The Strongest Middleweigt Era and Reevaluating Boxing Dogma

[Vysotsky]

Originally Posted by thistle1

great list Burt, but 3 points here...

Fitz I would say was a L-HW
Monzon like ALL of todays fighters would have been fighting UP against the greats & great period before him, really a L-HW too.

and Freddie Steele, YES, but not before or without Jock McAvoy - it's blows my mind they never met and Mac too fought the big boys and did better against common opponents.

it's better to just list 50 or more of these guys because there were a ton of them and very little between them.

I agree its a shame they never fought but the only real common opponent they had at MW, certainly elite one, was Babe Risko. Am i missing a bunch or something?

[thistle1]

No it's Risko but Steele fought him twice and McAvoy destroyed him as well as beat 4 other Americans including the Top L-HW cum HW contender Al McCoy who fought Loe Louis and Mac too competed with honour over the full 15 with the great JHL. these are great wins and fights to say nothing of his overall career.

[Vysotsky]

Originally Posted by Colonel Sanders

very important word here

and you picked 10 wins for the first 2 fighters of the tirthies, than 8 for the other 2, while you picked 7, 6 and 8 for the other crop

I would add to their ledger :

Monzon = Bouttier X2
Hagler = Hamsho, Minter
Hopkins = Echols, Eastman

Also, it seems to me you focus on the names, and not really on the quality of the wins at the time they were scored. How significant were Yarosz and Steele wins at the time they were scored ? I can't answer that question without making some research. But it seems to me this factor may have been overlooked here.

Hagler didn't beat the best, prime version of Brisoe. For that reason, I would put his Hamsho wins over his Brisoe win, even though Briscoe is the better fighter prime for prime.


***I do agree with the point of this thread though. Long championship reigns are kinda overated.

I do factor in the quality and context of the wins when rating them and Steele and Yarosz's few losses do not diminish their achievements at all. Actually when comparing them to other ATG MW's it actually gives them an edge against some other ATG's.

I have done a in depth comparison with all of these factors for Steele vs Hopkins and when looking at them against eachother the disparity is actually quite shocking. I'll make a thread for it soon.

Originally Posted by lufcrazy

Its a good post and fairly well rounded.

1) I can't post my list from phone but I know that in my top 25 or whatever the following are featured.


Freddie Steele
Holman Williams
Charly Burley
Fred Apostoli
Ken Overlin
Lloyd Marshall
Tony Zale
Mickey Walker
Marcel Thil

And the following feature in lists from other divisions.


Billy Conn
Ezzard Charles
Archie Moore
Georgie Abrams
Cocoa Kid

So it is a ridiculously strong era and I reckon I agree with you ranking it so highly.

2) I think an artificially long reign could be had due to the war years (if they fall in this time frame, I can't remember the specific years) in terms of a dominant reign though I think Hagler could manage it as I wouldn't pick many mw's to beat him and he he came through a tough schedule himself. Robinson would be a favourite over everyone on the list but as a mw he wasn't very consistent and in his prime he was a welter so a tough schedule at a higher weight could see him falter at points. Monzon was very consistent and again I think he could replicate his success in almost any era. Greb I can't say as I haven't seen his fights.

3) I rank on a tier system. I give resume and achievement an equal rating so even though these guys have top class resumes it is difficult to measure the worth of their achievements but that definitely holds a lot of those back. Within my tier I split on h2h based first on fight results and second on the eye test.

Resume vs achievements i'm not too sure what you mean by that and again if achievement essentialy means number of title defenses that can be an extremely meaningless thing at times. I would appreciate if you take a look at the Steele vs Hopkins comparison thread i will post soon and apply it to them after looking over all my information.

[Vysotsky]

Originally Posted by thistle1

No it's Risko but Steele fought him twice and McAvoy destroyed him as well as beat 4 other Americans including the Top L-HW cum HW contender Al McCoy who fought Loe Louis and Mac too competed with honour over the full 15 with the great JHL. these are great wins and fights to say nothing of his overall career.

