Top 5 UNDER-RATED fighters

First topic message reminder :

Hey guys, just a follow on from the "Top 5 Over-Rated Fighters" topic which has generated som good feedback. Here is my list of the the Under-Rated to get us started:

Paulie Malignaggi - Has great slick and technique in the ring but has feather fists. If this guy had power, he could have been BIG.

Juan Manuel Marquez - Summed up how under rated he is last weekend when i think, along with millions, that he had upset a certain Manny Pacquiao. Showed fantastic counterpunching abilities and brilliant movement to almost pull of an upset which many feel he had clearly won.

Amir Khan - People are giving him a lot of stick and are begging for him to be knocked out. I also feel people dont think he is good enough to be where he is. Some guy the other week on Boxing Scene says Khan will get "pasted" by Peterson because Peterson is a "Rabid Dog" and that Khan "Just Aint Good Enough Y'all!". I think he is brilliant and that he could be Great.

Wladamir/Vitali Klitshcko - People under-rate these MASSIVLY as slow, boring machines that are easily hittable and that they are ruining the boxing H/W division. The fact is that they are not. They are simply superior athletes compared to the majority of fat bum champs aka Povetikin that are up there at the moment.


Bernard Hopkins - Always slated for boring fights, people always state he will lose as he ages overnight, he is slow, dirty etc etc . But everytime he comes out and turns it on. People underestimate his capabilities. Could be around a little longer.


Special Mention to Tyson Fury who has to be by far the sh***est excuse of a boxer on this planet. And his promoter is a joke as well. After his bum fight against some guy with feather fists (where Tyson was put clean on his arse), his trainier stated he could smash up the Klitschkos and Haye. Really? Well then make it happen and we will all see. I actually hate Tyson Fury. His style, the way he has no defence, his attitude, his weight, his face, his voice.......

Union Cane wrote:In some ways it's a shame that Tyson came along then, as with all those world class fighters on the scene at the same time it could have been an even greater version of the heavyweight division's 70s heyday.

Why are you being so flippant? No-ones saying that it would equal that era, just that they were very good/world class fighters and Tyson should be credited for beating them. They are not ATG status but very good fighters nonetheless which was the original point being made as to why Tyson could be construed as underrated.

That was my point...

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

fearlessBamber wrote:Holmes, Spinks, Tucker, Bruno, Smith, Tubbs, Berbick, Thomas all former, current or future WORLD title holders.

Take a look at this like:

www.google.com - it supplements boxrec very very well

fearlessBamber 1 - 0 Union Cane

You'll not be so cheery when the ban comes through, Union has changed.

I can't ban people for just being wrong, so they tell me.

Not seen Truss for a while though...

Is Truss banned, pity I like him

rowley wrote:You'll not be so cheery when the ban comes through, Union has changed.

Yes I've noticed the vicious streak developing - oh for those carefree days of caption competitions with Holyfield staring at a woman's breasts or suchlike.

fearlessBamber wrote:

rowley wrote:You'll not be so cheery when the ban comes through, Union has changed.

Yes I've noticed the vicious streak developing - oh for those carefree days of caption competitions with Holyfield staring at a woman's breasts or suchlike.

Think those days are long gone, we may never see another reverse linear thread again, sad times indeed.

Julio Cesar Chavez arguably the greatest Mexican fighter ever unbeaten in his first 89 contests, 80 odd knockouts in his career multi weight champion.

Alexis Arguello would have given any Super Featherweight in history an argument very rarely spoken of in the same breath as PBF,Manny or the 3 Mexicans would have given them all nightmares.

Roberto Duran don't need to say much one of the best Lightweights ever been 4 weight world champ who took on the best.

Mike McCallum never ducked anyone and some impressive scalps on his record never knocked out or stopped tough as they come.

