Fitz was a middleweight when he moved up (and yes i know LHW wasn't around). Stop saying RJJ was a middleweight, he wasn't, he was a light heavy.

And i'd give a 165lb version of Fitz a massive chance of knocking Ruiz the spark out. You don't get rated in the top 10 punchers of all time without carrying a serious whack. His crack was legendary.

Really ? You really see the old fencing master sparking Ruiz, Tua style ?

I can't see it, I really can't. We've seen him on tape with that old style with his chin poking out.

If he clean KO's Ruiz how do you see him going against the 'overrated' Tyson ? Outsider but puncher's chance ?

manos de piedra wrote:

rowley wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Right well Il add Fitzsimmons to my top 5 overrated guys in that case.

.

Please don't.

Im just waiting for someone to tell me he could fly and wore his pants outside his tights.

He was apprently partial to fighting in pink britches, which given his ginger hair must have made a pretty odd sight, still not sure I'd have laughed at him though.

oxring wrote:If Jones Jr could shake Ruiz, Fitzsimmons certainly could shake Ruiz. If essentially dancing around the guy and landing a jab and following it with a right beats Ruiz - I'd back Fitzsimmons to be able to do that. Ruiz doesn't throw sufficient leather to win. Much as he did against RJJ and then Toney.

So you're basically saying Super Fitz does Roy Jones as well as Roy Jones !!

rowley wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:

rowley wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Right well Il add Fitzsimmons to my top 5 overrated guys in that case.

.

Please don't.

Im just waiting for someone to tell me he could fly and wore his pants outside his tights.

He was apprently partial to fighting in pink britches, which given his ginger hair must have made a pretty odd sight, still not sure I'd have laughed at him though.

At least he had style

Does he hit harder than Holyfield? Thunder? Rahman? Haye? I doubt it.

Yes.

Are Holyfield and co rated as the most murderous punchers of all time? Nope.

There is no question that Fitzsimmons had a heavyweights punching power. In 1893, he knocked out seven men in one night and accomplished the feat in under nineteen rounds. All men weighed over 200 pounds. One stood 6-7 and weighed in at 240 pounds. The fact that a middleweight could knock out a man the size of Lennox Lewis demonstrates his worth as a hitter. Fitzsimmons actually defeated top heavyweight contenders Peter Maher, Gus Ruhlin and Tom Sharkey all by knockout.

Interesting article on him on coxscorner:

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/fitz.html

fearlessBamber wrote:

oxring wrote:If Jones Jr could shake Ruiz, Fitzsimmons certainly could shake Ruiz. If essentially dancing around the guy and landing a jab and following it with a right beats Ruiz - I'd back Fitzsimmons to be able to do that. Ruiz doesn't throw sufficient leather to win. Much as he did against RJJ and then Toney.

So you're basically saying Super Fitz does Roy Jones as well as Roy Jones !!

Not sure of your point. RJJ put on a great performance against Ruiz - but Ruiz made it easy for him. He had to jab with reasonable accuracy and follow with the odd hook. Ruiz didn't bull forward and didn't put in any combination punching. He then compounded his miserable performance against Jones with a miserable performance against Toney.

So what does Ruiz do to Fitzsimmons? Tie him up because he's big? Endure his punches because he's big?

Sure - I wouldn't back Bob to beat Tyson, Lewis, Holyfield, either Klitschko, Holmes, Ali etc - but I don't see what stops him beating that Johnny Ruiz.

Malignaggi could knock out 7 men in one night. Who were the men?

Oxy,

Any reason why i can't quote anything that Coxy says? Prob not a bad thing in most cases but quote function seems to be working except for any of his statements.

coxy0001 wrote:

Does he hit harder than Holyfield? Thunder? Rahman? Haye? I doubt it.

Yes.

Are Holyfield and co rated as the most murderous punchers of all time? Nope.

There is no question that Fitzsimmons had a heavyweights punching power. In 1893, he knocked out seven men in one night and accomplished the feat in under nineteen rounds. All men weighed over 200 pounds. One stood 6-7 and weighed in at 240 pounds. The fact that a middleweight could knock out a man the size of Lennox Lewis demonstrates his worth as a hitter. Fitzsimmons actually defeated top heavyweight contenders Peter Maher, Gus Ruhlin and Tom Sharkey all by knockout.

Interesting article on him on coxscorner:

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/fitz.html

Im well aware of this. Do you honestly believe Fitzsimmons was one of the ten heaviest hitters in actual terms (not pound for pound) in the history of the sport? Up there with Shavers, Foreman, Tyson, Marciano, Demspey and all the other big hitting heavyweights?

Fitzsimmons was able to cut Jeffries to absolute shreds in their second fight and most were astounded he was able to continue, going by that he has more than enough to knockout Ruiz.

manos de piedra wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

Does he hit harder than Holyfield? Thunder? Rahman? Haye? I doubt it.

Yes.

Are Holyfield and co rated as the most murderous punchers of all time? Nope.

