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.

Holmes is my main one. Always viewed him as extremely over-rated. A magnificent heavyweight no doubt, but I feel he is given more credit than his record and his abilities deserve much of the time.

superflyweight wrote:I've been leaning towards Holmes a bit more lately as well, Scott. Have had him as low as 5 in the past but certainly now no lower than 4th and possibly in 3rd.

He has nothing to suggest he is 3rd, though. Record? No. Ability? No (great jab, though). X-factor? No. Head to head basis would he beat the likes of Ali, Louis, Lewis? For me, no.

I have him stuck about 8th these days.

Lance wrote:agree with what you are saying a bit on all of them other than Tito. no shame in losing to bhop or oscar, i rate tito very highly. Manny is good but his matchmaking has made him seem great and although jones was good, funny how he was suddenly past his best as soon as he came up against consistantly good opposition. tarver 1 was the worst robbery i have ever witnessed, and yet he still gets mentioned as part of a slightly weak resume for jones. beating ruiz is certainly an overrated win for jones

Yep. That feat was so easy, more than 1 person has done it since boxing began.

X-factor?

I don't think the ability to do crappy sub-karaoke of an originally crappy song should be a factor in ranking a fighter, Fists.

Problem is though, anyone you stick ahead of Holmes is going to come under similar analysis. There's not anyone that I can confidently say ranks above him.

Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

superflyweight wrote:

To be honest though, whoever I place number 3 behind Ali and Louis I could probably make a better argument as for why they dont belong there as opposed to why they should.

I've been struggling with 3rd spot in the heavyweight diviison for a few months. Like jeff I had Johnson as an automatic pick in 3rd place but have been questioning that lately and accept that I may have been unduly influenced by the general consensus. The problem I have is in making a convincing case for someone else that doesn't fall down under similar scrutiny to that I've been giving Johnson.

I have never really had a set 3rd guy. I dont think there is a right or wrong answer. I just think that with Dempsey his status exceeds far more of the other candidates like Holmes, Foreman, Johnson etc.

I did a thread there recently whereby I tried to differentiate between Dempsey and Marciano. From my experience Dempsey nearly always gets placed higher (although there are exceptions of course). But Im not sure why really. I think its largely down to him being perceived as better and being more of an icon, which is fine if you emphsise that kind of thing.

I think Dempsey was just a very overrated fighter in his day. I took decades before Louis overtook him in most credible lists when nowadays that seems a no brainer.

Fists of Fury wrote:

superflyweight wrote:I've been leaning towards Holmes a bit more lately as well, Scott. Have had him as low as 5 in the past but certainly now no lower than 4th and possibly in 3rd.

He has nothing to suggest he is 3rd, though. Record? No. Ability? No (great jab, though). X-factor? No. Head to head basis would he beat the likes of Ali, Louis, Lewis? For me, no.

I have him stuck about 8th these days.

Longevity, Norton, Shavers, and a number of B level wins. 8th is low, he's higher than that by any measure. Didn't lose until about a decade into his career, 2nd most defenses (?), and his wins don't stack up too badly with the 2nd tier of Heavyweights.

Fists of Fury wrote:

superflyweight wrote:I've been leaning towards Holmes a bit more lately as well, Scott. Have had him as low as 5 in the past but certainly now no lower than 4th and possibly in 3rd.

He has nothing to suggest he is 3rd, though. Record? No. Ability? No (great jab, though). X-factor? No. Head to head basis would he beat the likes of Ali, Louis, Lewis? For me, no.

I have him stuck about 8th these days.

Ouch, slightly over critical there for me Fists, but can actually see why you're saying it... For me certain things such as X-Factor don't come into it, could make a god case that he would take Lewis out also, suppose he doesn't have a stacked record (Not many heavy does to be honest) but was a very dominant champion in his time and has a fair bit of longevity to him also, I can see why some stick him in the top 5, but he is just pushed out of mine, though on better days he squeezes in.

Ha!

It is tight in there, superly, no doubt, and compelling arguments can be made for any of that bunch to rise ahead of the others. There is something about Holmes that has always nagged at me, though (beside him being an obnoxious twerp) and upon reflection just don't find him to be as great as many others do.

First man to lose his heavy title to a career light-heavy, pretty average record overall barring a couple of tight ones with Norton, none of the people he beat then went on to hold the heavyweight title. Just a few reasons why I believe this, but of course it is always objective and others may see it differently.

