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 09-29-2010, 05:17 PM   #31
teeto
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Team Ireland Manor, Easing Pabuiao into the life of managing the GOAT
Posts: 14,048
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Right now i'm struggling between this:

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Harry Greb
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Sam Langford
5. Muhammad Ali
6. Roberto Duran
7. Sugar Ray Leonard
8. Willie Pep
9. Joe Gans
10. Barney Ross

and my bold faced list, which is how good i think they were, with no other criteria-

Robinson
Ali
Duran
Greb
Pep
Chang
Mayweather
Rees
Louis
teeto is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 09-29-2010, 05:24 PM   #32
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 36,365
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokaj View Post
Well, the abilities are in what they have achieved, with taking certain factors in account (age size, opposition, manner of win/loss etc).

Are you using criteria similar to those of Stonehands?


Nah, I mostly just feel my way around it.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 05:46 PM   #33
Manassa
-
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: ESB since '05
Posts: 3,883
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Instead of arguing each case, I'll just emphasise one thing; there are a lot of greats. More than you realise, even now as you're thinking about it. The Gibbons brothers, Len Harvey, Lew Tendler, Kid Herman, Newsboy Brown, George Dixon, Benny Bass, Lou Brouillard, Eddie Perkins, Freddie Miller, Midget Wolgast, Young Corbett III, Frankie Genaro... And many more. Those would be rounding out a top one hundred, so don't go putting Ken Norton or Bennie Briscoe in there. It works for the top ten or fifteen, too; Ross is above Canzoneri, and only very, very slightly; it's just that on a list it looks like more of a gap because there are so many other contenders for the spot right underneath.
Manassa is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 06:00 PM   #34
El Bujia
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The dirty dirty.
Posts: 5,371
vCash: 500
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

How can anyone really quantify whether or not Len Harvey was a great fighter on a world stage? He fought his entire career overseas (outside of a short 3 fight trip to the US in which he went winless in 3 fights) and rarely against world class opposition, and when he did it was typically with mixed results against other Euro-class fighters of the same ilk (Len Johnson, Jock McAvoy, Marcel Thil, etc.). Thil was clearly the better of the two, in my opinion.
El Bujia is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 06:04 PM   #35
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,206
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manassa View Post
Just to avoid confusing Rumsfeld, this is a separate thread for the same subject. If you haven't already, make sure you post your top ten (just ten) in his thread; he'll count them up and we'll have a consensus.

I thought I'd post my top seventeen here with a bit of reasoning. The top ten are set in stone, I think, while the next seven are definites but could be rearranged:

1. Henry Armstrong - this man should be rated no less than #3. Armstrong, in the years before '37, beat numerous rated contenders. After he lost the title in 1940, he beat even more rated contenders. The numbers for his pre and post reign efforts would be enough to secure him a #30 place on their own (going down in history as a Burley-esque 'best never to win a title' legend) - but the bulk of his legacy is based around a superhuman three year run where he went 59-1-1 with 51 knockouts over three weight divisions. Infact, both the loss and draw were controversial; in my mind, Armstrong really went 61-0, won the featherweight, lightweight and welterweight titles, and made nineteen defences, eighteen of those at welterweight. Armstrong was a head-to-head featherweight terror, a great lightweight and the record holder for most welterweight title defences; in three years. Including the rest of his career, he beat more 'name' fighters than Ray Robinson, Willie Pep, Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore.

2. Harry Greb - maybe the only fighter who was more a hurricane than even Armstrong. If, by my own concession, there's an anomaly in my top ten, it's why I don't rate Greb #1. I can't find a reason other than the uncertainty of many of his bouts, but by any account, Greb dominated his era and performed extraordinarily against heavier fighters. The most accomplished middleweight by far, and probably more than a challenge for any light heavyweight, ever. Who else could go 45-0 in one year?

3. Ray Robinson - most people's #1, and understandably. Robinson was known as the best in an era that contained Pep, Louis, Charles, Williams and Ortiz. He was a phenomenon who, even in his own time, was acknowledged as perhaps the best gloved fighter ever. His record, littered with rated victims, backs it all up; the best all-time welterweight is also rated by many as the best filmed middleweight, the title of which he won five times in the slowing half of his career.

4. Sam Langford - here's another one with a lot of uncertainty. What is clear is that Langford spent three quarters of his career with the odds stacked against him; he fought fighters who were taller and heavier, and if he didn't, he was usually held back from giving it his all. Fact; Langford was the most feared fighter of his generation and has gone down in history as the best to never win a title. His record reads a who's who of great lightweights and heavyweights and all the ones in between.