Barry McGuigan fought his way up the rankings beat Laporte,Pedroza,and stopped the unbeaten Bernard Taylor yet best remembered as the pale skinned Irishman who lost his title in 140 degree heat and McGuigan wanted to pull out the fight several times due to injuries but was persuaded by Barney Eastwood to carry on .
The punch LaPorte hit him flush with would have felled most Featherweights but McGuigan shrugged it off and kept coming, showed how good his chin was.
Takes a lot of unfair criticism on here in my opinion.

ShahenshahG wrote:Mccallum
Marquez
Vasquez
Wlad
Bruno

I dont think McCallum was under-rated. He was just avoided.

tommy hearns underrated - shoudl be way higher than 67 on teh ring's greatest 80 fighters of the last 80 years

Nico I do have to point out that Arguello is widely considered to be the greatest of all super featherweights, usually only Mayweather who is considered capable of beating him at the weight. Pacquiao, Marquez, Morales and Barrera aren't regarded anywhere near as highly as El Flaco Explosivo.

d260005p wrote:

fearlessBamber wrote:By boxing fans:

Mike Tyson - Top 10 heavy for me 8 -> 10, totally destroyed world class opposition and revitalised the sport.

Michael Nunn - I truly believe the Nunn that beat Tate would have given any middleweight in history nightmares - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEVD1PD_lXA Don't forget he also sparked the also underrated Kalambay.

Lloyd Honeyghan - just gets forgotten, won the undisputed title against an extremely well respected champion.

Naz - One of the greatest fighters this country's produced.

Would disagree that Naz Hamed is UNDER RATED. I think the guy was exposed against Barrera. He had bags of talent but it got to his head in the end. He ended up sacking his trainer, converting to muslim, doing his own training and routines....then BANG. Smashed up by The Baby Faced Assasin, then pretty much retiring after a low key draw in the bout after. Waste of time and money that guy. He WAS good, but by no means great or under-rated.

1. What difference does being muslim make? Or converting to Islam? (hello greatest HW boxer of all time...)

2. His parents were both Yemeni, an almost exclusively Muslim country, therefore I very much doubt he wasn't raised Muslim - when did he 'convert' and what from?

TopHat24/7 wrote:1. What difference does being muslim make? Or converting to Islam? (hello greatest HW boxer of all time...)

Tyson fan too?

Naz was always a Muslim, just became a bit more vocal in expressing it later in his career.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

d260005p wrote:

fearlessBamber wrote:By boxing fans:

Mike Tyson - Top 10 heavy for me 8 -> 10, totally destroyed world class opposition and revitalised the sport.

Michael Nunn - I truly believe the Nunn that beat Tate would have given any middleweight in history nightmares - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEVD1PD_lXA Don't forget he also sparked the also underrated Kalambay.

Lloyd Honeyghan - just gets forgotten, won the undisputed title against an extremely well respected champion.

Naz - One of the greatest fighters this country's produced.

Would disagree that Naz Hamed is UNDER RATED. I think the guy was exposed against Barrera. He had bags of talent but it got to his head in the end. He ended up sacking his trainer, converting to muslim, doing his own training and routines....then BANG. Smashed up by The Baby Faced Assasin, then pretty much retiring after a low key draw in the bout after. Waste of time and money that guy. He WAS good, but by no means great or under-rated.

1. What difference does being muslim make? Or converting to Islam? (hello greatest HW boxer of all time...)

2. His parents were both Yemeni, an almost exclusively Muslim country, therefore I very much doubt he wasn't raised Muslim - when did he 'convert' and what from?

Bit of a strange thing to say, isn't it?

He wasn't 'smashed up' by MAB either, it was a convincing points victory by an exceptional talent. Anyone would think Hamed was given a beating by some novice pro or something, not one of the finest fighters of recent years. Without wishing to open an old debate again, Hamed is always given a kicking over one fight, and he deserves better than that. It is hard to give context, but I think it is pretty easy to make a case for Naseem been underrated.

How was your night out, TopHat?

It was good Tino, 9 bottles of red wine and 1 bottle of port between 6 guys made for a pretty uncomfortable hangover tho...

How was the Guinea?

TopHat24/7 wrote:It was good Tino, 9 bottles of red wine and 1 bottle of port between 6 guys made for a pretty uncomfortable hangover tho...

