John Conteh's 'window of opportunity' and what might have been

Morning all, hope the days been a good’un so far.

We’re all well-versed in the subject of John Conteh. A lavishly gifted and lovable Liverpudlian, but one who didn’t fulfil what his talents deserved. As good ol’ Steve Bunce said, Conteh didn’t realise his potential, but he did realise how much fun he could have as a popular, good-looking and wealthy young athlete on the night club scene.

Some say that had it not been for injury problems, managerial disputes and, at times, a lack of self-discipline, Conteh would have earned a place amongst the very elite of British boxing. Some go even further than that and say that he could have become the greatest ever from these shores.

But how true is that? To be a great fighter, you need ability, first off. Conteh had it in bucket loads. But you also need that ‘window of opportunity’; great fighters to test yourself against. And I think it’s a great tragedy that, had Conteh not done all his best work by his mid-twenties (and he was completely finished by thirty), he certainly would have had such a window.

Now you’ll have to use your imagination here, lads. Let’s pretend for a second that Conteh’s right hand doesn’t give him any problems, that his management team is a settled one and that he applies a Dennis Andries approach to boxing, rather than the one which he eventually did. In short, let’s imagine Conteh at the peak of his powers and with his mind on nothing but boxing.

How does he do against the other fabulous Light-Heavyweights of the seventies and early eighties (some of which he didn’t meet, for the reasons outlined above)? The 175 lb division has nearly always been a marvel, but Conteh’s era was a particular standout, especially in the sense that it contained some of the best ‘value for money’ fighters of their, or any, era. On the roster we have Victor Galindez, Marvin Johnson, Dwight Muhammad Qawi, Eddie Mustafa Muhammad and Matthew Saad Muhammad (who, of course, Conteh did meet, though it’s generally accepted that it wasn’t the ‘real Conteh’ by the time of their two fights). At a stretch, we can maybe throw in Mike Spinks, too, although he was a little more removed from Conteh’s best years.

How does Conteh fair against these men and, had he been able to square off against them in peak condition, would he have achieved the sort of results to put him not only amongst the greatest from our shores, but also the all-time elite of the Light-Heavyweight division?

As much as I love Galindez (wonderfully entertaining fighter, who I covered in my ‘forgotten greats’ series), I believe that Conteh would have had the beating of him. One thing often forgotten about Conteh was how good he was on the counter-punch; his first bout with Finnegan is a great example of this. Of all the bouts Conteh missed, this is probably the most damaging, and also the fact that it didn’t happen makes it one of the most frustrating. A unification bout between the pair should have been a must. But as I say, I think Conteh’s counter-punching and lateral movement give him a narrow points win over Galindez in a classic.

Next up, Marvin Johnson, who was a real byword for courage, featuring in some superb battles with the names mentioned above. Again, I see a win for Conteh against the three-times titlist. It’s another epic, mind you; but Conteh wears the Philadelphia man down to a late stoppage for me.

Dwight Muhammad Qawi? This is a real pick ‘em, for my money, and a real testament to the old dictum that ‘styles make fights.’ Qawi wins no points for style or grace, but by God, his pressure could cause anyone problems. His swarming style was so crude but, with his low attack (he crouched, in addition to only standing 5’5”) put many a good boxer off their rhythm. I think Conteh sneaks a narrow, narrow decision here (possibly a split), while being very thankful that he could box off the back foot, because that’s where Qawi will have him all night.

Eddie Mustafa Muhammad was a quality technician in his own right, but once more, I fancy the man from Liverpool to be a little too good for him. I doubt this would be much of a fight in terms of spectacle, but I feel that Conteh would be against an opponent playing to his strengths – he does what Conteh did, but none of it quite as well. Conteh by a comfortable decision.

Now on to the tricky subject of Matthew Saad Muhammad. Conteh did, as you know, face him twice, though it’s undeniable that Conteh was not the fighter he’d once been by this stage. The right hand was all but gone, and his performance in their second fight (where he was badly beaten and stopped, after losing a close decision first time out) proved what many had suspected for a while – his heart just wasn’t in boxing anymore. At the back of my mind, the fact that Conteh pushed Saad Muhammad so close with virtually one hand (he seldom threw the right in that first bout) gives me encouragement that he may have beaten him, all things being equal. But at the same time, I see Saad Muhammad’s heavy hands (at least comparable to Conteh in that respect), explosiveness and superb stamina and think that maybe, just maybe, this is a man that Conteh can’t find a way around no matter when they met. I think the American has the wood on Conteh and decisions him more often than not, with a late stoppage not out of the question.