5. Benny Leonard - this is absolute lowest I'll rate this man, because he was a genuine superstar of a strong division. Willie Pep later dominated his division in similar fashion, except Leonard's opposition was undoubtedly stronger on the whole - Britton, Lewis, Kansas, Welsh, Ritchie, Dundee, Kilbane, White, Tendler - Leonard beat all these along with anyone else who stepped anywhere near the 135lbs mark.

6. Ezzard Charles - from '46 to '50, Charles went on an Armstrong-esque run, resisting all challenges and avenging losses all over. One man beat him, and that was Elmer Ray; hard punching heavyweight, who won a very disputed decision and was later knocked out as a returned favour. Over the course of Charles' career, he racked up a list of victories more varied and more impressive than Ray Robinson's; Archie Moore was beaten three times; Joey Maxim, five times. Jimmy Bivins four times, Jersey Joe Walcott and Charley Burley, twice each.

7. Willie Pep - as mentioned before, Pep dominated his division. He really, really did; 135-1-1 was his record going into the first Saddler fight, before which he'd already suffered from a terrible plane crash, and it is documented that he was not the same fighter. Nevertheless, he avenged the loss and, while losing the next two to Saddler, none were as convincing. In the '40s, Pep controlled the featherweight division like Robinson controlled the welterweights, and beat many more top ten opponents than most people realise.

8. Roberto Duran - anything after his lightweight run was just a bonus - seven years as champion and Duran was already rated alongside Benny Leonard and Joe Gans as one of the best ever lightweights. Stepping up and beating one of the very best welterweights after a career's worth record of 72-1 just capped it off nicely. Add to that a junior middleweight title and then a middleweight title in '89, twenty one years into his career and at a height disadvantage of six inches.

9. Archie Moore - in the modern era (post '30?) there hasn't been a fighter who's came back from as many beatings, setbacks and bouts of poverty to reign as champion in his old age as Archie Moore. He tops the list as knockout king, and flourished in an unnatural way in his later years - he was still defending his title at a proposed forty four years of age, and after such a hectic career that seems inhuman to me, especially considering Moore was jumping weight constantly.

10. Barney Ross - a real war hero, but that doesn't matter on this list. Ross takes this spot for me because of his utter dominance over fellow greats. From 135 to 147, Ross was boss of Canzoneri, McLarnin, Petrolle and Garcia, retiring without ever being stopped. In a remarkably short career of just nine years, Ross bowed out with a remarkably tidy record for the era of 72-4-3 because he was just brilliant.


11. Mickey Walker
12. Jimmy McLarnin
13. Joe Gans
14. Bob Fitzsimmons
15. Muhammad Ali
16. Joe Louis
17. Tony Canzoneri
The list is a compelling one. I happen to like Armstrong in the top spot -not because I agree that he should be over Greb or SRR, but because you defend it well and he deserves to be at least be proposed there. He's one person of the fistic trinity. (Greb, Robinson, and him).

Enough of that. It's time to return a favor. You declared my ranking of Burley at #10 as indicative of a flaw. I would shine a spotlight on your considering Gans, Fitzsimmons, and Langford. Langford's career is far murkier than Greb's with or without the film. He was a known tanker. We do not know how many of his losses -or his wins- against Jeannette, McVea, et al. were on the level. They had to eat and it is pretty certain that they would rotate who won to increase interest and get more purses -especially because of the reluctance of Papa Jack to offer a brother a title shot. Sam also carried fighters. Especially white ones.

Gans, Fitzsimmons, and Sam fought in a murky era -and no one is gonna tell me that going 15 rounds with a neutral corner rule and licensed judges is the same as going 20 rounds in a barn with no neutral corner rule and newspaper decisions where much of the press were on the take. So, we have a validity problem. Would Ruby Bob have done as well as he did in the late 19th century as he would have had he fought in 1949? Who knows?! Essentially, the sports are too different. Now let me turn off the broken record.
...

Now ...When do I get my 'thank you' for absorbing all the hell that you would otherwise have gotten for ranking Ali at 15?!
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 06:10 PM   #36
Manassa
-
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: ESB since '05
Posts: 3,883
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonehands89 View Post
The list is a compelling one. I happen to like Armstrong in the top spot -not because I agree that he should be over Greb or SRR, but because you defend it well and he deserves to be at least be proposed there. He's one person of the fistic trinity. (Greb, Robinson, and him).

Enough of that. It's time to return a favor. You declared my ranking of Burley at #10 as indicative of a flaw. I would shine a spotlight on your considering Gans, Fitzsimmons, and Langford. Langford's career is far murkier than Greb's with or without the film. He was a known tanker. We do not know how many of his losses -or his wins- against Jeannette, McVea, et al. were on the level. They had to eat and it is pretty certain that they would rotate who won to increase interest and get more purses -especially because of the reluctance of Papa Jack to offer a brother a title shot. Sam also carried fighters. Especially white ones.

