Top 5 Fighters You Really Don't Like (Current or Retired)

Bit of fun this one - who are your top 5 fighters that you just don't like? Ability is not in question here - the reasons can be as irrational as you like - just give a list of your 5 and the reasons why. Can be retired fighters, current ones, even ones who've never been a titlist.

5. I am going to start with many people's favourite, the current WBC heavy champ Tyson Fury. I have never warmed to him - I respect what he's done in the ring, but he's generally about as exciting to watch as doing the washing up, has not much power for his size and his much vaunted boxing ability just seems to look clumsy to me. I cannot stand his antics (such as his singing when he's won, or the Batman incident) - I just think he comes across as an oaf. It's nice to have pretty much 3 of the top 4 in the HW world being British, with one still unbeaten, but I just cannot warm to him. Plus he uppercutted himself in the face.

4. Amir Khan. This is a kid who really believed the hype behind him. From when he won his silver medal at the Olympics up until his most recent "fight" with Billy Dib, he a classic example of why you should not believe everything the yes men tell you. I remember watching his utter destruction at the hands of Prescott which was highly amusing, especially after he'd been yapping about being a multi-weight champ before even winning one belt. Always talked a good fight, and has been in some good ones, but he's just so... unlikeable!

3. Andre Ward. His ability is not in question. As an unbeaten fighter, having beaten the top guys in 2 weight classes is no easy feat. No, I did not like him for a lot of reasons. His style, for one. Technically he was incredibly adept at the hit and don't get hit back style, but s**t the bed it was boring to watch. The king of the spoilers, he was able to get away with over-use of the head. He nearly always managed to arrange so that his fights were in the US ( I think he only fought outside the US 3 times). The judges were often US judges too. Everything he could get in his favour, he did. And the fact he called himself "Son Of God". Doesn't take away what he achieved, but I could not stand him. Ironically I like and respect him as a pundit.

2. Saul Alvarez. Simply because Money talks. Like Ward above, his ability is fantastic, and unlike Ward he is exciting to watch. Why don't I like him? The favouritism aspect and the questions over his failed drug test. There's the amusing "Caneloweight" during his time at MW where he would force his opponents to boil down to a set weight UNDER the MW limit just so he could gain an extra advantage. I am certain that if he'd fought at the 160 limit he still would have smashed them anyway, but every little helps, right? The obviously dodgy judge in the first GGG fight. If that judge had scored 115-113 Canelo there would have been no controversy. I thought GGG just sneaked the win personally, but the judge scoring the fight 118-110 Canelo was just ridiculous, and smelt a bit fishy. Then, after the "failed test" all he got was a miniscule 6 month "suspension" which did him no harm at all. Because he generates so much money a long ban was never going to happen.

Credit to him for winning at so many weights, but I just can't be a fan due to the questions surrounding the drug use.

1. Adrien Broner. I have never had SO much dislike for a character in boxing as I do Broner. He comes across as such a vile human being. He is always the big "I am" and thinks his skills are way way better than they actually are. He's actually quite accomplished but he's such a massive d*ck that I cannot imagine anyone in their right minds wanting to support him. He's all about the attitude and the image. Unfortunately for him it's such a hateful attitude and image you can't help but dislike him. The build up to the Maidana fight was sometimes painful to watch and you could just see Marcos taking it all in and thinking to himself "You're mine". The savage beating that he gave Broner was SO satisfying to watch. But the best part? Watching Broner with his "About Billions" trunks on being walked back to his changing room, head down, only a handful of his entourage escorting him.

Only allowed five? Damn, this is tough! Let's see....

Zab Judah. Could never stomach him at all. Serial excuse-maker whenever he lost, which was generally whenever he stepped up to the very highest level he (and his hardcore fans) always claimed he belonged at. A dirty fighter himself, not averse to rabbit punches, low blows, hitting on the break etc., yet never stopped whining at referees whenever he was on the wrong end of any infraction, no matter how small. Always talked a good fight, I'll give him that, but grossly overrated by some fans who had him pegged as this amazing all-round boxer who lost fights simply because he was 'mercurial' or had an 'off-night', rather than just accepting that maybe he'd found his true level just below that highest bracket (which still made him a good fighter with a very respectable and impressive career, in fairness). On top of that, just seemed like an objectionable and crass loud mouth as a person. Not my cup of tea.