Steele beat Risko 3 times actually, 1st in a non title bout when Risko was Champ, 2nd to win the title, 3rd in title rematch.

[lufcrazy]

Originally Posted by Vysotsky

I do factor in the quality and context of the wins when rating them and Steele and Yarosz's few losses do not diminish their achievements at all. Actually when comparing them to other ATG MW's it actually gives them an edge against some other ATG's.

I have done a in depth comparison with all of these factors for Steele vs Hopkins and when looking at them against eachother the disparity is actually quite shocking. I'll make a thread for it soon.



Resume vs achievements i'm not too sure what you mean by that and again if achievement essentialy means number of title defenses that can be an extremely meaningless thing at times. I would appreciate if you take a look at the Steele vs Hopkins comparison thread i will post soon and apply it to them after looking over all my information.

Achievement can mean a plethora of things. for instance louis achieved a level of dominance never seen before or since. Ali achieved 3 times champion status before anyone else. Lewis achieved the feat of beating everyone he fought. Jones Jr achieved a status as one of the most gifted boxers in history. Wills achieved one of the longest runs of top contender in history. Armstrong achieved the incredible feat of being the best fw, lw and ww AT THE SAME TIME! Hopkins achieved full unification when there was an incredible 5 belts knocking about. Leonard achieved the greatest comeback in boxing history. Rocky achieved an undefeated career. Burley achieved the status of most avoided boxer in history. Tyson achieved status as the youngest champ in hw history. Benitez achieved status as youngest champ period.

The achievements is where my personal taste comes into. Resume is a very black and white concept that's logic based and objective, by and large there isn't a huge degree os disagreements on the strength of a resume. Achievements is what makes my list mine. It's what reflects my personal opinion on the sport and gives my rankings flavour.

Here's my MW list as of now:

Marvin Hagler
Carlos Monzon
Ray Robinson
Stan Ketchel
Harry Greb
Charley Burley
Fred Apostoli
Holman Williams
Bernard Hopkins
Dick Tiger
Jake La Motta
Bob Fitzsimmons
Mike Gibbons
Les Darcy
Tiger Flowers
Freddie Steele
Gene Fullmer
Bobo Olson
Nino Benvenuti
Micky Walker
Sumbu Kalambay
Emile Griffith
Tony Zale
Marcel Thil
Jack N.P. Dempsey
Billy Papke
Tommy Ryan

[SP_Mauler]

It's nice to see Les Darcy being mentioned great human being,tragic story.

[MadcapMaxie]

Great post

Burley v Charles must've been something.

[Vysotsky]

Originally Posted by lufcrazy

Achievement can mean a plethora of things. for instance louis achieved a level of dominance never seen before or since. Ali achieved 3 times champion status before anyone else. Lewis achieved the feat of beating everyone he fought. Jones Jr achieved a status as one of the most gifted boxers in history. Wills achieved one of the longest runs of top contender in history. Armstrong achieved the incredible feat of being the best fw, lw and ww AT THE SAME TIME! Hopkins achieved full unification when there was an incredible 5 belts knocking about. Leonard achieved the greatest comeback in boxing history. Rocky achieved an undefeated career. Burley achieved the status of most avoided boxer in history. Tyson achieved status as the youngest champ in hw history. Benitez achieved status as youngest champ period.

The achievements is where my personal taste comes into. Resume is a very black and white concept that's logic based and objective, by and large there isn't a huge degree os disagreements on the strength of a resume. Achievements is what makes my list mine. It's what reflects my personal opinion on the sport and gives my rankings flavour.

Yeah so achievement for you means what i thought and while those things are interesting and sometimes significant the majority of examples you provided would hold little value, some almost none, in where i actually rank them. Especially the subjective ones lke your RJJ or Burley examples. Resume and achievement holding equal significance seems far from the most accurate and objective way to go about ranking them imo.

Thanks for sharing your MW list i have 7 of the same top 10 guys but in pretty different order.