Gans, Fitzsimmons, and Sam fought in a murky era -and no one is gonna tell me that going 15 rounds with a neutral corner rule and licensed judges is the same as going 20 rounds in a barn with no neutral corner rule and newspaper decisions where much of the press were on the take. So, we have a validity problem. Would Ruby Bob have done as well as he did in the late 19th century as he would have had he fought in 1949? Who knows?! Essentially, the sports are too different. Now let me turn off the broken record.
...

Now ...When do I get my 'thank you' for absorbing all the hell that you would otherwise have gotten for ranking Ali at 15?!
My thank you was diguised as giving you the 'benefit of the Burley doubt'

I rate the gloved era because it's a fairly easy cut off point. It's hard making and taking allowances, but it can be done.
Manassa is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 06:12 PM   #37
Manassa
-
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: ESB since '05
Posts: 3,883
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Bujia View Post
How can anyone really quantify whether or not Len Harvey was a great fighter on a world stage? He fought his entire career overseas (outside of a short 3 fight trip to the US in which he went winless in 3 fights) and rarely against world class opposition, and when he did it was typically with mixed results against other Euro-class fighters of the same ilk (Len Johnson, Jock McAvoy, Marcel Thil, etc.). Thil was clearly the better of the two, in my opinion.

It was a name, off the top of my head, of an underappreciated fighter; I never meant he was a foremost legend, don't worry. Thil was certainly greater.
Manassa is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 06:13 PM   #38
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,206
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
1) Sugar Ray Robinson
2) Muhammad Ali
3) Willie Pep
4) Sugar Ray Leonard
5) Pernell Whitaker
6) Roy Jones Jr
7) Roberto Duran
Salvador Sanchez
9) Marvin Hagler
10) Thomas Hearns

Joe Louis, Manny Pacquiao, Rocky Marciano, Jose Napoles, Ricardo Lopez could've all found themselves on here.
This list is compelling for a different reason. It compels me to attack it.

* Was Ali greater than Armstrong?

* Ray Leonard at 4?! Say your prayers tonight, Pachilles, because the ghost of Benny Leonard is gonna spin your head around.

* I've said it before and I'll say it again -Roy Jones in a P4P top ten is about as appropriate as a transvestite at King Arthur's Round Table.

* Do you believe that Hagler and Hearns are greater than Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore...?

* Sanchez is a coulda' been, even a woulda' been -but sitting there at number 8 makes him look like a midget on a throne. Why you gotta go and do that to him?
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 06:14 PM   #39
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,206
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manassa View Post
My thank you was diguised as giving you the 'benefit of the Burley doubt'
--While you threw a sneaky (Holman) hook at the same time!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manassa View Post
I rate the gloved era because it's a fairly easy cut off point. It's hard making and taking allowances, but it can be done.
Okay.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 09:10 PM   #40
Pachilles
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,147
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonehands89 View Post
This list is compelling for a different reason. It compels me to attack it.

* Was Ali greater than Armstrong?

* Ray Leonard at 4?! Say your prayers tonight, Pachilles, because the ghost of Benny Leonard is gonna spin your head around.

* I've said it before and I'll say it again -Roy Jones in a P4P top ten is about as appropriate as a transvestite at King Arthur's Round Table.

* Do you believe that Hagler and Hearns are greater than Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore...?

* Sanchez is a coulda' been, even a woulda' been -but sitting there at number 8 makes him look like a midget on a throne. Why you gotta go and do that to him?
Simply because anybody pre-1940 is getting their ass completely and utterly served by the names on that list, in their respective weight class.

* Yes i do believe Ali is greater than Armstrong. I explained in length my opinion of the HW division in P4P lists. There is no weight jump on paper, its just wide open and completely full of men all physically capable of taking you out. No point in going into how he beat the biggest punchers ever or how he beat prime top 10 P4P ATG prime HW's, past his own prime...which is a triple rarity. Then theres his clear to see technical and physical superiority to Armstrong on footage we have.

* Benny Leonard. I've seen footage of him. He is clearly no Hearns, Duran, Hagler or Benitez and never fought, let alone defeated anyone on their level, physically or technically

* If King Arthur was so hetero, his table would be straight and rectangle. And his woman wouldnt have left him for some medieval hipster called Lance.

* Yes, i do believe Hagler and Hearns are superior P4P fighters.

* Sanchez dismantled a monstrous punching HOFer in Lopez, a monstrous punching SuperBantamweight king in Gomez and a very game future champion and HOFer in Nelson. Which throws the shoulda and coulda out the window. The rest of his argument is clear to see on footage.