I have Liston as high as 3rd sometimes but realise thats mainly down to my own personal preference and bias towards him. As said above after the top 2 there are no clear cut positions really. Any of Foreman, Johnson, Liston or Holmes would make up my top 5 at the moment. I definitely wouldn't have Dempsey as 3 or Lewis near my top 5 and think they're over rated especially compared to someone like Frazier who can be a tad under rated.

Fists of Fury wrote:

superflyweight wrote:I've been leaning towards Holmes a bit more lately as well, Scott. Have had him as low as 5 in the past but certainly now no lower than 4th and possibly in 3rd.

He has nothing to suggest he is 3rd, though. Record? No. Ability? No (great jab, though). X-factor? No. Head to head basis would he beat the likes of Ali, Louis, Lewis? For me, no.

I have him stuck about 8th these days.

Really? On ability and head to head I think Holmes would be an easy choice of third. Where he falls down for me is lack of big names on his record. But nearly everything else he ranks highly.

Fists of Fury wrote:Ha!

It is tight in there, superly, no doubt, and compelling arguments can be made for any of that bunch to rise ahead of the others. There is something about Holmes that has always nagged at me, though (beside him being an obnoxious twerp) and upon reflection just don't find him to be as great as many others do.

First man to lose his heavy title to a career light-heavy, pretty average record overall barring a couple of tight ones with Norton, none of the people he beat then went on to hold the heavyweight title. Just a few reasons why I believe this, but of course it is always objective and others may see it differently.

Would seriously have to agree there, he is a twerp I remember him talking about something to do with him being the best Heavyweight of all time just because he beat Ali... Such utter nonsene, however I don't regard him lower because of things like that and I try to keep a clear head when rating such things.

On head to head I may sneak him into 4th, Manos, but I do think big Lennox would have the beating of him more often than not. That isn't my biggest issue by any means, but was just an additional.

Weaver, Witherspoon and Smith all went on to hold versions of the title.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Ruiz is right up there as one of the worst ever heavyweight champions, it's a good achievement but has to be measured against the man he beat at heavyweight which gives it an almighty blow.

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Jones brought fame and money to the table, enough to make ruiz take the fight. he didnt have to fight him, part of the reason no other guy achieved it was because the heavyweights arent usually open to the idea of letting a smaller fighter run rings around them.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Weaver, Witherspoon and Smith all went on to hold versions of the title.

Sorry completely cocked up what I was saying there. What I meant to say was that none of them went on to become dominant champions in the way that say Vitali has after losing to Lennox.

Fists of Fury wrote:On head to head I may sneak him into 4th, Manos, but I do think big Lennox would have the beating of him more often than not. That isn't my biggest issue by any means, but was just an additional.

I think Tunney beats Louis but can't rank Gene anywhere near the top 3. I think you're a bit harsh on Holmes here Fists. Some fine wins on his ledger and longevity. No huge names and he didn't unify a la Tyson. Those are the only real criticisms I can level at him. As mano says, in every other department he excels. I think he's as good a candidate as any for the coveted 3rd spot.

Liston top 5 is pretty generous for me. He would be a definate lower end top 10 guy in my list.

I would probably go with Holmes at 3rd because he has the most complete balance. He has ability, he has longetivity, he has a decent record and no major weaknesses on his c.v. Even while he was ancient he still managed some credible results and performances.

Foreman and Johnsons weak title reigns might see them miss out for me as both guys have much bigger holes in their claims than Holmes. They might outdo him in cetain areas but across the board I think Holmes takes it on balance.

Lance wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Jones brought fame and money to the table, enough to make ruiz take the fight. he didnt have to fight him, part of the reason no other guy achieved it was because the heavyweights arent usually open to the idea of letting a smaller fighter run rings around them.

Completely disagree. Any Middleweight fighting for the title is a big deal and draws attention. Perhaps you can name me another middleweight who had a real, genuine chance of winning a heavyweight title had the hevayweight champ at the time been prepared to take him on?

I struggle with the third best Heavy spot .Its Dempsey for me but I will admit the icon thing and his influence on the game are part of that.Plus the fact he was one of my first boxing heros. Appreciate that is not the most objective view but thats how I see him.
Rocky is the one I struggle with.Looks like a guy that most of the greats would beat but im not so sure.Noone actually managed it in the ring so I think he was better than he looks

Gentleman01 wrote:

Lance wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Jones brought fame and money to the table, enough to make ruiz take the fight. he didnt have to fight him, part of the reason no other guy achieved it was because the heavyweights arent usually open to the idea of letting a smaller fighter run rings around them.