Anthony Joshua. Now I'm probably being harsh putting Joshua in here. While I'm not a great fan overall, normally he'd never come anywhere near my top five most disliked fighters. But I've come to grow tired of Hearn and Matchroom's guff these past few years and the creepy, one-eyed media machine which accompanies them, and unfortunately as the cash cow Joshua is the closest embodiment to all that stuff in terms of fighters. Not his fault, I guess. But all his stage-managed "stay humble" schtick gets my goat, as does all his pretensions at philosophy in interviews which seems contrived beyond belief. I wish he'd just be himself a bit more and not turn everything into some affected deep and would-be profound soundbite. E.g., Hey Anthony, my phone / watch is bust, what time is it? Joshua: "You know what? In life it ain't about what the time is, it's what you do with the time that counts" and suchlike. Anyway, I'm being petty and while I can take or leave him, my gripe is mainly with his employers and gang of creeps who accompany him. He at least took his loss against Ruiz properly and gave his opponent full credit, learned from it and put things right next time out, which is more than can be said for someone like Judah above.

Josh Warrington. Some overlap with my reasons for listing Joshua here. Has a legion of creepy little acolytes who follow him around polluting everything with crap chants and loutish behaviour. Don't enjoy his attitude or abysmal attempts at humour / personality, nor his style. Have to begrudgingly give him credit for so far proving himself a better fighter than I thought he was, mind you.

Sven Ottke.Not sure what his qualities or drawbacks as a bloke are - he might be the complete gent and great company for all I know. Regardless of that, him being able to boast such a long title reign, and a unified champion at that, is a big load of phlegmy goz straight in the face of the sport and several other more deserving fighters, figuratively speaking. Terribly dull and amateurish style, involved in stinker after stinker, and though I've not watched all his championship fights back by any means, the ones I have watched have left me wondering if he ever actually legitimately beat a 'name' opponent in his whole career (Mundine perhaps being the exception). The first Charles Brewer fight, Glen Johnson, Robin Reid - he lost all of these bouts as far as I'm concerned. He might have had a case against Byron Mitchell, but even then I only scored that one a draw. He got away with murder in there, always having the ref and judges in his back pocket. Forever fouling without receiving so much as a warning, but then always looking to the referee for help - a referee who was always quick to warn his opponents, who visibly started to become disheartened once they realised that the deck was stacked against them (Johnson and Reid in particular).

Most of his fights were so dull because of his no-risk style and because his team picked guys who couldn't / wouldn't fight inside to exploit his weaknesses. He was content just to jab (his best punch, in fairness), hold, spoil, pitty-pat and back-peddle his way through, knowing that if it was remotely close he could just rely on the inevitable home town decision incoming. I know Germany's reputation for hometown cooking during that period was also owed to a couple of other fighters based there, but it went almost beyond parody in Ottke's case.

Adrien Broner. Pretty much for the reasons you've outlined, and because it just seems sacrilege not to include him in a list like this. Maidana earned plenty of brownie points in my eyes for bringing him back down to earth the way he did.

Would you have paid to attend or watch their fights if you thought there was a chance that they could get beaten / knocked out?

I really did not like the way David Haye used to hype his fights up wishing death or brain damage on his opponents, but he was exciting to watch when he was fit and healthy.  He also used to attend other peoples fights and wind people up in the hope of getting a fight deal arranged. Ps: he was a cruiserweight who bulked up to make money in the heavyweight division.

Nice thread... Not sure how anyone can dislike Alvarez...One of the few fighters who fights everybody...

1. Billy Jo Saunders...Lost my Sister years ago to drug addiction.. The way he teased that Lady in the video was so disgusting I wouldn't puke on him....Pitiful the way the Sky guy Smith and Hearn keep saying he is a nice lad...No integrity. these People.

Gennady Golovkin...Great fights at 168 with Smith...Groves and Eubank...Ward have beckoned...But wants to stay in his comfort zone....Alvarez however has seeked challenges.

David Haye....A British legend who has a gob bigger than his record....His one great matchup and he bottled it....Showing his toe after some Brits shelled out thousands to watch him...Showed a lack of class...

