Challengers that didn't deserve a title shot

So I was reading an article on ESPN about Albert Sosnowski and it went into history and showed other "No-Hopers" that were challenging a champion, and they had this tidbit that intrigued me:

This intrigued me for two reasons.

1. What the hell is this guy making his PRO DEBUT getting a title shot against Floyd Patterson for??? What happened to earning your way to the title? I realize nowadays anyone can get a title shot, but I've never heard of someone in their very first pro fight getting a shot at the champ.

2. This motherfucker DROPPED Patterson. First pro-fight and he drops the Champ? Damn.

 

...aka the Morrade Hakkar Thread...


REED:hammert:

 

Rademacher was actually the first name I thought of. At the time, D'Amato was as pensive as ever about his champion facing the division's most prominent contenders. Rademacher made noise with his Olympic gold & achieved some real fame (albeit briefly) on the back of it, & he & his camp declared an interest in debuting in a title bout. D'Amato was believed to be killing two birds with one stone --- another fight to keep the wolves (Folley, Machen, Williams) at bay, & capitalise on public interest for the token fight with a decent payday to boot.

In the end, Patterson simply out-gunned him, opting for force over finesse, & Rademacher buckled. Looking at his brief career, Rademacher actually fought some shockingly tough competition. Fearless match-making, some of the fights he made were unbelievable.

 

Has there ever been another (or previous) fighter to get a title shot in his debut?

 

It has never happened, before or since. The only talk of a serious nature I can even recall, off-hand, would be Muhammad Ali granting a title shot to Teo Stevenson. That was discussed in the late-70's, but never eventuated.

 

but there's plenty examples of fighters getting title shots early in their careers, on the strength alone of their amateur success and fame: L. Spinks, Dave Moore, David Reid, Vargas, even ODH.

These were guys who were worthy of a title shot, perhaps, but unlike most, they were not given the burden of proving it. Promoters at work.

 

Leon Spinks

 

Unlike most, he took his chance when it came, though, & grabbed it with both hands. Say what you must about Ali's condition & level of respect he had for his adversary, but Spinks really came at Ali that night with not only a fightplan, but gusto. He was not overwhelmed being in there, ala many other boxers for whom title shots came very early.

 

The topic started off in a direction I was not expecting and a direction I don't think is as interesting. This is a 'who got a title shot early in their career' debate now.

I was hoping it would be more along the lines of "Bubba Dipmoney was 25-15 (12) and had lost 5 of his last 6 fights when he got a title shot..." That's what I think of when I think of 'undeserving.' A guy who wins an olympic gold medal is pretty much deserving by default, but could be far from ready. It's sort of like saying that a #1 pick college pitcher isn't deserving to be an opening day starter. Sure, you could be sort of right, but you also could be dead wrong.

 

Sweet Pete Frissina. I saw him fight on the Forrest/Mayorga 2 off tv undercard. He barely won his title eliminator and promptly got blown out in 2 rounds by MAB.

 

Frissina sucked, but at least he had a couple of decent wins going into his title shot.

The one that I think of as undeserving is Eddie Croft:

23-6-1 (1) coming into his February 2003 title shot against Erik Morales. That's not so bad, but

Croft's previous fight was 3 years earlier when he got stopped in 3 rds against 13-0-1 Fred Neal. Before that, stopped in 6 by 34-0 Pedersen. Before that, stopped in 3 against 7-4-1 Priest Smalls.

Before that, he finally has a win...a Split Decision 8 win over a fighter with a 7-8 record back in November of 1998 over 4 1/2 years before his title shot.

Before that, back in 1995, he lost two title shots against Barrera (tko 7) and Tom Johnson (UD).

Only when you get back to 1994 do you find some good wins...over 8 years before his title shot against Morales.

This is undeserving.

 

Or Roy Jones' championship reign:kidcool:

 

That African fellow that fought Oleg Maskaev couple years ago in Russia

 

:atu:

 

I disagree. The pros are a whole new ballgame. That's what ranking are for. An Olympian is an unranked fighter when he marks his pro debut. He cannot possibly be deserving of a title fight.

However, to follow your trackway on more experienced fighters...