How was the Guinea?

Jeez, good effort. Guinea was good, I was a bit boring with the ale though, I just stuck to Youngs. Plenty of it though and the biggest steak and kidney pie I have ever seen.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Nico I do have to point out that Arguello is widely considered to be the greatest of all super featherweights, usually only Mayweather who is considered capable of beating him at the weight. Pacquiao, Marquez, Morales and Barrera aren't regarded anywhere near as highly as El Flaco Explosivo.

Don't need to point it out to me I know how good he was, still don't think he gets the respect he deserves not just as a superfeatherweight but as 3 weight champion when the above 5 are mentioned.

I honestly think Carl Froch still remains Britain's most underrated active fighter.

Most of his fights around world level have been exciting, for one reason or another, he's fought an unbelievable run of opponents, and he's travelled regularly to face them.

I'm not sure he'll have enough to beat Ward, and i don't think he'd have beat Calzaghe (though i wasn't Joe's biggest fan), but he's been a real credit to British boxing over the last few years, and whilst some could argue that he's limited technically, as a boxing fan he ticks most of the boxes for me.

Just to put my own case here, I yield to no-one in my admiration for Duran as a fighter, allowing even for the fact that he broke my young heart by beating Buchanan. In ranking him on an all-time, pound for pound basis, however, I have tried to set his career in context with other wonderful fighters.

Someone like Pernell Whitaker, for example. I would argue that Whitaker's career as a lightweight was very nearly the equal of Duran's. Leaving aside the disgrace that was the Ramirez I verdict, Whitaker utterly dominated a crop of 135 lb men which, while not of an absolutely sparkling vintage, was not much inferior to that which Duran trampled underfoot. Duran had his troubles at the weight as well. Beaten and severely dicomforted by DeJesus, niggled by Buchanan, and possibly, arguably, less dominant at 135 than Whitaker. At welter, Whitaker does not have a victim as exceptional as Leonard, but conversely, his longevity and dominance are far superior to Duran's. In addition, we have a light-welter and light-middle strap for Pea (and no accompanying embarrassments), who never genuinely lost until the sere and yellow of his career.

All of which means that Duran, if he is at all, cannot be far ahead of Whitaker in the all-time stakes for me. I'd love to know of those who place him as high as 3 or 4 (and whose opinions I fully respect), whether they would accordingly place Whitaker at 5 or 6, because I don't see any justification for there to be much distance between them at all. For me, Pea fits close to Duran at around the 15 mark. I gladly acknowledge Duran's wonderful achievements, but I refuse to forget DeJesus, Benitez and Laing entirely from the equation.

To the original question, and I used to say that Tunney, Jofre and McCallum were the three most underrated great fighters of all time. Over the last few years, this trio has increasingly received due appreciation, so some other names might be in order. Among them, I would suggest Freddie Miller, the great old featherweight champ, Sandy Saddler, whose name deserves to be a lot closer to that of Willie Pep in the all-time p for p stakes than is routinely the case, and Ike Williams, still afforded far too little respect outside the geekier boxing circles (yes, I'm one too!).

Much of it comes down to Duran beating a higher level of opposition Captain, Whitaker looked classier beating the men he did but isn't enough to come close to Duran.

Starting with Kobayashii and Marcel before he had won a world title all the way through Buchanan, De Jesus, Palomino, Leonard and Cuevas represents a set of wins that far out does that of Whitaker.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Just to put my own case here, I yield to no-one in my admiration for Duran as a fighter, allowing even for the fact that he broke my young heart by beating Buchanan. In ranking him on an all-time, pound for pound basis, however, I have tried to set his career in context with other wonderful fighters.