Darrin Van Horn...A champion at two weights and never beaten a World class fighter....Nearly lost to Barkley before the fight started bless him..

Lloyd Honeyghan....Be rude not to include the little brat....Caught Curry on a night any 147 pounder beats him and then hides the belts against Hatcher...Bumphus...Vaca and Chung....Starling's shoulder was red from Honey tapping him on it thanking him for the lesson....

Ossie Ocasio....Should have been banned for stinking...

Manny.....When I start believing Azumah Nelson could knock Andre Ward cold....I will believe this guy is clean..

Van Horn is an interesting and random one, Truss. Not the only guy to prosper from the proliferation of belts and weight classes, but hey we've all got the ones who annoy us that little bit more for whatever reason. Actually watched Van Horn's win against Lindell Holmes not long ago. Pretty good and enjoyable fight and a decent win, albeit Holmes had slid a little. Van Horn was limited and looked more like a Levi's model than a fighter, but if nothing else he threw a good old body shot!

Can never make up my mind if Saunders is really a fundamentally decent (wouldn't go any further than that) guy underneath it all, who is just a bit thick, easily lead and a terrible judge of public mood, or if he's actually a straight up helmet and nasty piece of work. I've often found myself thinking that I should dislike him more than I do (not that he's a favourite by any stretch). But we're all shaped by personal experiences and I can see why someone such as yourself who's had such a devastating loss would find it harder to brush off that kind of thing.

Agree wholeheartedly on Haye. Excellent Cruiserweight and a worthy world champion there. A relative con man as a Heavyweight, which is a shame as he had the potential to be much more than that.

Knew you'd bite on Alvarez, Truss. I love the fact he fights everyone and everybody. It just has to be done entirely on his terms, and even though he was found to be cheating he pretty much gets away with it because he makes money.

But this is what I love about threads like this. Everybody's opinion is different. However, I can't believe that I left out that revolting excuse for a human that is Saunders. If he ever fights Canelo, I WILL be supporting the Mexican. And I hope he makes the beating last.

Much the same as those already mentioned

Tyson Fury- the fawning over his ability is getting to ridiculous levels and he is a drugs cheat, his victory over Wlad should be ruled a NC for that very reason but it's ok he provides no actual entertainment but acts like an idiot doing it.

Adrian Broner- not sure anything needs adding to what has already been said, that beating by Maidana is beautiful.

Antonio Margarito- what is there to say other than cheat, got caught in the act and tarnished his whole career. Somewhat conflicted by Shane Mosley also but there wasn't another boxer around who could have turned that anger into such majestic brutality, the way he went for him at the end was poetic justice.

Sergey Kovalev- seems particularly relevant right now but that t-shirt in this day and age is foul, the fact so many defended him afterwards is equally so, Stevenson being a **** himself does not negate racism being tolerated within boxing.

Steve Collins- I grew up watching Eubank and Benn, the excitement of their fights, their contrasting personalities and the way their careers took a nose dive after inflicting life changing injuries. We then had to listen to Collins bleat on about beating the pair as though they were anything but shells of their former selves, you beat two washed up has beens Steve.

I can see why Collins rubs people up the wrong way, Soul, but I think some of the flak he gets his unfair. Certainly never had anything handed to him and I can see why he had a bit of a chip on his shoulder. A bit cringe how he tried to dogg Jones out and talk up the fight at times, similar to Khan chasing Mayweather more recently...But at least he aimed high and wasn't afraid to try and make his reputation the hard way. Those losses to McCallum and Johnson were very creditable.

I agree Benn was clearly finished when they fought, but I disagree on Eubank. I think Collins deserves full credit for those wins and beat a still very good version of Chris. There was nothing about Eubank's performances against Collins which really suggested he was shot or a particularly different fighter to the one who'd been winning in the previous few years. I just see Eubank as a fighter who was always beatable and who'd already had plenty of close shaves where his flaws had been highlighted or exposed before.

People say he'd lost a bit of cutting edge after the Watson rematch, which might be true, but he was getting clearly beaten and all but shut out by Watson before finding that uppercut from somewhere, and the first fight was a very tight one...So it's not as if Eubank was some dominant or radically different fighter before that tragedy. I just think that Collins (who gave McCallum a much better fight than Watson, after all) was better than most of the guys Eubank had been facing during his Sky Sports years and therefore Eubank couldn't quite get away with it that time.

