Before I begin, let's be clear--overrated does not mean you aren't a good or even great fighter. It implies that you received more praise and credit than you deserve.
Mayweather insists he is the greatest (best) fighter to ever live. His hardcore fans agree. Even some boxing scribes rank him very high. But how does his 50-0 record stack up against ATG fighters such as Benny Leonard, Barney Ross, Henry Armstrong, Ray Robinson, Emile Griffith, Luis Rodriquez, Jose Napoles, Duran, Leonard, Hearns, and many other ATG fighters? Does anyone truly believe he is "The Best Ever"? He dumped all over Ali and Leonard's resumes when they were ranked above him. But did Mayweather ever truly test himself against a prime elite? Has there ever been a fighter who navigated his career with as much prudence? A great defensive fighter, but never truly tested against a prime elite level fighter at their best. Made a lot of excuses for avoiding certain fights or putting them off until his opponents were no longer at their best.
Jack Johnson often shows up in the All-Time top ten HW lists. While he does deserve credit for becoming the first black HW champion; he did draw the color line against other top black fighters of his day. He openly admits to it. His greatest wins were against Middleweights and much smaller fighters. He often had a very distinct size advantage over his opponents.
His wins over McVea and Jeannette were during the beginning of their boxing careers. McVea had less than ten fights, Jeannette less than twenty. Very green. Langford was not yet prime and about 40 or more pounds lighter and almost six inches shorter. Fitzsimmons long washed up and smaller, Jeffries coming off a 6 year retirement and had to lose hundred pounds, nearly got schooled by a much smaller O'Brien who he wouldn't rematch. Lost by KO to Willard. The remaining 20 or so fights of his career were against no name, long forgotten opponents, lost five of those fights to journeymen or beginners.
Ali resurrected boxing at a time when the sport's popularity was waning. Television killed the local clubs and venues, and there were no polarizing figures in boxing since the retirement of Marciano. We cannot deny his importance to the sport, but his ranking as a fighter deserves some scrutiny. Especially a fighter who coined himself "The Greatest", a moniker that stuck with him to this day and has become the mantra of casual fans who aren't capable of (a) determining his technical flaws as a boxer and (b) scrutinizing his resume.
If he count some of the gift decisions he received against Doug Jones, Norton x2, Jimmy Young, and some could argue Shavers and one of the Chuvalo fights, and IMO two fixed fights versus Liston, the shine on his resume begins to lose it's luster. Take into account some much smaller and overmatched opponents like an old Archie Moore, Quarry who he fought not once but twice, Foster a LHW, Patterson x2--a small, battle fatigued and aging HW, Bonavena, and others. Subpar opponents like Bugner who he fought 2x, Evangelista and Lubbers with awful resumes, and a loss to Spinks who had just 7 fights. Watching the rematch with Spinks I think it was much closer and could have gone either way. Floyd himself criticizes Ali's resume in similar fashion.
Of these three highly touted fighters, who do you feel was most overrated? Again, this does not imply they are bad fighters, but who gets the most undeserved praise and recognition of the three?
Mayweather insists he is the greatest (best) fighter to ever live. His hardcore fans agree. Even some boxing scribes rank him very high. But how does his 50-0 record stack up against ATG fighters such as Benny Leonard, Barney Ross, Henry Armstrong, Ray Robinson, Emile Griffith, Luis Rodriquez, Jose Napoles, Duran, Leonard, Hearns, and many other ATG fighters? Does anyone truly believe he is "The Best Ever"? He dumped all over Ali and Leonard's resumes when they were ranked above him. But did Mayweather ever truly test himself against a prime elite? Has there ever been a fighter who navigated his career with as much prudence? A great defensive fighter, but never truly tested against a prime elite level fighter at their best. Made a lot of excuses for avoiding certain fights or putting them off until his opponents were no longer at their best.
Jack Johnson often shows up in the All-Time top ten HW lists. While he does deserve credit for becoming the first black HW champion; he did draw the color line against other top black fighters of his day. He openly admits to it. His greatest wins were against Middleweights and much smaller fighters. He often had a very distinct size advantage over his opponents.
His wins over McVea and Jeannette were during the beginning of their boxing careers. McVea had less than ten fights, Jeannette less than twenty. Very green. Langford was not yet prime and about 40 or more pounds lighter and almost six inches shorter. Fitzsimmons long washed up and smaller, Jeffries coming off a 6 year retirement and had to lose hundred pounds, nearly got schooled by a much smaller O'Brien who he wouldn't rematch. Lost by KO to Willard. The remaining 20 or so fights of his career were against no name, long forgotten opponents, lost five of those fights to journeymen or beginners.
Ali resurrected boxing at a time when the sport's popularity was waning. Television killed the local clubs and venues, and there were no polarizing figures in boxing since the retirement of Marciano. We cannot deny his importance to the sport, but his ranking as a fighter deserves some scrutiny. Especially a fighter who coined himself "The Greatest", a moniker that stuck with him to this day and has become the mantra of casual fans who aren't capable of (a) determining his technical flaws as a boxer and (b) scrutinizing his resume.
If he count some of the gift decisions he received against Doug Jones, Norton x2, Jimmy Young, and some could argue Shavers and one of the Chuvalo fights, and IMO two fixed fights versus Liston, the shine on his resume begins to lose it's luster. Take into account some much smaller and overmatched opponents like an old Archie Moore, Quarry who he fought not once but twice, Foster a LHW, Patterson x2--a small, battle fatigued and aging HW, Bonavena, and others. Subpar opponents like Bugner who he fought 2x, Evangelista and Lubbers with awful resumes, and a loss to Spinks who had just 7 fights. Watching the rematch with Spinks I think it was much closer and could have gone either way. Floyd himself criticizes Ali's resume in similar fashion.
Of these three highly touted fighters, who do you feel was most overrated? Again, this does not imply they are bad fighters, but who gets the most undeserved praise and recognition of the three?
Comment