Someone like Pernell Whitaker, for example. I would argue that Whitaker's career as a lightweight was very nearly the equal of Duran's. Leaving aside the disgrace that was the Ramirez I verdict, Whitaker utterly dominated a crop of 135 lb men which, while not of an absolutely sparkling vintage, was not much inferior to that which Duran trampled underfoot. Duran had his troubles at the weight as well. Beaten and severely dicomforted by DeJesus, niggled by Buchanan, and possibly, arguably, less dominant at 135 than Whitaker. At welter, Whitaker does not have a victim as exceptional as Leonard, but conversely, his longevity and dominance are far superior to Duran's. In addition, we have a light-welter and light-middle strap for Pea (and no accompanying embarrassments), who never genuinely lost until the sere and yellow of his career.

All of which means that Duran, if he is at all, cannot be far ahead of Whitaker in the all-time stakes for me. I'd love to know of those who place him as high as 3 or 4 (and whose opinions I fully respect), whether they would accordingly place Whitaker at 5 or 6, because I don't see any justification for there to be much distance between them at all. For me, Pea fits close to Duran at around the 15 mark. I gladly acknowledge Duran's wonderful achievements, but I refuse to forget DeJesus, Benitez and Laing entirely from the equation.

To the original question, and I used to say that Tunney, Jofre and McCallum were the three most underrated great fighters of all time. Over the last few years, this trio has increasingly received due appreciation, so some other names might be in order. Among them, I would suggest Freddie Miller, the great old featherweight champ, Sandy Saddler, whose name deserves to be a lot closer to that of Willie Pep in the all-time p for p stakes than is routinely the case, and Ike Williams, still afforded far too little respect outside the geekier boxing circles (yes, I'm one too!).

Yeah Whitaker gets at 9 for me Captain - welcome back btw. My reason for placing Duran so high are both Leonard and Hagler. Both men - bigger, stronger and arguably faster than him and he cuts them down to a narrow win and defeat respecti velywith cunning, economy of movement and sheer bloody spite. Whitaker can match his achievements as you said but those two opponents for me said it all about Roberto Duran. He is the epitome of pound for pound - using skill to negate every advantage his opponent had. Whitaker beats him as do several others who i've placed behind him - maybe even Mayweather - but what he achieved - with an ATG WW - ATG MW always sticks in my mind. Those losses you mentioned do speak badly of his willingness to prepare or put his all in - we've punsihed others for it in our 606 HOF- but these lists are made with the best of each fighter taken into consideration - and the best of Roberto Duran has proved time and time again to be special.

Whitaker was denied his three victories in JCC/ Ramirez or ODLH - With those in mind - (I have him as victor in all) and taking his superiority in all the fights (Except ODLH - fairly close one) gives him a top 10 slot.

I would slightly demur with you Ghosty (and very nice to see you back, by the way). While Leonard is clearly of an order beyond any of Whitaker's opponents, and I also think that Marcel is an oft-forgotten gem on Duran's record, Pea's list of victims stands reasonable comparison with the rest of Duran's front-rank opponents. Ramirez, for example, is not that far behind De Jesus and Buchanan; moreover, Haugen, Nelson, Chavez (officially a draw, but I think that we all know the truth of it), Paez and McGirt are easily comparable with Kobayashi, Palomino and Cuevas for me. Furthermore, I would repeat that the slips against DeJesus and Benitez and the wretched performance against Laing simply didn't happen to Pea. Whitaker's performances in the autumn of his career against de la Hoya and Trinidad also do him a good deal more honour than Duran's at a similar point in his boxing life, excepting only that wonderful win over Barkley.

I acknowledge the Hagler fight as one of Duran's finest hours, and am happy for him to be slightly ahead of Pea overall, but it is a slight difference. For my taste, there is too much competition in the all-time top ten to accommodate both Duran and Pea, but both are clearly well inside a top twenty. That is surely no disgrace.

I am totally at one with your reasoning, Shah. The only thing that would seem illogical is to place Duran in one category and then Whitaker in another, miles behind him. It is essentially a matter of taste and opinion whether Duran and Whitaker exceed the achievements of men such as Charles, Langford, Tunney, Fitz, Pep et al, or are narrowly shaded by those greats in or around the top 10. It's such a rarefied level of talent that there can be no right answer; my own take on it is that there is a group of around 20-25 fighters that separate themselves from the field to become a celestial host of stars. Within that, there are half a dozen who, in my opinion, have achievements that place them even higher in the firmament. After that, it may depend on how the constellations are aligning themselves on a particular day! Extremely difficult to be absolutely precise between 7 and 25.