Completely disagree. Any Middleweight fighting for the title is a big deal and draws attention. Perhaps you can name me another middleweight who had a real, genuine chance of winning a heavyweight title had the hevayweight champ at the time been prepared to take him on?

Toney of course nearly did it, hopkins would have beaten ruiz and even challenged david haye. id back chris eubank to beat john ruiz

Gentleman01 wrote:

Lance wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Jones brought fame and money to the table, enough to make ruiz take the fight. he didnt have to fight him, part of the reason no other guy achieved it was because the heavyweights arent usually open to the idea of letting a smaller fighter run rings around them.

Completely disagree. Any Middleweight fighting for the title is a big deal and draws attention. Perhaps you can name me another middleweight who had a real, genuine chance of winning a heavyweight title had the hevayweight champ at the time been prepared to take him on?

Are you talking about a guy who was a middleweight i'd assume? Because RJJ wasn't a middleweight, he was a light heavy when he moved up to face Ruiz. And Bob Fitz took out Sullivan having been a middleweight like RJJ and beat a much better champ than Ruiz was. So nuh.

As it's lunch, and it's my thread check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmpONxJ7JSw&feature=player_embedded

Sounds just like Ron Burgendy...

Toney was taking PED's which, to put it mildly, gave him an unfair advantage. It's not a great example.

I think Haye would wipe out Hopkins. I also think Eubank would struggle with Ruiz's size and would lose. I agree it could be a decent contest though.

I still maintain what RJJ did was special

coxy0001 wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Lance wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Jones brought fame and money to the table, enough to make ruiz take the fight. he didnt have to fight him, part of the reason no other guy achieved it was because the heavyweights arent usually open to the idea of letting a smaller fighter run rings around them.

Completely disagree. Any Middleweight fighting for the title is a big deal and draws attention. Perhaps you can name me another middleweight who had a real, genuine chance of winning a heavyweight title had the hevayweight champ at the time been prepared to take him on?

Are you talking about a guy who was a middleweight i'd assume? Because RJJ wasn't a middleweight, he was a light heavy when he moved up to face Ruiz. And Bob Fitz took out Sullivan having been a middleweight like RJJ and beat a much better champ than Ruiz was. So nuh.

As it's lunch, and it's my thread check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmpONxJ7JSw&feature=player_embedded

Sounds just like Ron Burgendy...

Think you will find it was Corbett he beat actually

How many middleweights had such a weak champion to have a tilt at?

Mickey Walker should have got the nod against Sharkey which would have been a huge achievement for a former Welterweight champion.

Had the likes of Greb, Monzon, Hagler, Robinson etc. had Ruiz to go for, think we'd have seen more middleweights gunning for the heavyweight title.

Toney's a strange case. He was fighting at heavy due to his pure laziness and lack of professionalism rather than his talent alone. I'm not sure I would have given him the same credit as a RJJ if he had of done it.

coxy0001 wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Lance wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Jones brought fame and money to the table, enough to make ruiz take the fight. he didnt have to fight him, part of the reason no other guy achieved it was because the heavyweights arent usually open to the idea of letting a smaller fighter run rings around them.

Completely disagree. Any Middleweight fighting for the title is a big deal and draws attention. Perhaps you can name me another middleweight who had a real, genuine chance of winning a heavyweight title had the hevayweight champ at the time been prepared to take him on?

Are you talking about a guy who was a middleweight i'd assume? Because RJJ wasn't a middleweight, he was a light heavy when he moved up to face Ruiz. And Bob Fitz took out Sullivan having been a middleweight like RJJ and beat a much better champ than Ruiz was. So nuh.

As it's lunch, and it's my thread check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmpONxJ7JSw&feature=player_embedded

Sounds just like Ron Burgendy...

I mean any guy to have won world titles at middleweight and then heavyweight. RJJ is one of only 2 fighters to ever do it. That in itself is an achievement.

manos de piedra wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Lance wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Jones brought fame and money to the table, enough to make ruiz take the fight. he didnt have to fight him, part of the reason no other guy achieved it was because the heavyweights arent usually open to the idea of letting a smaller fighter run rings around them.

