Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-18-2012, 03:11 PM   #106
Vic-JofreBRASIL
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,697
vCash: 1166
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kittikasem View Post
If he didn't prove it, he didn't prove it. Otherwise we're just guessing. I have to rate someone on what they DID do, not what they might have been capable of. If a guy never got the fights with the A-level comp, I can't guess that he was good enough and rank him as if he had, have to deal in reality. JMHO.
I understand

Just out of interest Kit...for example, would you rate Jimmy Bivins (great resume !!) over Joe Louis in a hypothetical p4p list ?
Vic-JofreBRASIL is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 08-18-2012, 05:13 PM   #107
Kittikasem
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,255
vCash: 500
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic-JofreBRASIL View Post
I understand

Just out of interest Kit...for example, would you rate Jimmy Bivins (great resume !!) over Joe Louis in a hypothetical p4p list ?
I would have no problem at all with anyone who wanted to rank Jimmy Bivins over Joe Louis. I think it's sheer folly that so many Classic fans rate guys like Bivins, Lloyd Marshall, Jimmy McLarnin etc lower than other fighters on the basis of things like who was a more major figure in the sport, who was more culturally/historically significant, etc etc. On here, you'll find Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis and even guys like George Foreman and Joe Frazier consistently rated higher than McLarnin, simply because they held the biggest prize of them all and were involved in high-profile fights. For me, this is totally bogus. There should be a very clear difference between ATG lists based purely (and rightly) on what happened inside the ring, and lists that are based on a criteria such as how important Johnson and Louis were for the sport, or how famous Dempsey was, or how many big fights Frazier had. These kind of things aren't important when it comes to just plainly evaluating boxing greatness, achieved in the ring.

Resume above all. Resume above all. Forevermore. This is what matters. This is what counts. JMHO.
Kittikasem is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 05:18 PM   #108
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,862
vCash: 330
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Kitti, how do you view someone like Sullivan who has a terrible resume in comparison to most HW's who followed him, yet ruled for nigh on a decade and unified the various hybrid championships.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 06:22 PM   #109
Kittikasem
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,255
vCash: 500
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
Kitti, how do you view someone like Sullivan who has a terrible resume in comparison to most HW's who followed him, yet ruled for nigh on a decade and unified the various hybrid championships.
Sullivan doesn't really come into my thinking when it comes to the greatest heavyweights of all-time. An important figure, yes. Someone that should not be overlooked when discussing the history and development of the sport, sure. But I'm not so interested in accurately placing someone when I don't know much about the general quality and skill level of his opponents. There are some fighters I've never seen footage of that I feel compelled to research and assess. Sullivan is not one of them.
Kittikasem is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 06:28 PM   #110
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,862
vCash: 330
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kittikasem View Post
Sullivan doesn't really come into my thinking when it comes to the greatest heavyweights of all-time. An important figure, yes. Someone that should not be overlooked when discussing the history and development of the sport, sure. But I'm not so interested in accurately placing someone when I don't know much about the general quality and skill level of his opponents. There are some fighters I've never seen footage of that I feel compelled to research and assess. Sullivan is not one of them.
Ok then a more modern example: hearns as a ww, how do you rate him there?
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 06:46 PM   #111
Kittikasem
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,255
vCash: 500
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
Ok then a more modern example: hearns as a ww, how do you rate him there?
Ability-wise, high.

P4P/all-time? Not particularly highly at all. He didn't stay there long enough, didn't have enough top wins (arguably only one).

Not a difficult one. Cut and dried.
Kittikasem is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 06:50 PM   #112
Vic-JofreBRASIL
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,697
vCash: 1166
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

I was thinking...There is no way to rate Duran over Ike Williams using the resume comparison.....at least at LW, Williams beat much better LWs....as a big fan of Williams I like this idea...few people do this though...
Actually Carlos Ortiz has a much better resume at LW than Duran too.....

Last edited by Vic-JofreBRASIL; 08-18-2012 at 07:02 PM.
Vic-JofreBRASIL is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 07:01 PM   #113
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,862
vCash: 330
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kittikasem View Post
Ability-wise, high.

P4P/all-time? Not particularly highly at all. He didn't stay there long enough, didn't have enough top wins (arguably only one).