Last one up, Mike Spinks. Now at best, this fight isn’t going to happen until 1981 / 1982, by which time Conteh would have been in some absolute wars with the above had my theory panned out. Conteh is in the mix in this one, but I think Spinks would have been a little too fresh and rounded for him. Spinks’ right hand was a marvel and, even in his pomp, Conteh let the odd big right get over the top of his own jab. I think Spinks takes a decision by a small but at the same time clear margin.

So, there you have it. Conteh ‘plays the game’ a little better and achieves those results against the fighters in question – where does that leave him in your estimation of British greats? And do you agree with my assessments of the fights? Personally, had it panned out how I see it, I think Conteh would be a lock for a top five Brit spot, and would possibly be knocking on the door of an all-time top ten Light-Heavyweight place.

Anyway, just a little something to get your teeth in to if you fancy it. Sorry it dragged on, but thanks for sticking with me. Cheers everyone.

Cracking article Chris and hard to argue too much with how you see it. Along with Lynch and perhaps Laing John is one of the greatest wastes of talents ever from these shores. I watch Conteh at his best and I don't see too many weaknesses, what I also like about him is when he needs he can be a rough SOB not unwilling to utilise the dark arts when necessary.

Would agree that were things to pan out as you suggest there are simply too many miles on the clock by Spinks. Think he beats MSM because as you say if he can push him to the limit one handed have to think a fully functioning right hand is enough to turn the close rounds in his favour but it is close enough to not make any arguments either way.

rowley wrote:I watch Conteh at his best and I don't see too many weaknesses, what I also like about him is when he needs he can be a rough SOB not unwilling to utilise the dark arts when necessary.

In a nutshell.

Excellent article, by the way, Chris.

Thanks for the contributions, Jeff and Windy.

As you alluded to Rowley I went back and forth a few times in my head regarding the Matthew Saad Muhammad match up. I'll admit that there's a little bit of gut feeling in that particular prediction but at the same time I wouldn't argue against anyone who has Conteh winning that one had he been able to properly load up the right hand. Very, very close either way.

Conteh was a nearly man. I like him and rate him very highly, but looking at the talent he had and the reign he should of and could have had, imo he's a nearly man. Not a nearly man in terms of what he did achieve, he is a p4p best brit because he did lift the WBC world light heavyweight title, but he should of done more with what he had going for him

Young_Towzer wrote:Conteh was a nearly man. I like him and rate him very highly, but looking at the talent he had and the reign he should of and could have had, imo he's a nearly man. Not a nearly man in terms of what he did achieve, he is a p4p best brit because he did lift the WBC world light heavyweight title, but he should of done more with what he had going for him

Depends what context you measure 'nearly man' status in, but you're right that he should have achieved more. Since the War, I can only see two British fighter who was even approaching Conteh's talents, and they were Naseem Hamed and Ken Buchanan. Even then, I'd care to wager that Conteh was a more complete all-round fighter than both Naz and Ken.

Youve summed it all up well here Chris.. Great article! Had everything been smoother and his focus was solid i think for sure he could have mixed it with the above mentioned fighters and definatley would have won a few of theese fights.

Depends what context you measure 'nearly man' status in, but you're right that he should have achieved more. Since the War, I can only see two British fighter who was even approaching Conteh's talents, and they were Naseem Hamed and Ken Buchanan. Even then, I'd care to wager that Conteh was a more complete all-round fighter than both Naz and Ken.
....................
Depends what context you measure 'talent' on
Naseem had terrible footwork, terrible balance, no textbook boxing ability, he was a good fighter but awkward more than anything else and lost to every genuine world class fighter he fought, 1 - Barrera.

Cheers DoubleD, wasn't sure whether or not people would think I was being a little too kind to Conteh in some of my predictions, but a lot of thought certainly went in to them. Glad you enjoyed the article.

posted on wrong thread

He is definatley one of those fighters you could see raw talent in, you knew the ability was there its just a shame how diffrent factors affected his career.

Young_Towzer wrote:Depends what context you measure 'talent' on. Naseem had terrible footwork, terrible balance, no textbook boxing ability, he was a good fighter but awkward more than anything else and lost to every genuine world class fighter he fought, 1 - Barrera.

The problem is, you can pick holes in the skill set of most fighters apart from a lucky few. McGuigan looked as if he had his opponent's jab glued to his face at times, and was inept when having to box off the back foot. Ditto for Hatton. Benn's stamina often went missing after five or six rounds the McClellan fight aside, and his defence left a lot to be desired. Lennox Lewis hung his jab out to dry too often, getting knocked spark out once or twice as a result and, in other instances, being pressured and troubled by the likes of Mercer and a past-his-best Holyfield, both of whom he should have dealt with more conclusively.

Get my drift?