Completely disagree. Any Middleweight fighting for the title is a big deal and draws attention. Perhaps you can name me another middleweight who had a real, genuine chance of winning a heavyweight title had the hevayweight champ at the time been prepared to take him on?

Are you talking about a guy who was a middleweight i'd assume? Because RJJ wasn't a middleweight, he was a light heavy when he moved up to face Ruiz. And Bob Fitz took out Sullivan having been a middleweight like RJJ and beat a much better champ than Ruiz was. So nuh.

As it's lunch, and it's my thread check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmpONxJ7JSw&feature=player_embedded

Sounds just like Ron Burgendy...

Think you will find it was Corbett he beat actually

Ah yeah he won it from Sullivan.

I blame beer for memory holes.

Gentleman01 wrote:Toney was taking PED's which, to put it mildly, gave him an unfair advantage. It's not a great example.

I think Haye would wipe out Hopkins. I also think Eubank would struggle with Ruiz's size and would lose. I agree it could be a decent contest though.

I still maintain what RJJ did was special

Hasnt jones admitted to taking PEDS though?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:How many middleweights had such a weak champion to have a tilt at?

Mickey Walker should have got the nod against Sharkey which would have been a huge achievement for a former Welterweight champion.

Had the likes of Greb, Monzon, Hagler, Robinson etc. had Ruiz to go for, think we'd have seen more middleweights gunning for the heavyweight title.

Monzon and Hagler didn't move above Middle so that's a bit of a stretch.

Gentleman01 wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Lance wrote:

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think a fair few light heavyweights would have loved to have the luxury of John Ruiz as a champion to beat rather than the ones the greats had to contend with.

Maybe, but I don't see Ruiz the worst fighter to ever hold a belt. RJJ is still only one of two men ever to have won world titles at Middleweight and Heavyweight. There have been other poor champions over the years and no other Middleweight, other than Fitz has ever managed to accomplish this feat. It certainly stands to reason then that this achievement is something incredibly special

Jones brought fame and money to the table, enough to make ruiz take the fight. he didnt have to fight him, part of the reason no other guy achieved it was because the heavyweights arent usually open to the idea of letting a smaller fighter run rings around them.

Completely disagree. Any Middleweight fighting for the title is a big deal and draws attention. Perhaps you can name me another middleweight who had a real, genuine chance of winning a heavyweight title had the hevayweight champ at the time been prepared to take him on?

Are you talking about a guy who was a middleweight i'd assume? Because RJJ wasn't a middleweight, he was a light heavy when he moved up to face Ruiz. And Bob Fitz took out Sullivan having been a middleweight like RJJ and beat a much better champ than Ruiz was. So nuh.

As it's lunch, and it's my thread check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmpONxJ7JSw&feature=player_embedded

Sounds just like Ron Burgendy...

I mean any guy to have won world titles at middleweight and then heavyweight. RJJ is one of only 2 fighters to ever do it. That in itself is an achievement.

Jumping weight classes, especially when moving up against poor oppo, doesn't do much for me. Not like he beat Lennox Lewis now - is it?

And lets not forget he's forever linked with Balco. Especially as when that all went into meltdown his career suddenly took a nose dive as he looked average.

You can say that Ruiz wasnt great fair enough. He wasnt. But we would also have alot more middlewight champions picking up the title if the champion was somebody like Corbett who I dont think was all that great either and was more or less a light heavyweight.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:How many middleweights had such a weak champion to have a tilt at?

Mickey Walker should have got the nod against Sharkey which would have been a huge achievement for a former Welterweight champion.

Had the likes of Greb, Monzon, Hagler, Robinson etc. had Ruiz to go for, think we'd have seen more middleweights gunning for the heavyweight title.

Maybe, but it's all ifs and buts. Many eras have had weak champs, only 2 have produced middleweights who have won a heavyweight world title.

With regards to Greb, Walker et al, even if they had both achieved it, that hardly diminishes RJJ's achievement does it? Those guys are boxing royalty. The fact that to make your point you have used some of the greatest fighters of all time as examples only serves to re-inforce the point that it takes a special fighter to achieve what RJJ did.