Very nice to have the time to be back, by the way. H of F's resumption is imminent, you'll be thrilled to know.

I would have to have De Jesus and Buchanan a fair way ahead of Ramirez at lightweight who was a good champion but not great, tend to see the latter part of Durans career cancelling out. For every good win or performance like Hagler, Moore, Barkley or Castro there's a Laing, Sims or other such poor performance.

Duran is in my top ten at about 6/7 with Whitaker down in about 18th, I never appreciated his style one of the main reasons I don't give him the benefit of the doubt in his draw and losses.

My top 14/15 are almost untouchable with Ross and Gans being the two whom could lose out to Mayweather at some point above that the order varies but the names never change,

Whitaker I think as ghosty has just demonstrated gets unfairly penalised for his style - which I would admit gets boring after the first few times you've seen it. For me the mark of the greatest fighters is the ease and grace or the inevitability with which they conduct themselves at pivotal moments (meaning what puts e above the merely great). Ali's magnificent dance around while knocking down Foreman, or his casual dismissal of Listons vicous jab. Then theres Robinson's left hook, or Haglers wearing down of Hearns. One of my favourite moments though is Durans knockdown of Barkley - at a time when he should seriously have hung up his boots - slip slip bang bang bang - turn around and walk away as if you've just beaten up Audley Harrison and not someone three or four weights above your natural weight - and a serious contender for the title at that.

I know theres those fights with which he let himself down - but even there - his greatness is such that we look at that and we think he could have easily done better. Bit of a cop out I know - but some of those fighters you've mentioned all have over Duran - speed and power (bar pep).

Anyway - I'll leave it at that otherwise I might get an indecent proposal from the hands of stone

There are great many fighters I believe have been underrated and outright forgotten about in many ways. I find it difficult to narrow it down to just 5 but at the moment I will say:

1. Young Stribling
2. Packy McFarland
3. Nonpareil Jack Dempsey
4. Sammy Angott
5. Jack McAuliffe

I would also include honourable mentions to Barbados Joe Walcott, Beau Jack, Tommy Ryan, Jack Dillon and Owen Moran.

1. Jake lamotta
2. Riddick Bowe
3. Max Baer
4. Tommy Hearns
5. Mike mccallum

1. Ricardo Lopez
2. Willie Pep- I've seen plenty of people leave him out of their top 10 P4P lists which is criminal imo.
3. Sandy Saddler
4. Peter Kane
5. Rafael Marquez- Lived in his brothers shadow with the exception of the Vazquez fights.

Who was Peter Kane pretty boy???

6. Donald Curry.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Who was Peter Kane pretty boy???

A flyweight from Liverpool. He boxed twice against Benny Lynch lost once and drew once then went on to have a very successful career as a flyweight once Lynch was finished. He seems to get forgot about because of Lynch and Wylde.

Fair enough...

Percy Jones.

Underrated forgotten flyweight champ. Career spoiled by the first world war. Some good wins, losses after trouble with weight later in his career.

I'm not saying he's an ATG at any weight - but he shouldn't be forgotten - especially not in Wales.

First Welsh boxing World champion - predating Wilde and Welsh - and a century of fistic success for a small nation.

This might seem strange but just thinking about it there I would say Ezzard Charles. I dont think hes underrated so much on this site but I have seen a fair few lists that would have him outside the top 15 or 20 of all time and even as low as 4/5 on some light heavyweight divisional lists. This would seem strange for a guy who has a light heavyweight record second to none and woud be a top 5 of all time in my book.

Many of his opposition were Murderers Row guys who tend to be either forgotten or else underrated themselves and this rubs off a bit on Charles I think, aswell as his lack of title at light heavyweight. Theres also some mileage that he tends to get a bit more remembered for being a patchy heavyweight than a near unbeatable light heavyweight in his own era.