But yeah, maybe liked the sound of his own voice just a bit too much at times.

My Uncle Tony travelled up the road to watch McCallum v Collins for the 160 title back in the late 80s....Said he didn't think he was any better than Sean Mannion who was a well liked fighter back then in Massachusetts....Lost to Mike as well...

Mannion had trialhorse written all over him but he was Irish and engaging...

The fact Collins beat Eubank and Benn at 168 albeit past their primes and had decent success on limited talent...

Means I have admiration for him...Stayed retired too..

But it's all about preference.

I can't agree with much of that Chris, Eubank was in my opinion over the hill and since Watson could not pull the trigger when he had someone hurt which happened against Collins, rewind five years and I think he wins with ease most probably stopping the obnoxious sod in 5 rounds.

Yes Eubank had two careers....One before Watson 2 and one after...

Think Watson shipped a lot of punishment in his war with McCallum and like Griffiths v Paret you wonder if a bit of the damage was done before..

Paret was beaten up for the 160 crown by Basilio or a Fullmer type I believe just before Griffiths 3.

Mr Bounce wrote:Knew you'd bite on Alvarez, Truss. I love the fact he fights everyone and everybody. It just has to be done entirely on his terms, and even though he was found to be cheating he pretty much gets away with it because he makes money.

As with Leonard choosing the gloves...ring size...12 instead of 15 rounds etc in his fight with Hagler...The bigger draw has always set the terms throughout Boxing history.

Under no illusions that the vast majority of Boxers cheat primarily because making weight is so difficult...Steroids and diuretics were rampant in College back in the day....The Coaches supplied them too...

The fact I am hard on Manny is this delusion from his fans that a 22 year old Flyweight can move up and bash up 147 pounders without taking..

But still all about preference..

Good thread keep writing them.

Fury - Maybe I'm being harsh, but the way he has managed to marry his cocaine problem to the point where people seem to think he was banned for being coked up rather than melting the pissing cup grates. Also his style is boring. Aside from the second Wilder fight, it's all feint, feint, do a jiggle, slap a jab. Rinse and repeat.

Wilder - Basically fought bums til this day. I guess he's sought out the challenges - not his fault Povetkin pissed hot - but he basically lost 17/19 rounds vs Fury, and probably loses to Luis Ortiz if Ortiz was north of 45 when they fought. Him having ten title defences is an affront. Also a guy that big with power that crazy getting pinned for domestic battery is always a turn-off.

Mayweather - Yawn. Meh. Boring.

Canelo - I actually really like Canelo. His win over Kovalev honestly deserves to be up there all-time as one of the most impressive wins in boxing history (unless you believe Sergey took a dive, I guess), but him going into fights knowing he's getting a split decision at the bare minimum. Turn off.

Tommy Oosthuizen - Local kid. 6'4. Hands like speedy Gonzales. Chin made of iron. Shoulda won world titles. Instead it was arrests, failed drug tests. At one stage I'm pretty sure he fell off a bicycle which caused a card to be cancelled. God he pissed me off

Apart from Golovkin 1 I haven't seen Canelo get a decision he hasn't deserved....

Had the 2nd fight 6-6/7-5.Either guy could have won that..

Marquez v Manny 1 was a disgrace....Anyone giving him more than 2 rounds is a Clown...

Ali v Norton 3...Ali v Young....

Alvarez is no different...He wins close fights but at least they could go either way.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Apart from Golovkin 1 I haven't seen Canelo get a decision he hasn't deserved....

Had the 2nd fight 6-6/7-5.Either guy could have won that..

Marquez v Manny 1 was a disgrace....Anyone giving him more than 2 rounds is a Clown...

Ali v Norton 3...Ali v Young....

Alvarez is no different...He wins close fights but at least they could go either way.

That isn't so much the issue but some of the scorecards are and the following are why;

Trout- 118-109
Mayweather- 114-114
Lara- 117-111
Golovkin (1)- 118-110

They all stink.

I'm conflicted on Canelo.