My point regarding Naz wasn't about his career record, it was concerning his freakish talents. His balance may have been off, you're right, and he didn't care much for footwork. But you're woefully wrong when you say he had no textbook boxing at all, and his incredible power, good chin and almost unequalled ability to find angles from anywhere more than make up for his shortcomings.

My point regarding Naz wasn't about his career record, it was concerning his freakish talents. His balance may have been off, you're right, and he didn't care much for footwork. But you're woefully wrong when you say he had no textbook boxing at all, and his incredible power, good chin and almost unequalled ability to find angles from anywhere more than make up for his shortcomings.
.....................................
He got beat against every world class fighter he fought, 1- Barrera.
Get my drift?

Young_Towzer wrote:My point regarding Naz wasn't about his career record, it was concerning his freakish talents. His balance may have been off, you're right, and he didn't care much for footwork. But you're woefully wrong when you say he had no textbook boxing at all, and his incredible power, good chin and almost unequalled ability to find angles from anywhere more than make up for his shortcomings.
.....................................
He got beat against every world class fighter he fought, 1- Barrera.
Get my drift?

As immitation is the highest form of flattery, I'll take it as a compliment that you keep repeating certain lines I write, Steven. And considering you keep telling us that Froch's victims such as Pascal are "world class", surely using your own logic your claim that Hamed never beat a world class operator is a load of cobblers? Pascal, Abraham and an over-the-hill Taylor world class, but Tom Johnson, Wilfredo Vasquez and Wayne McCullough not?

88Chris05 wrote:

Young_Towzer wrote:My point regarding Naz wasn't about his career record, it was concerning his freakish talents. His balance may have been off, you're right, and he didn't care much for footwork. But you're woefully wrong when you say he had no textbook boxing at all, and his incredible power, good chin and almost unequalled ability to find angles from anywhere more than make up for his shortcomings.
.....................................
He got beat against every world class fighter he fought, 1- Barrera.
Get my drift?

As immitation is the highest form of flattery, I'll take it as a compliment that you keep repeating certain lines I write, Steven. And considering you keep telling us that Froch's victims such as Pascal are "world class", surely using your own logic your claim that Hamed never beat a world class operator is a load of cobblers? Pascal, Abraham and an over-the-hill Taylor world class, but Tom Johnson, Wilfredo Vasquez and Wayne McCullough not?

Good luck Chris trying to reason with him...He thinks Chisora beats Haye...Naz is ahead of Froch at the moment, beat quality like Kelley and Robinson.

PBF and Young_Towzer - PMs for you.

As immitation is the highest form of flattery, I'll take it as a compliment that you keep repeating certain lines I write, Steven. And considering you keep telling us that Froch's victims such as Pascal are "world class", surely using your own logic your claim that Hamed never beat a world class operator is a load of cobblers? Pascal, Abraham and an over-the-hill Taylor world class, but Tom Johnson, Wilfredo Vasquez and Wayne McCullough not?
...............................
McCullough world class?
Vasquez, Johnson - B level, well below the Barrera's
Like it or not, Pal. He fought 1 world class fighter and was schooled, end of.

Good luck Chris trying to reason with him...He thinks Chisora beats Haye...Naz is ahead of Froch at the moment, beat quality like Kelley and Robinson.
................................
Yeah, don't remember saying any of those things like!, but Robinson quality hahahahahahah, that's as good as the rest of the stuff you say, you could write what you know on the back of a postage stamp. i hope you've got your Mayweather fan club membership paid !

Young_Towzer wrote:As immitation is the highest form of flattery, I'll take it as a compliment that you keep repeating certain lines I write, Steven. And considering you keep telling us that Froch's victims such as Pascal are "world class", surely using your own logic your claim that Hamed never beat a world class operator is a load of cobblers? Pascal, Abraham and an over-the-hill Taylor world class, but Tom Johnson, Wilfredo Vasquez and Wayne McCullough not?
...............................
McCullough world class?
Vasquez, Johnson - B level, well below the Barrera's
Like it or not, Pal. He fought 1 world class fighter and was schooled, end of.

Will take the 'not' option if that's all the same with you. Jean Pascal, Arthur Abraham and Glen Johnson all "world class" in your own words, but Vasquez, Johnson and McCullough not. Sums you up, basically. Now, does anyone have anything to add to the actual article?

i got it windy, he's obsessed with me mate, he'll have the genius of southpaw_towz next week pal

Pascal in my own words? no erm i think winning the ring mag title suggests otherwise, cheers

Young_Towzer wrote:i got it windy, he's obsessed with me mate, he'll have the genius of southpaw_towz next week pal

Yet you commented to me first on 606v2 and commented on my articles...yet im the obsessed one ok then

And back to John Conteh.

