[McGrain]

So this is traditional classic fare, we're talking "versions", we're talking "primes" we're talking about "peaks". I'll give an example.

The best fighter ever to be beaten at heavyweight is the Muhammad Ali that Joe Frazier beat. A hugely motivated Ali was past his prime but still had his best career wins ahead of him and can be considered a better fighter than any other HW to be beaten.

Other good examples would include the Lewis that lost to Rahman, the Louis that lost to Schmeling and maybe the Klitschko that lost to Lewis.

So this is not about great losing performances (though they will often be the same thing) but about great fighters losing.

Thoughts?

 

[NJ1979]

Would you have Liston there? The first Ali fight? Hagler, Hearns and Leonard are all feasible too.

 

[Chatty]

Heavyweight - Ali by Frazier
Light heavy - Charles by Ray
Middleweight - Greb by Gibbons
Welterweight - Leonard by Duran
Lightweight - Duran by DeJesus
Featherweight - Pep by Angott or Saddler 1 (Angott victory was more near to prime due to aircrash)
Bantamweight - gonna think on it a bit more
Flyweight - Perez by Kingpetch????

 

[Luf]

good thread @McGrain

HW: the Foreman that ali beat; he'd have walked through most HW's imo.

LHW: The Tunney that Greb beat or vice versa. Have two prime LHW's ever competed at such a high level against each other?

MW: this one is tricky as a lot of the great MW's didn't lose in their prime. I'd probably say the Robinson that lost to LaMotta.

WW: has to be close between the Leonard that lost to Duran and the Hearns that lost to Leonard. given the second result I'm gonna say the Leonard that lost to Duran.

LW: the Arsmtrong that lost to Ambers (although there's point deduction controversy I think this has to be the only answer).

FW: the Pep that lost to Saddler.

BW: the jofre that lost to harada

FLW: the Canto that lost to Park

 

[doug.ie]

you could say that the pre-accident pep that lost to sammy agnott perhaps ?

 

[NJ1979]

Not really that clued up on the history of the division outside of Wilde, but what about the Jimmy Wilde that Tancy Lee beat?

 

[JamieC]

@lufcrazy good shout on foreman actually and agree on bantamweight

 

[Luf]

you could say that the pre-accident pep that lost to sammy agnott perhaps ?

that was at lightweight I believe and I think Armstrong was a better LW than Pep.

 

[Luf]

@lufcrazy good shout on foreman actually and agree on bantamweight

yeah Foreman was a beast and although he gassed I don't see many people surviving that long against him without fighting a purely defensive gameplan.

 

[JamieC]

What about Tyson of Tokyo? Or was he already off the rails by then?

 

[Luf]

What about Tyson of Tokyo? Or was he already off the rails by then?

that Tyson was still awesome imo but he'd have got wiped by foreman.

 

[Meast]

Good thread, I'll get thinking

 

[Foreman Hook]

that Tyson was still awesome imo but he'd have got wiped by foreman.

Awesome? :lol: Awesome impersonation of a human-heavybag more like lufc. :ughh

He'd have been soundly beaten by a fair few guys that night, considering how sickeningly lethargic, listless & lackadaisical he was. :barf

Mike had a disgusting lack of even basic defensive skills (as if admiring the "Iron Men" of yore), a woefully wank workrate of about 17 punches per round, with an obsessive belief that all he needed was one very loaded-up telegraphed righthand to end everything. Also, a stupendously incompetent corner not fit to be in a domestic champs corner. :-(

For '90, Ruddock, Berbick, Old Foreman, Page, Holy, Spoon & Mercer would've all had him at least decisioned, maybe stopped by two of them (you know which two).

 

[Luf]

Awesome? :lol: Awesome impersonation of a human-heavybag more like lufc. :ughh

He'd have been soundly beaten by a fair few guys that night, considering how sickeningly lethargic, listless & lackadaisical he was. :barf

Mike had a disgusting lack of even basic defensive skills (as if admiring the "Iron Men" of yore), a woefully wank workrate of about 17 punches per round, with an obsessive belief that all he needed was one very loaded-up telegraphed righthand to end everything. Also, a stupendously incompetent corner not fit to be in a domestic champs corner. :-(

For '90, Ruddock, Berbick, Old Foreman, Page, Holy, Spoon & Mercer would've all had him at least decisioned, maybe stopped by two of them (you know which two).

I disagree. I think he still had too much for all of them bar Holy to handle.

 

[Flea Man]

HW: The Foreman that Ali beat
LHW: @chatty pretty sure Ray was always a Heavyweight(!) I'll go the Tunney of Greb I
MW: I honestly can't come up with an answer at the mo'.
WW: The Leonard that Duran beat
LW: Nelson stopping Gans maybe...or Buchanan of the Duran fight.
FW: The Attell that Driscoll beat...the Davey Moore that Sugar Ramos sadly killed.
BW: Accept no substitutes: Eder Jofre of the Harada fights.
FW: A very tough one. You could go with the Ebihara that Accavallo beat...I could encompass light fly and justify the decision in the first Chang-Zapata fight because it's a close one and say Chang...such a stacked division...the first Kingpetch fight with Perez could've went either way IMO, and Perez didn't look at his absolute best, but that may well be nitpicking as you could with some of my picks...the Argie was certainly a better fighter than Pone so that's a better shout than either Harada/Ebihara>Kingpetch...

Depending on whether you consider either of those rematches fair decisions, the Thai did beat both Masahiko and Hiroyuki in rematches and they both had very good spells there so they could be worthy shouts.

 

[McGrain]

I'd say that Ketchel was at his absolute peak when Papke beat him.

I think Burley beat a prime Williams and vice-versa.

But it's true, middleweight is the toughest division to pick out a fighter on film.

 

[Flea Man]

@McGrain The Ketchel that Papke dismantled and battered is a good shout. Featherweight was hard for me to pick hence I went with summat I hadn't seen but knew about...was Charles within the limit when he beat Burley? Oh, maybe I'll take the McCallum of Kalambay I? :hey

 

[JamieC]

At WW, seems to be a consensus on SRL but what about the Hearns he beat?

 

[O59]

Foreman-Ali is a great shout. I think that's when Big George was really at the absolute peak of his powers. That was the absolute top for Foreman.

Charles against Johnson was good, as was Walcott against Marciano.

 

[Sittin Sonny]

He'd have been soundly beaten by a fair few guys that night, considering how sickeningly lethargic, listless & lackadaisical he was. :barf

Here we go again - another post perpetuating the same old myths and distortions about Tyson's loss to Douglas. :-(

Mike had a disgusting lack of even basic defensive skills (as if admiring the "Iron Men" of yore), ...

If you think slipping over thirty punches in the first round alone is "disgusting," then yes. :-(

BTW, I can recommend some Pernell Whitaker fights that will just make you barf.

a woefully wank workrate of about 17 punches per round, ...

Most fighters do when they fight an opponent who keeps sidestepping their attack and then bombing them.

For '90, Ruddock, Berbick, Old Foreman, Page, Holy, Spoon & Mercer would've all had him at least decisioned, maybe stopped by two of them (you know which two).

Yes, the Ruddock that Tyson twice beat only a year later, with even less technique and defensive skills, would've beaten Tyson in Tokyo. :-(