Jones is a former middleweight world champion, whilst his acheivement does not compare with Fitz' because obviously Fitz beat the man at the weight to do it, it still stands that in the 100+ years of the sport only two guys have done it and Jones is one of them. Easy to say this guy could have done it or I'd back so and so to beat so and so, they didn't, Jones did. Not an accomplishment that should be so readily dismissed.

the point remains that, jones was able to do it because ruiz gave him the shot, it wasnt as if he went up and fought his way to a title shot. most heavyweight wouldnt make the same mistake. how many middleweights could have done to valuev what david haye did??

Foreman and Johnsons weak title reigns might see them miss out for me as both guys have much bigger holes in their claims than Holmes. They might outdo him in cetain areas but across the board I think Holmes takes it on balance..

That just about sums up where I am in my thinking, Manos.

As for Liston, have in the past had him as high as 6th (as much for his pre-title days as for his reign as champion) but think he would be down somewhere around 8th or 9th if I wrote a list today.

Scottrf wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:How many middleweights had such a weak champion to have a tilt at?

Mickey Walker should have got the nod against Sharkey which would have been a huge achievement for a former Welterweight champion.

Had the likes of Greb, Monzon, Hagler, Robinson etc. had Ruiz to go for, think we'd have seen more middleweights gunning for the heavyweight title.

Monzon and Hagler didn't move above Middle so that's a bit of a stretch.

Spot the weak link out of this trio, Spinks, Foster or Ruiz?

Gentleman01 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:How many middleweights had such a weak champion to have a tilt at?

Mickey Walker should have got the nod against Sharkey which would have been a huge achievement for a former Welterweight champion.

Had the likes of Greb, Monzon, Hagler, Robinson etc. had Ruiz to go for, think we'd have seen more middleweights gunning for the heavyweight title.

Maybe, but it's all ifs and buts. Many eras have had weak champs, only 2 have produced middleweights who have won a heavyweight world title.

With regards to Greb, Walker et al, even if they had both achieved it, that hardly diminishes RJJ's achievement does it? Those guys are boxing royalty. The fact that to make your point you have used some of the greatest fighters of all time as examples only serves to re-inforce the point that it takes a special fighter to achieve what RJJ did.

Relative isn't, Greb would have to have beaten Jack Dempsey for the title, a nailed on top ten fighter, Walker was a fighter who seemed to be screwed out of titles more than any other. I don't rate Jones' win over Ruiz because he's garbage.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:How many middleweights had such a weak champion to have a tilt at?

Mickey Walker should have got the nod against Sharkey which would have been a huge achievement for a former Welterweight champion.

Had the likes of Greb, Monzon, Hagler, Robinson etc. had Ruiz to go for, think we'd have seen more middleweights gunning for the heavyweight title.

Monzon and Hagler didn't move above Middle so that's a bit of a stretch.

Spot the weak link out of this trio, Spinks, Foster or Ruiz?

Spot the weak link out of this trio, Ali, Louis or Corbett.

Perhaps we should stop calling Fitz a freak of nature.

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

Scottrf wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:How many middleweights had such a weak champion to have a tilt at?

Mickey Walker should have got the nod against Sharkey which would have been a huge achievement for a former Welterweight champion.

Had the likes of Greb, Monzon, Hagler, Robinson etc. had Ruiz to go for, think we'd have seen more middleweights gunning for the heavyweight title.

Monzon and Hagler didn't move above Middle so that's a bit of a stretch.

Spot the weak link out of this trio, Spinks, Foster or Ruiz?

Spot the weak link out of this trio, Ali, Louis or Corbett.

Perhaps we should stop calling Fitz a freak of nature.

Corbett was a very accomplished fighter for his time and was the best heavyweight in the world at the time, Ruiz was a garbage fighter in a very weak era.

You can nit pick all you want but its still some achievement. Fair enough Ruiz wasn't anything special but put it into context. Could you see someone like Martinez beating Audley? I honestly couldn't and Ruiz is twice the fighter Audley is.

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.

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.

We could argue about this one all day, no doubt, but I'd say it is a very good achievement given that so few others have achieved it (regardless of oppo, as more would have done it if a weak champ was the only ingredient for doing so), and certainly enhances RJJ's legacy no end.

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.

Doesn't matter if you could see this guy or that guy doing it, fact is they haven't done it. Jones and Fitz have, easy to say Ruiz is a rubbish champion and am unlikely to agree with you. However he is far from the first or last ordinary heavyweight champion but in over 100 years only two have acheived the feat, suggests to me it is perhaps not as easy as we would like to portray.

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.