George Foreman (vs. Michael Moorer)
Ray Leonard (vs. Marvin Hagler)

You could also make a case that it is just about the norm, now, on the back of things like PPV taking precedence to legitimate rankings. If you go that route, you can name nigh-on every title fight today --- for instance, Marquez vs. Casamayor, Pacquiao vs. Hatton, Hatton vs. Mayweather, Mayweather vs. De La Hoya, De La Hoya vs. Hopkins, Hopkins vs. Tarver, & on it goes, where marketing forces rankings to take a back-seat.

 

If you count the WBO as "legitimate" there have been some shockers, Damon Reed and Will McIntyre for example off the top of my head

 

I don't know that that's an apt analogy, but that's just my thoughts. A guy fighting for the championship belt in his very first fight, there's no rational way of saying he deserves it or he earned it. He hasn't earned SHIT.

A more apt comparison would be someone on the PGA Golf Tour getting his PGA card and officially being a pro golfer, and then invited to play on the Ryder Cup or something.

 

McIntyre was the first guy I thought of as well. This clown lost every second of every round vs an old, shitty dana rosensplatt prior to somehow earning a title shot vs calzaghe.


Croft was unworthy and also half blind going against morales, who didn't even make weight in mexico

 

Julio Cesar Chavez against Kostya Tszyu. Chavez was actually the WBC mandatory at 140, despite not having won a fight weighing 140 or below in almost five years. We can thank Don King and Jose Suliaman for that.

Roberto Duran against William Joppy. I know boxrec is often incomplete, but Alvaro Rojas had a listed record of 4-4 when he fought Duran for the LW title.

 

Tocker Pudwell? :: Was that that guys name?

 

A legitimate challenger only needs a legitimate claim to being a top 15 fighter these days. I think it may have been top 10 in the 90's and before?

Foreman had a few good wins leading up to his Moorer shot--Adilson Rodrigues had been on a long winning streak since George blew him away, for example. I don't think he was an overly deserving challenger, but there are far worse out there.

Leonard was Leonard and while he was coming back cold from a retirement, his record sort of speaks for itself to that point. And he wasn't that old.

And since they won, they really diffuse the claim that there weren't worthy. I agree that this doesn't necessarily kill a claim of being unworthy, but it is usually a huge step in that direction. After all, you are basically cutting on a sanctioning body when you say a challenger is unworthy. The fact that the challenger won pretty much proves their point.

 

I don't agree with that notion. To me, it really isn't all that subjective. Foreman hadn't fought in over a year, & that was a losing outing. Leonard hadn't even been in a ring in three years, & had taken one fight in the last five years. Foreman & Leonard could've knocked out Moorer & Hagler respectively in the first round & they would still never be worthy of the title shots they received.

Good luck to them both, but it is beyond subjective. Neither could possibly be considered to have earned those fights.

 

Was that Intended to B FUNNY, because it Certainly ISN'T Accurate...



REED:dunno:

 

Oh God yea, he was awful. Even the name sounds like a bum. It's just impossible to picture a world class fighter with that name. He actually had two title shots from what I can remember, lost a UD to Ottke and was stopped in 2 by Calzaghe.

 

1. More proof of the decline of boxing standards. What's next? Top 20? Top 30?

2. Sorry, but Adilson Rodrigues sucked. He was KOed by in 2 rounds by both Holyfield and Foreman and his post-Foreman winning streak was a result of his fleeing back to Brazil and fighting nobodies.

 

1. Account suspended due to misusage of one of the most tired cliches in the sport.

 

The COURT JESTER of Fightbeat Strikes Again!!!!...U JUST PRAISED the Infinitely INADEQUATE Adilson Rodriguez, Yet U've Got the TEMERITY to Bitch about a "Tired Cliche"???...

U're the Possessor of THE LAMEST, MOST "Tired" SCHTICK @ Fightbeat, Dude...



REED::

 

Not a cliche, it's called the truth...which you are apparently avoiding since you are an apologist for the current lowered standards.

Not all that long ago a fighter ranked outside the top ten but still maybe in the Top 20 was considered a fringe contender at best and if that fighter received a undeserved title shot it was usually in the form of an easy fight for a champ in between more legitimate challenges or as a fill in opponent due to a challenger pulling out of the fight. Now in your world of lowered standards, that same fringe contender is now a contender and is a "legtimate" candidate for a title shot. Ugh.

 

So you agree that Foreman never should have gotten a title shot against Moorer? Or just with the point about the Rodrigues win providing some indication of his worthiness? Let's narrow this down, my retarded friend.

 

I know! Rodrigues?? Really??? What a joke. Another BoxRec related accident.::