With Ali, Jones and Ray Leonard i think i know your agenda. Theyre mainstream so you spite them
Pachilles is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2010, 09:37 PM   #41
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,206
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
Simply because anybody pre-1940 is getting their ass completely and utterly served by the names on that list, in their respective weight class.
After this Pablum, why would I read any more?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
* Yes i do believe Ali is greater than Armstrong. I explained in length my opinion of the HW division in P4P lists. There is no weight jump on paper, its just wide open and completely full of men all physically capable of taking you out. No point in going into how he beat the biggest punchers ever or how he beat prime top 10 P4P ATG prime HW's, past his own prime...which is a triple rarity. Then theres his clear to see technical and physical superiority to Armstrong on footage we have.
...because I'm a masochist. That's why.

I do my best to respect other opinions but I can't respect those so hopelessly ill-informed as this one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
* Benny Leonard. I've seen footage of him. He is clearly no Hearns, Duran, Hagler or Benitez and never fought, let alone defeated anyone on their level, physically or technically
You're a fugitive from the General Forum who has pitched a ragged tent on the Classic forum. Someone get me a match.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
* If King Arthur was so hetero, his table would be straight and rectangle. And his woman wouldnt have left him for some medieval hipster called Lance.
This is almost as humorous as the rest of your post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
* Yes, i do believe Hagler and Hearns are superior P4P fighters.
Superior to Charles and Moore. Really. I'm very tempted to use an emoticon here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
* Sanchez dismantled a monstrous punching HOFer in Lopez, a monstrous punching SuperBantamweight king in Gomez and a very game future champion and HOFer in Nelson. Which throws the shoulda and coulda out the window. The rest of his argument is clear to see on footage.
...and this catapults him into the top ten p4p of all time? This demonstrates more limitations in your knowledge of boxing history than it does Sanchez's undeniable greatness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
With Ali, Jones and Ray Leonard i think i know your agenda. Theyre mainstream so you spite them
I rank Whitaker, Duran, Arguello, Monzon, Chavez, and Ali quite high. They're not mainstream?
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2010, 08:17 AM   #42
Pachilles
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,147
vCash: 75
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonehands89 View Post
After this Pablum, why would I read any more?


...because I'm a masochist. That's why.

I do my best to respect other opinions but I can't respect those so hopelessly ill-informed as this one.


You're a fugitive from the General Forum who has pitched a ragged tent on the Classic forum. Someone get me a match.


This is almost as humorous as the rest of your post.


Superior to Charles and Moore. Really. I'm very tempted to use an emoticon here.


...and this catapults him into the top ten p4p of all time? This demonstrates more limitations in your knowledge of boxing history than it does Sanchez's undeniable greatness.


I rank Whitaker, Duran, Arguello, Monzon, Chavez, and Ali quite high. They're not mainstream?
You can talk all you like, Mr Hands. Pull rank and be as condescending as you like with me. I dont care about my credibility in this little sub-culture. I just love watching boxing

I can tie my own velcro and common sense tells me that this guy...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcq-Sy05C-8[/ame]

would be breakfast for either of these guys...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHqEUX2Vw6k[/ame]

Same goes for a Jones Jr, Bob Fitz comparison. Or a Dempsey, Tyson/Ali comparison. Or a B Leonard, Ray Leonard comparison. Or a Ross, Duran comparison.
Pachilles is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2010, 08:22 AM   #43
teeto
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Team Ireland Manor, Easing Pabuiao into the life of managing the GOAT
Posts: 14,048
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Barney Ross isn't primitive by any stretch of the imagination though Pachilles. Many people who believe that boxers from the earliest glove boxing days were primitive, they credit Ross as being the catalyst for the revolution of boxing technique. Ross is an atg technician without any reservations.
teeto is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2010, 08:23 AM   #44
Bokaj
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,174
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
You can talk all you like, Mr Hands. Pull rank and be as condescending as you like with me. I dont care about my credibility in this little sub-culture. I just love watching boxing

I can tie my own velcro and common sense tells me that this guy...

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

would be breakfast for either of these guys...

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Same goes for a Jones Jr, Bob Fitz comparison. Or a Dempsey, Tyson/Ali comparison. Or a B Leonard, Ray Leonard comparison. Or a Ross, Duran comparison.
I generally agree with you about that, but don't see the relevance really. That would just be giving more modern fighters a bonus for developments in boxing (which are largely due to the greats that preceeded them) and developments in sport sciences in general. You have to rate each fighter in relation to their own era IMO.
Bokaj is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2010, 10:51 AM   #45
enquirer
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,604
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Pound-for-pound list

1) manos de piedra.

2) Harold greb.

3) Bobby fitz.

4) samuel langford.

5) Eazy charles.

6) Carlito Monzon.

7) Sugah 1.

Sugah 2.

9) cassius marcellus.

10) Joseph barrow.
enquirer 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 12:11 PM.


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