There is no question that Fitzsimmons had a heavyweights punching power. In 1893, he knocked out seven men in one night and accomplished the feat in under nineteen rounds. All men weighed over 200 pounds. One stood 6-7 and weighed in at 240 pounds. The fact that a middleweight could knock out a man the size of Lennox Lewis demonstrates his worth as a hitter. Fitzsimmons actually defeated top heavyweight contenders Peter Maher, Gus Ruhlin and Tom Sharkey all by knockout.

Interesting article on him on coxscorner:

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/fitz.html

Im well aware of this. Do you honestly believe Fitzsimmons was one of the ten heaviest hitters in actual terms (not pound for pound) in the history of the sport? Up there with Shavers, Foreman, Tyson, Marciano, Demspey and all the other big hitting heavyweights?

Can you counter prove that from going on the many statements we have from that point in history?

coxy0001 wrote:

Does he hit harder than Holyfield? Thunder? Rahman? Haye? I doubt it.

Yes.

Are Holyfield and co rated as the most murderous punchers of all time? Nope.

There is no question that Fitzsimmons had a heavyweights punching power. In 1893, he knocked out seven men in one night and accomplished the feat in under nineteen rounds. All men weighed over 200 pounds. One stood 6-7 and weighed in at 240 pounds. The fact that a middleweight could knock out a man the size of Lennox Lewis demonstrates his worth as a hitter. Fitzsimmons actually defeated top heavyweight contenders Peter Maher, Gus Ruhlin and Tom Sharkey all by knockout.

Interesting article on him on coxscorner:

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/fitz.html

Hahahaha. 7 men in one night. Did he drag them out of the local boozer? Come on, get serious. Naz can (now) KO 7 drunks in one night and all within 7 rounds. Probably Ian Napa could do the same.

As for overrated, look no further than Rocking Marshianus.

Scottrf wrote:Malignaggi could knock out 7 men in one night. Who were the men?

Malignaggi would have to prove that claim before you make it Scott.

This is taking postmodernist thinking too far. Are we really questioning the punch of a guy who could KO Sharkey, Ruhlin, Corbett whilst weighing in at only 160?

Jeffries struggled to stop Corbett in 23. Fitz stopped him in 14. Jeffries was known for having an excellent punch.

Still see you have zero appreciation for anyone who fought pre-1960. Thus rendering comments on the subject void.

coxy0001 wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

Does he hit harder than Holyfield? Thunder? Rahman? Haye? I doubt it.

Yes.

Are Holyfield and co rated as the most murderous punchers of all time? Nope.

There is no question that Fitzsimmons had a heavyweights punching power. In 1893, he knocked out seven men in one night and accomplished the feat in under nineteen rounds. All men weighed over 200 pounds. One stood 6-7 and weighed in at 240 pounds. The fact that a middleweight could knock out a man the size of Lennox Lewis demonstrates his worth as a hitter. Fitzsimmons actually defeated top heavyweight contenders Peter Maher, Gus Ruhlin and Tom Sharkey all by knockout.

Interesting article on him on coxscorner:

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/fitz.html

Im well aware of this. Do you honestly believe Fitzsimmons was one of the ten heaviest hitters in actual terms (not pound for pound) in the history of the sport? Up there with Shavers, Foreman, Tyson, Marciano, Demspey and all the other big hitting heavyweights?

Can you counter prove that from going on the many statements we have from that point in history?

No one from that point in history thought Shavers hit harder than Fitz, you're correct.

But there is a flaw there.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Fitzsimmons was able to cut Jeffries to absolute shreds in their second fight and most were astounded he was able to continue, going by that he has more than enough to knockout Ruiz.

That was supposedly down to his wraps. Ruiz has only been stopped twice. If nothing else he is durable.

paperbag_puncher wrote:Oxy,

Any reason why i can't quote anything that Coxy says? Prob not a bad thing in most cases but quote function seems to be working except for any of his statements.

Working for me mate. No idea. You can write it manually if you can be bothered:

coxy001 wrote:

After that I'm stumped. Will ask on the mod thread.

Scottrf wrote:Malignaggi could knock out 7 men in one night. Who were the men?

Local pub crawlers.

manos de piedra wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Fitzsimmons was able to cut Jeffries to absolute shreds in their second fight and most were astounded he was able to continue, going by that he has more than enough to knockout Ruiz.

That was supposedly down to his wraps. Ruiz has only been stopped twice. If nothing else he is durable.

Never proven, only theorised.

Like Dempsey was loading against Willard.

oxring wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Malignaggi could knock out 7 men in one night. Who were the men?

Malignaggi would have to prove that claim before you make it Scott.

This is taking postmodernist thinking too far. Are we really questioning the punch of a guy who could KO Sharkey, Ruhlin, Corbett whilst weighing in at only 160?

Jeffries struggled to stop Corbett in 23. Fitz stopped him in 14. Jeffries was known for having an excellent punch.

No his punch isnt being questioned but I think its being overrated if the argument is he is one of the ten heaviest punchers in history. Its nothing to do with postmodernist anyway I dont see where thats relevant.