Not a difficult one. Cut and dried.
see for me the achievement of being second only to leonard, of destroying a prime hof, of establishing a reputation as a h2h monster, that's enough to counteract the thin resume and justify his status as a WW great.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 07:03 PM   #114
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,862
vCash: 330
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Mandell at LW: Kansas, McLarnin, Canzoneri, Petrolle, Terris, J Dundee, Bernstein (x2), McGraw, Seeman (x2), H Brown (x2) - Terris (D), Bernstein (D) - Goodrich (L), Singer (L)

one of the best resume's in the divisions history but you never see him argued as a top 3 candidate.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 07:53 PM   #115
LittleRed
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yoknapatawpha
Posts: 3,264
vCash: 475
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic-JofreBRASIL View Post
I was thinking...There is no way to rate Duran over Ike Williams using the resume comparison.....at least at LW, Williams beat much better LWs....as a big fan of Williams I like this idea...few people do this though...
Actually Carlos Ortiz has a much better resume at LW than Duran too.....
I agree with both those statements but to play devils advocate, you could argue that Duran might not have beaten better fighters but he doesn't have losses at the weight in big fights life say, Ortiz against Laguna, or Williams against Montgomery.
LittleRed is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2012, 11:42 PM   #116
HOUDINI
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: The Garden State
Posts: 1,861
vCash: 500
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Joe Louis
Benny Leonard
Willie Pep
SRR
Roberto Duran
HOUDINI is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2012, 04:26 AM   #117
Kittikasem
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,255
vCash: 500
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
see for me the achievement of being second only to leonard, of destroying a prime hof, of establishing a reputation as a h2h monster, that's enough to counteract the thin resume and justify his status as a WW great.
I'd argue that you are wrong. One win over Cuevas (27-6), 3 title defences against B/C list fighters, and a stoppage loss to SRL does not justify the description of a "welterweight great", same as Shane Mosley isn't a lightweight great. I'd have no problem with anyone saying Hearns is one of the top 5 ww's ever h2h; in fact, I think that myself. But because he looked great there doesn't translate into saying he earned/proved greatness, because he didn't.

I think you and Vic are thinking that I'm saying resume is the only factor though; I'm not.

Saying "resume above all" is not the same as saying "only resume". I consider resume by far the most important single factor, but I do take other things into consideration as well.
Kittikasem is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2012, 04:51 AM   #118
Boxed Ears
Smugly Savvy Feelings
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pazinfowit, Esperantia
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 26664
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
I do stand by that comment. I think any champ should aim to unify all title claims.
I've got to sympathise with Luf, here, K. Frankly, unification bouts have always caused me to have a pugilistic nerdgasm. And they always will. When Donaire signed to fight Mathebula, recently, many said "Oh, no! God, no! Sweet baby Jesus, no!" and I said "This is great! " Importantly, I have worked very hard to speak in ESB emoticons. And I have succeeded. Thanks to reading "The Secret".
Boxed Ears is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2012, 06:40 AM   #119
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,862
vCash: 330
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kittikasem View Post
I'd argue that you are wrong. One win over Cuevas (27-6), 3 title defences against B/C list fighters, and a stoppage loss to SRL does not justify the description of a "welterweight great", same as Shane Mosley isn't a lightweight great. I'd have no problem with anyone saying Hearns is one of the top 5 ww's ever h2h; in fact, I think that myself. But because he looked great there doesn't translate into saying he earned/proved greatness, because he didn't.

I think you and Vic are thinking that I'm saying resume is the only factor though; I'm not.

Saying "resume above all" is not the same as saying "only resume". I consider resume by far the most important single factor, but I do take other things into consideration as well.
And that's our main difference because his greatness isn't questionable to me.

I understand exactly what you mean which is why i'm focusing on the fact I give achievement equal weighting. I'm highlightin the cases of strong achievement and weak resume as that's the difference for those I think are great (john l, hearns) whilst you disagree.

Mosley was never really better than the wbc guys at the time and they mixed at a higher level despite not looking as quality.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2012, 09:03 AM   #120
Kittikasem
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,255
vCash: 500
Default Re: Top Five Greatest Fighters Ever

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
And that's our main difference because his greatness isn't questionable to me.

I understand exactly what you mean which is why i'm focusing on the fact I give achievement equal weighting. I'm highlightin the cases of strong achievement and weak resume as that's the difference for those I think are great (john l, hearns) whilst you disagree.

Mosley was never really better than the wbc guys at the time and they mixed at a higher level despite not looking as quality.
A title win, 3 defences, and a stoppage loss = strong achievement???

I don't think so.

You are rating Hearns at welterweight on the basis of Hearns as the fighter he proved to be through all weight classes across his whole career, which is bogus IMO.

Well, either that or you're rating him as a proven great welterweight because of one win over a top guy, 3 wins over mediocrities, and a stoppage loss he looked good in. This is a very dangerous road to go down - where does it end?

Is Manny Pacquiao a proven great light-welterweight because he obliterated one of the best lww's of his era there?

You have to draw a line between 'looking good there' and proving good there. Hearns was an h2h monster at ww and fully merits recognition as such. But he simply did not prove to be a great welterweight in the same way as many others who had many more meaningful wins there.
Kittikasem is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013