I never really rated him at all when he first started making a splash, and was amazed that anyone was giving him a prayer against Mayweather. He hadn't exactly looked great against a shot-to-bits Mosley and the Trout fight was ruined by open scoring. Trout (to the unbiased eye not interested in which fighter makes more money) was in control of the fight and boxing well - then learns that he's behind after eight rounds when he really shouldn't be, and as a result gets disheartened and is forced to throw his game plan out the window and fight the last few rounds in a way which suited Canelo more. Even then, I only just had Canelo scraping home because of the knockdown.

Was definitely being hyped way beyond reason back then and I wasn't surprised at all that Mayweather walked it against him. Thought that those legions who were calling him 'the next De la Hoya' or predicting he'd go on to become a pound for pound star were going to be left severely disappointed.

Fair play to him, though, he's since proved that he's a much better fighter than I ever thought he'd go on to be, so I have to eat some humble pie. He's not the same fighter that Mayweather made a mockery out of back in 2013 and at least deserves to be mentioned in the upper echelon on the sport these past few years. He generally gives value for money and he certainly takes the big fights against the leading names, zipping through the weights as he does, so he deserves his status as the sport's cash cow in the post-Mayweather era.

That said...

Kingraf is right to allude to the helping hands he's received and the fact that he goes into all these big and risky fights with at least one judge in his pocket and a bit of a head start over his opponent does leave a bitter taste. I've already mentioned the Trout fight, which came with a little asterisk as far as I'm concerned. He could easily have lost the decision against Lara the following year. He got a gift first time out against Golovkin, and though the rematch was no robbery, once again in a fight where both guys had a claim it was Canelo who got 'lucky' and had things come out in his favour, which is a recurring theme.

He still hasn't had a really outstanding, dominant win against a top fighter in their prime. He beat a faded (but still decent) version of Cotto fair enough, albeit again not quite by the margins the judges declared. His win against Kovalev is arguably his best, but he didn't look great before landing that knockout shot and Kovalev was appreciably on the slide. Good wins, no doubt, but he's not added that touch of greatness to his record as of yet.

Then there's all the catchweight mumbo jumbo. Good fighter, but Thomas Hearns he ain't.

Soul Requiem wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Apart from Golovkin 1 I haven't seen Canelo get a decision he hasn't deserved....

Had the 2nd fight 6-6/7-5.Either guy could have won that..

Marquez v Manny 1 was a disgrace....Anyone giving him more than 2 rounds is a Clown...

Ali v Norton 3...Ali v Young....

Alvarez is no different...He wins close fights but at least they could go either way.

That isn't so much the issue but some of the scorecards are and the following are why;

Trout- 118-109
Mayweather- 114-114
Lara- 117-111
Golovkin (1)- 118-110

They all stink.

Not my point though is it......Whether the judges are bent or not apart fron GGG 1....I think he has won every fight...

Chavez was beating Taylor by 8 points on one card...Drew with Whittaker and got a gift against Taylor with the stoppage...Randall 2 was contentious...

But no one moans about him....

88Chris05 wrote:I'm conflicted on Canelo.

I never really rated him at all when he first started making a splash, and was amazed that anyone was giving him a prayer against Mayweather. He hadn't exactly looked great against a shot-to-bits Mosley and the Trout fight was ruined by open scoring. Trout (to the unbiased eye not interested in which fighter makes more money) was in control of the fight and boxing well - then learns that he's behind after eight rounds when he really shouldn't be, and as a result gets disheartened and is forced to throw his game plan out the window and fight the last few rounds in a way which suited Canelo more. Even then, I only just had Canelo scraping home because of the knockdown.

Was definitely being hyped way beyond reason back then and I wasn't surprised at all that Mayweather walked it against him. Thought that those legions who were calling him 'the next De la Hoya' or predicting he'd go on to become a pound for pound star were going to be left severely disappointed.

Fair play to him, though, he's since proved that he's a much better fighter than I ever thought he'd go on to be, so I have to eat some humble pie. He's not the same fighter that Mayweather made a mockery out of back in 2013 and at least deserves to be mentioned in the upper echelon on the sport these past few years. He generally gives value for money and he certainly takes the big fights against the leading names, zipping through the weights as he does, so he deserves his status as the sport's cash cow in the post-Mayweather era.

That said...