Yet you commented to me first on 606v2 and commented on my articles...yet im the obsessed one ok then
.....................
Scroll up, i think you will find it's you who commented first, anyway im gonna do myself and windy a favour and ignore you, all you are is a WUM.

1. IGNORE
2. LEAVE YOU FRUSTRATED

boooooooooom

HumanWindmill wrote:And back to John Conteh.

It's finger in the dyke stuff for you today Windy, reminds me why I don't have kids. May hold over that Manny Floyd blood testing thread for another day.

Young_Towzer wrote:Pascal in my own words? no erm i think winning the ring mag title suggests otherwise, cheers

Two things. The Ring didn't give out title recognition in the nineties, so not really a fair comparison to Naz's opponents. But the Ring Magazine title at Featherweight rested with Esparragoza at the time they stopped recognizing it. Esparragoza was beaten by Park. Park was beaten by Rojas. Rojas was then beaten by WBA champion Vasquez. So, there we have it. Vasquez undeniably a world class fighter, using another one of your definitions. Hence, as stated earlier, your idea that Hamed only ever faced one world class fighter is a load of cobblers - unless you're once again planning on scurrying around like a spider in a bath tub and coming up with a third definition of what world class is?

Young_Towzer wrote:Yet you commented to me first on 606v2 and commented on my articles...yet im the obsessed one ok then
.....................
Scroll up, i think you will find it's you who commented first, anyway im gonna do myself and windy a favour and ignore you, all you are is a WUM.

1. IGNORE
2. LEAVE YOU FRUSTRATED

boooooooooom

Actually if you look yesterday it was all you commenting towards me and then you went through my profile and commented on my hello article but dont let facts get in the way.

rowley wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:And back to John Conteh.

It's finger in the dyke stuff for you today Windy, reminds me why I don't have kids. May hold over that Manny Floyd blood testing thread for another day.

That's kind of you, jeff.

Such a thread might be the final straw and my ticket to Broadmoor.

I think Dwight Qawi would beat John Conteh comfortably...look at the problems he caused Holyfield.

Actually if you look yesterday it was all you commenting towards me and then you went through my profile and commented on my hello article but dont let facts get in the way.
.................................
eh? i'm lost, keep thinking of me

Young_Towzer wrote:Actually if you look yesterday it was all you commenting towards me and then you went through my profile and commented on my hello article but dont let facts get in the way.
.................................
eh? i'm lost, keep thinking of me

Thought you would be lost

https://www.606v2.com/t5932-606-finally-locked-down-to-comments

Looks like I was on your mind when I was away from 606v2

Last time. Back to John Conteh.

First time round, when Holyfield was a baby. Vander still found a way to win, though, and then dished out the mother and father of hidings in the return.

Conteh would have loved fighting Qawi - he was excellent against the shorter fighters, ripping up the uppercuts as they came in, boxing beautifully, roughing them up on the inside. He was nails, our John - amazing how many of his opponents ended up getting cut. He had a nasty streak and used it, and by god there are more of our fighters who could do with it.

Conteh had it all; could have been absolutely anything he wanted and that certainly includes being Britain's best ever boxer. I also agree that a switched-on Conteh would have held every chance against any of the great light-heavyweights of the 74-82 period. Such a shame, but God he could fight.

windy i won't respond to him, he's referring to an article where many on here slated the way he is, he's a wum, we all know that

captain carrantuohil wrote:First time round, when Holyfield was a baby. Vander still found a way to win, though, and then dished out the mother and father of hidings in the return.

Conteh would have loved fighting Qawi - he was excellent against the shorter fighters, ripping up the uppercuts as they came in, boxing beautifully, roughing them up on the inside. He was nails, our John - amazing how many of his opponents ended up getting cut. He had a nasty streak and used it, and by god there are more of our fighters who could do with it.

Conteh had it all; could have been absolutely anything he wanted and that certainly includes being Britain's best ever boxer. I also agree that a switched-on Conteh would have held every chance against any of the great light-heavyweights of the 74-82 period. Such a shame, but God he could fight.

Thanks for contributing, captain. Interesting that we seem to differ completely on our view of the potential Conteh-Qawi fight, though. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that I've totally misread it, of course. As I said, I see Conteh winning but for me Qawi's aggressive nature and pressure does cause him some problems along the way. I think the Holyfield fights aren't the best indicator, in fairness; Qawi was already going some to compete at 175 lb with such a short stature, never mind 190 lb against a man with the ability to fight effectively at 215 lb in the shape of Holyfield.

Glad that the general consensus seems to be that he'd have the upper hand on all but one or maybe two of the fighters I've mentioned.