Obviously, this is to pay hommage to the guys who "Woulda" been champ but came along at a time when their division was loaded with talent or things just happened that prevented them from getting the title. I know this guy may not be the best example to start off with, but Oba Carr has to be up there as far as recent fighters. He had a 168-7 amateur record in the tough Detroit area amateur ranks (In addition to international competition). Unfortunately, he had to compete with Felix Trinidad, Oscar DeLa Hoya, Ike Quartey, even Rafael Pineda got into the act. Frankie Randal was still making noise at that time (Although Carr beat him). This guys was a bridesmaid.
Tommy Morrison. He'd have no chance against the Klitshkos but i think he could beat quite a bit of the garbage that's out there and pick up an alphabet strap today.
In a different context the Klitschkos themselves came along too late as they missed out on the career defining fights they would have got if they'd come through a few years earlier
I can agree with that part...but why stop at Tommy Morrison? And he did pick up a strap in his own time.
I don't understand his inclusion either, if this thread is about "woulda" been champs. He was the middleweight champ...and I wouldn't say the division was that loaded at the time he won the title, or that the champion (Taylor) was particularly strong.
Thats actually where I was thinking. Kelly's kryptonite is people who actually move away from him and box.
John L. Sullivan. If he fought in today's era he would have KO'ed both Klitschkos on the same night and ruled the division for as long as he felt like it.
I think Yaqui Lopez is a good example. Maybe Howard Davis. I'd have to disagree respectfully with Carr as an example though. And Raphael Pineda certainly shouldn't be mentioned evidence he was fighting in a tough era. Don't forget. Many people consider Mark Breland to have been one of the best amateur fighters ever. What's my point? The point is the fact that a fighter was a good amateur should not carry with it the expectation he will be a good pro. If Carr had been a good pro, he would've had a signature win his whole career and certainly would not have been knocked out by Pineda.
So when do you think Carr would have been a champion? I don't see him being one in the Leonard, Benitez, Hearns or Duran time. Or Curry, Starling, McCrory, Honeyghan a few years later. Maybe during the later 80's early 90's...but then there was Simon Brown, Meldrick Taylor, Whitaker, McGirt. Could he have beaten one of those guys? Maybe, maybe not. His best shot might have been during this past decade against the likes of Baldomir, Judah, Spinks, Forrest or Mayorga. I've never seen Carr as anything more than a good fighter, but one who really wasn't championship material. But maybe in a not too deep division with multiple titles he might have a shot.
Ugh. Enough of the McCallum as an 80's version of Charley Burley stuff. McCallum won title belts in three different divisions and had a very successful career. The notion that Hearns, Leonard, and Hagler were all scared stiff of McCallum just doesn't hold water when you look what was happening at that time. McCallum was a very good fighter, but he is definitely in the category of being overrated by folks who think he is underrated. And like most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle of the two.
I don´t know. He defeated a lot of good fighters, and fought a prime Roy Jones on even terms for six rounds, when he was 40 years old and 20 pounds above his best weight. I would have loved to see him in his prime against the very best guys. Of course you cannot accuse fighters with the records of Hagler, Leonard and Hearns of ducking a challenge, but they surely weren´t eager to face McCallum.
Of course it correlates. Actually, it's correlated. But it's not 1. It's probably closer to .8, which means as a predictor, it's about 64% accurate. That wasn't my point. My point was exactly what I said which is that amateur success shouldn't carry with it the expectation of pro success. In other words, if a guy was a great amateur, but not a great pro, it's not grounds for claiming that he came around at the wrong time.
Actually, you're making my point. My point is, he was a good amateur and there was a lot expected of him. Carr was also pretty darn good as a pro, with a very good skill set; he was just not a super elite fighter as evident by him falling against elite opposition. I threw Pineda in as an aside, not as an example of how tough the division was. In other words, with his same ability, if he were around now, or within the past 5 years, he may have gotten one of those belts. I mean, Paulie Malinaggi got one at 140! (I know we're talking about 147's)
Who would you pick Morrison to beat in the top 16 right now? Fightnews Top 16: 1. Wladimir Klitschko 2. Vitali Klitschko 3. David Haye 4. Tomasz Adamek 5. Alexander Povetkin 6. Odlanier Solis 7. Denis Boytsov 8. Chris Arreola 9. Ruslan Chagaev 10. Robert Helenius 11. Nikolai Valuev 12. Alexander Dimitrenko 13. Eddie Chambers 14. Sam Peter 15. Jean-Marc Mormeck 16. Tony Thompson Arreola maybe. I don't know Helenius. Probably Peter. Mormeck. Morrison doesn't do any better these days than he did back then, imo.
I would put him as the absolute underdog aginst the top 3. (Yes including Haye) There's lots of guys on that list could beat him as well. Also vice versa.