Kingraf is right to allude to the helping hands he's received and the fact that he goes into all these big and risky fights with at least one judge in his pocket and a bit of a head start over his opponent does leave a bitter taste. I've already mentioned the Trout fight, which came with a little asterisk as far as I'm concerned. He could easily have lost the decision against Lara the following year. He got a gift first time out against Golovkin, and though the rematch was no robbery, once again in a fight where both guys had a claim it was Canelo who got 'lucky' and had things come out in his favour, which is a recurring theme.

He still hasn't had a really outstanding, dominant win against a top fighter in their prime. He beat a faded (but still decent) version of Cotto fair enough, albeit again not quite by the margins the judges declared. His win against Kovalev is arguably his best, but he didn't look great before landing that knockout shot and Kovalev was appreciably on the slide. Good wins, no doubt, but he's not added that touch of greatness to his record as of yet.

Then there's all the catchweight mumbo jumbo. Good fighter, but Thomas Hearns he ain't.

Which top fighter did Tyson beat in his prime ????.....Which top fighter in his prime did Holy beat Convincingly ???....Qawi was old and Bowe 2 was contentious certainly helped by a nice rest..

We can all play that game..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Apart from Golovkin 1 I haven't seen Canelo get a decision he hasn't deserved....

Had the 2nd fight 6-6/7-5.Either guy could have won that..

Marquez v Manny 1 was a disgrace....Anyone giving him more than 2 rounds is a Clown...

Ali v Norton 3...Ali v Young....

Alvarez is no different...He wins close fights but at least they could go either way.

That isn't so much the issue but some of the scorecards are and the following are why;

Trout- 118-109
Mayweather- 114-114
Lara- 117-111
Golovkin (1)- 118-110

They all stink.

Not my point though is it......Whether the judges are bent or not apart fron GGG 1....I think he has won every fight...

Chavez was beating Taylor by 8 points on one card...Drew with Whittaker and got a gift against Taylor with the stoppage...Randall 2 was contentious...

But no one moans about him....

It may not be your point but it is relevant, I had him beating Trout and Lara but both fights were close and those rogue scorecards highlight that his opponents don't get a fair shake of things. He lost every single round against Mayweather and somehow CJ Ross scored it a draw.

I'd say whenever Chavez is mentioned the contentious stoppage of Taylor and the robbery of Whitaker come up.

Soul Requiem wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Apart from Golovkin 1 I haven't seen Canelo get a decision he hasn't deserved....

Had the 2nd fight 6-6/7-5.Either guy could have won that..

Marquez v Manny 1 was a disgrace....Anyone giving him more than 2 rounds is a Clown...

Ali v Norton 3...Ali v Young....

Alvarez is no different...He wins close fights but at least they could go either way.

That isn't so much the issue but some of the scorecards are and the following are why;

Trout- 118-109
Mayweather- 114-114
Lara- 117-111
Golovkin (1)- 118-110

They all stink.

Not my point though is it......Whether the judges are bent or not apart fron GGG 1....I think he has won every fight...

Chavez was beating Taylor by 8 points on one card...Drew with Whittaker and got a gift against Taylor with the stoppage...Randall 2 was contentious...

But no one moans about him....

It may not be your point but it is relevant, I had him beating Trout and Lara but both fights were close and those rogue scorecards highlight that his opponents don't get a fair shake of things. He lost every single round against Mayweather and somehow CJ Ross scored it a draw.

I'd say whenever Chavez is mentioned the contentious stoppage of Taylor and the robbery of Whitaker come up.

Not relevant if the right man won.....Harsh to mark Alvarez down for fights he "Won"...

Yes the judging hasn't been the best.....But these judges haven't given him gifts apart from GGG 1.......Nearly every great fighter gets a gift..

Hearns v Kinchen
Leonard v Hearns 2...
Holy v Lewis...
Ali v Norton 3...
Trinidad v DelaHoya etc etc etc etc.....

Some of the most talented / invincible boxers lost their shine when moving up the weight division because they had cleared their division out and there was more money to be made at the higher weight division.  

Some started out professionally very young so naturally had to move up in weight as they developed more adult bodies.  Others had to take enhancements.  Taking enhancements after the body has fully matured tends to grow muscles but bone mass and lung and heart size remain the same.