Very much agree Manos and would add Tunneys name as well, he and Charles are for me nailed on certainties for the top two light heavyweight spots as well as potential top 5 pound for pound but especially in the case of Tunney he seems to feature lower in both counts.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:6. Donald Curry.

Who? Is this some one new whose cause you are championing?

captain carrantuohil wrote:I would slightly demur with you Ghosty (and very nice to see you back, by the way). While Leonard is clearly of an order beyond any of Whitaker's opponents, and I also think that Marcel is an oft-forgotten gem on Duran's record, Pea's list of victims stands reasonable comparison with the rest of Duran's front-rank opponents. Ramirez, for example, is not that far behind De Jesus and Buchanan; moreover, Haugen, Nelson, Chavez (officially a draw, but I think that we all know the truth of it), Paez and McGirt are easily comparable with Kobayashi, Palomino and Cuevas for me. Furthermore, I would repeat that the slips against DeJesus and Benitez and the wretched performance against Laing simply didn't happen to Pea. Whitaker's performances in the autumn of his career against de la Hoya and Trinidad also do him a good deal more honour than Duran's at a similar point in his boxing life, excepting only that wonderful win over Barkley.

I acknowledge the Hagler fight as one of Duran's finest hours, and am happy for him to be slightly ahead of Pea overall, but it is a slight difference. For my taste, there is too much competition in the all-time top ten to accommodate both Duran and Pea, but both are clearly well inside a top twenty. That is surely no disgrace.

Duran came up from 135, straight to 147 and beat a younger, bigger, nailed on top 10 p4p ATG in Sugar Ray Leonard. It was Leonard's first defeat. Whittaker has nothing even remotely close to this on his record. It must be one of the greatest wins in the history of the sport. Debating the relative merits of Paez, Cuevas and co., when this one achievement dwarfs the whole argument is pointless.

However, I also think Whittaker is arguably top ten and Duran is definitely top ten.

Well, we're more or less on the same page then, Bamber! It might be interesting to attempt to compile a list of the greatest wins in the history of the sport at some point - I would certainly agree that Duran's victory over Leonard would be in this category, and would venture to add Frazier's win over Ali in 71 and Sanchez's over Gomez a decade later to the equation.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Well, we're more or less on the same page then, Bamber! It might be interesting to attempt to compile a list of the greatest wins in the history of the sport at some point - I would certainly agree that Duran's victory over Leonard would be in this category, and would venture to add Frazier's win over Ali in 71 and Sanchez's over Gomez a decade later to the equation.

I've seen it done by decade, can find it if it would interest you.

Yes, that would interest me plenty, Scott - thanks very much. Just before you do, I might have to take some guesses. 1920s - Greb v Tunney, 1930s - Armstrong v Ross, 1940s - Pep v Saddler II, 1950s - Robinson V Fullmer II, 1960s - Ali v Liston I, 1970s - Frazier v Ali I, 1980s - Duran v Leonard I/Sanchez v Gomez, 1990s - Jones v Toney, 2000s - Pacquiao v Cotto.

Perhaps.

I think it had 100 fights per decade, can't remember the winners, and I'm not sure if he did back past the 70s.

Oh, well - it's still of interest!

captain carrantuohil wrote:Well, we're more or less on the same page then, Bamber! It might be interesting to attempt to compile a list of the greatest wins in the history of the sport at some point - I would certainly agree that Duran's victory over Leonard would be in this category, and would venture to add Frazier's win over Ali in 71 and Sanchez's over Gomez a decade later to the equation.

Yes would be - think it could be measured in terms of how it affected the the fighter's standing.

Ali Frazier I was the first one that sprang to mind for me too.
Leonard Hagler - certainly made a massive impact on Leonard's legacy.
We mentioned Duran Hagler - though Duran lost, in terms of legacy, Hagler's was left diminished and Duran's enhanced.
Ali Foreman.
Jones Toney is good call - without it Jones' record looks really thin.