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 12-14-2007, 01:01 PM   #16
Thread Stealer
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 18,222
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

The Ring never ranks fighters who haven't retired yet, even if they are done with the division.

They wait until the fighter has retired before ranking them.
Thread Stealer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 12-14-2007, 01:11 PM   #17
Drew101
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "...The Land of Dixon and Langford..."
Posts: 8,302
vCash: 3930
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erratic Behavior
The Ring never ranks fighters who haven't retired yet, even if they are done with the division.

They wait until the fighter has retired before ranking them.
Well, not quite.

Virgil Hill was rated #19 at LH when they did the top 20 in that division. The rationale is that a fighter has to be done with the division (with no hope of returning), or retired altogether before they'll consider him for their lists. Of course, the rationale might have changed since 2002, when the LH list was compiled.
Drew101 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 01:26 PM   #18
Thread Stealer
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 18,222
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew101
Well, not quite.

Virgil Hill was rated #19 at LH when they did the top 20 in that division. The rationale is that a fighter has to be done with the division (with no hope of returning), or retired altogether before they'll consider him for their lists. Of course, the rationale might have changed since 2002, when the LH list was compiled.
Oh yeah, I remember that list.

I think they changed it after that. I remember before Hopkins beat Trinidad, they had Hopkins in the high teens all-time at MW. After he beat Tito, they had a list, but Hopkins wasn't ranked, because he was still active.
Thread Stealer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 01:44 PM   #19
Drew101
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "...The Land of Dixon and Langford..."
Posts: 8,302
vCash: 3930
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erratic Behavior
Oh yeah, I remember that list.

I think they changed it after that. I remember before Hopkins beat Trinidad, they had Hopkins in the high teens all-time at MW. After he beat Tito, they had a list, but Hopkins wasn't ranked, because he was still active.
You could be right. I know they've changed the criteria before, so it wouldn't surprise me to see it tweaked a bit further.

Anyway, the list that the Ring compiled at 147lbs is actually quite good. You could argue the placement of certain fighters (I think SRL could go Top 3), but, by and large, there aren't too many grievous errors in terms of fighter's placements.
Drew101 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 02:37 PM   #20
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: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
What's your rationale for Trinidad at #5? Just out of curiousity.
I give the most credit to those fighters who dominated their eras , my top 6 are the ones I feel did this . It can be argued that some fighters fought in tougher eras than others , but I think the ones that dominated their eras showed a really strong character to emerge as the best of their era . I know Gavilan never dominated as such , but that was probably only because of Robinson . Gavilan emerged as the best in the 147 post-Robinson era .

To answer your question further though , I think I rate Trinidad so highly becsuse I view him as sort of an icon , he captured the harts of boxing fans(the way Joe Louis did) the way he fought . And I just think he was great
teeto is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 02:40 PM   #21
radianttwilight
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,272
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Quote:
Originally Posted by teeto
I give the most credit to those fighters who dominated their eras , my top 6 are the ones I feel did this . It can be argued that some fighters fought in tougher eras than others , but I think the ones that dominated their eras showed a really strong character to emerge as the best of their era . I know Gavilan never dominated as such , but that was probably only because of Robinson . Gavilan emerged as the best in the 147 post-Robinson era .

To answer your question further though , I think I rate Trinidad so highly becsuse I view him as sort of an icon , he captured the harts of boxing fans(the way Joe Louis did) the way he fought . And I just think he was great
Fair enough.
radianttwilight is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 02:44 PM   #22
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: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
Fair enough.
I wouldnt move Trinidad , but he is one of the ones that if someone else had him lower on their list then I wouldnt argue with it
teeto is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 03:02 PM   #23
MrSmall
Journeyman
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 73
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

I'd like to see their 140 and 135 lb list.
MrSmall is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 04:25 PM   #24
Drew101
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: "...The Land of Dixon and Langford..."
Posts: 8,302
vCash: 3930
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSmall
I'd like to see their 140 and 135 lb list.
They did do a lightweight list. Here's the Top 10 (not certain of the placement of the bottom 10)

1. Roberto Duran
2. Benny Leonard
3. Pernell Whitaker
4. Joe Gans
5. Ike Williams
6. Joe Brown
7. Carlos Ortiz
8. Tony Canzoneri
9. Bob Montgomery
10. Beau Jack
Drew101 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 04:29 PM   #25
Bummy Davis
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 9,493
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Dempsey
From this months issue

1.Sugar Ray Robinson
2.Henry Armstrong
3.Kid Gavilan
4.Charley Burley
5.Sugar Ray Leonard
6.Carmen Basilio
7.Jose Napoles
8.Tommy Ryan
9.Joe Walcott
10.Emile Griffith
11.Tommy Hearns
12.Mickey Walker
13.Jack Britton
14.Ted Kid Lewis
15.Barney Ross
16.Jimmy McLarnin
17.Luis Rodriguez
18.Billy Graham
19.Pernell Whitaker
20.Roberto Duran

What do you guys think?

Not Bad but the Duran from Montreal should be higher and Hearns would blast out a lot of guys ahead of him, also Barney Ross should be higher
Bummy Davis is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 10:43 PM   #26
red cobra
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Sea of Tranquility
Posts: 13,246
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Ring Magazines 20 Greatest Welterweights

Both Griffith and Napoles are rated too low. Napoles would have boxed rings around Carmine Basilio, and would have stopped him in my opinion.
red cobra 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 07:48 PM.


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