BJS- I can not stand the guy, vile human being. The list of reasons can go on and on, and have already been highlighted by Truss. His attempts of being funny are disgusting and infantile.
Throwing food at Wilder and then legging it, what an absolute coward.
Mayweather II, aka Broner. What can absolute fool. I was so happy for Maidana, a life times hard work made work all coming together that night.

The Slimester Carl Froch

David Haye

Kell Brook

Tony Bellew

Ricky Hatton

No particular reason just don't like them

1.Sven Ottke. The look on his face when he appealed to the ref was pure, "Help me out again here, pal" .
2.Lennox Lewis He refused to give any other fighter credit, post fight, and talked himself up unnecessarily. He was totally without grace, and dull to boot !
3.Sugar Ray Leonard. Blagged the ref in the Hagler one. Hand picked Donny Lalonde who was a weak out of shape fighter simply cos he needed to big himself up coming back as "the best evah".Also did cheesy adverts for Coca Cola.
4.Jake La Motta. Fought with his face, beat up women, and forced people to laugh at his jokes.
5.Chris Eubank Jr. No need to explain why

Not in any particular order,

Sugar Ray Leonard
Ricky Hatton
Manny Pacquiao
Canelo
Chris Eubank Sr.

For me it has to be in no particular order:

1. Carl Froch - I can't think of a boxer who would have made less money if he'd been a bit more clinical. Made millions by being "exciting" (hit and get hit) and from lucrative rematches against opponents he couldn't do the job properly against the first time out! For me he was a little too settled on being second best to Andre Ward and didn't make any noise about a rematch. Imagine he'd landed that right hand in a Ward rematch rather than Groves rematch, his reputation would have been stratospheric. Also a narcissist and lacks class.

2. Zsolt Erdei. A bit obscure this one, but unlike most stay at home German based champions, Erdei actually had great skills but allowed them to go waste fighting handpicked, over-matched opponents who he'd easily outbox to an ultra safe, boring UD win. Was robbed by Denis Grachev in Monaco who was considerably below him in every detail but paid the price for being complacent and lazy. Could easily have mixed it with the best of his era, i.e. Tarver, Johson, Woods, Dawson etc but chose the easy route and is now largely forgotten.

3. Naseem Hamed. Hated him at the time, desperately unpleasant both in and out of the ring. Disabled someone with his car in real life also. His loss to Barera is possibly my favourite boxing match ever.

4. Sven Ottke. No words needed. Every fight of his I saw, was either a robbery win or inconclusive. Whilst the German media made him out as a "defensive wizard", such wizardry involved throwing clusters of punches in the general direction of his opponent, and then running. How a fighter with fringe contender ability could amass a Hall of Fame record is shameful even by boxing standards. Is not yet in the Hall of Fame despite being retired 18 years. Let it be another 18 and another 18 after that!

5. Chris Eubank Senior. I've never bought this pre-Watson, post-Watson Eubank. Even before those fights he allowed bouts against overmatched opponents to be drawn out and boring. He also robbed lesser fighters of wins during his reign. He could have been a great fighter but wanted nothing to do with the best Americans Nunn and Toney and was blatantly happy to stay at home fighting unknowns, something he seems to get a pass on while Calzaghe gets criticism. His bitter rival Nigel Benn has a better career despite being less talented.

Michael Olajide: Just didn't like his face. Used to box in the states in the 80s was a heavily touted prospect and actually had a decent run untill he was exposed for good. A bit like khan had smoke blown up his backside and was never the real deal. He had good feet and hands but I could never warm to him cuz and this is no joke he looked like Michael Jackson Gerry curls, wet look, glitter shorts the lot.

Anyway Iran Barkley slapped him around at the felt forum New York 1988 Olajide now a personal trainer to supermodels and he wears an eye patch

ONETWO2020 wrote:Michael Olajide: Just didn't like his face. Used to box in the states in the 80s was a heavily touted prospect and actually had a decent run untill he was exposed for good. A bit like khan had smoke blown up his backside and was never the real deal. He had good feet and hands but I could never warm to him cuz and this is no joke he looked like Michael Jackson Gerry curls, wet look, glitter shorts the lot.

Anyway Iran Barkley slapped him around at the felt forum New York 1988 Olajide now a personal trainer to supermodels and he wears an eye patch

The eye patch isn't just for show. He's legally blind in the right eye. He wasn't someone that I could get behind either.