Do you agree with these Tiers of Greatness for 90s-00s fighters?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by horst, Jul 5, 2011.


  1. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    701
    Dec 6, 2009
    Wlad should be higher, JMM should be lower, and Floyd should be in tier 4 but other than that everything is just about right. Norris could be higher but I would have him in the same class as Wlad, Wright, and/or Tszyu so maybe Floyd should be 5 but no way in hell should hee be higher than 4(Toney has better wins for instance).
     
  2. ApatheticLeader

    ApatheticLeader is bringing ***y back. Full Member

    10,798
    3
    Jul 20, 2004
    One again you come up with names that had done big things in the past, but failing to acknowledge that they did nothing subsequently and were therefore clearly on the way down/at the end of their careers and basically on the level of fringe contenders/journeyman. People overrate and underrate resumés terribly due to this massive flaw.
     
  3. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    701
    Dec 6, 2009
    Almost perfect except Floyd should be in tier 4 or 5. Guy is too overrated.
     
  4. ApatheticLeader

    ApatheticLeader is bringing ***y back. Full Member

    10,798
    3
    Jul 20, 2004
    Sorry, Toney's win over Nunn was pretty huge. The way he did it shows his weaknesses, but the win itself is the bottom line.
     
  5. horst

    horst Guest

    You don't see how Mosley and Oscar can be separated?? :huh

    I don't see how they can be in the same tier.

    Oscar has a better, stronger, deeper resume, fewer losses through the main part of his career, went 1-1 with Shane IMO, won more world titles than SMM, won titles in more weight classes than SSM, and IMO was a better fighter in terms of ability as well.

    I don't see them as being equal at all, Oscar is clearly superior.
     
  6. leocouture

    leocouture Chinchecker KILLA!!!!!! G Full Member

    1,889
    67
    Jun 7, 2010
    No roy jones debates yet?
     
  7. horst

    horst Guest

    Yet another wooly comment which did not attempt to provide the equivalent list for Lopez as requested.

    Toney's 2 best wins are Nunn and Jirov IMO, and both were at the top of their games when he beat them.

    Also, the version of McCallum that Toney 'drew' with in '91 would have beaten any middleweight of the past 20 years other than Jones and perhaps Hopkins. He was still a superb fighter, and watching his fights from this period will confirm this.
     
  8. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    701
    Dec 6, 2009
    He also beat Trinidad (who was a beast and highly ranked pfp at that time) I don't care what it says on paper. I'm sorry, if you win no less than 8 rds and go the decision then you win the fight(I only thought he lost 9-12 but even if you're very generous the most you could give Trinidad is 4 rds). Titles don't really mean anything if you're beating Baldomirs but overall DLH is better/greater and this is from a Shane fan.
     
  9. ApatheticLeader

    ApatheticLeader is bringing ***y back. Full Member

    10,798
    3
    Jul 20, 2004
    Sorry, Toney's win over Nunn was pretty huge. The way he did it shows his weaknesses, but the win itself is the bottom line.

    Ditto with the Reggie Johnson win. I still think Lopez's win over dominant champion Alvarez (who himself beat future champions) is the superior single victory, but that's one win. I already acknowledged that Toney had the greater depth of wins on the first page.
     
  10. horst

    horst Guest

    I agree with everything you've said. People continually think that contemporaries and rivals are equals, it's a common mistake and it's usually not the case. Just because Marquez often gets mentioned alongside Barrera and Morales, people think he was their equal - career wise, he wasn't. Same story with Hopkins and Calzaghe, Oscar and Shane, etc etc. Just because names are often mentioned in proximity doesn't mean these fighters are grouped together. Their careers need to be looked at individually. In no way is Shane Mosley's career equal to Oscar De La Hoya's.
     
  11. Journey Man

    Journey Man Journeyman always. Full Member

    4,943
    2,116
    Aug 22, 2009
    Lennox should be in the top tier imo. Bernard and Roy are debatable for the top, yes Roy was brilliant but his string of fights at light heavy and losses have really tarnished his career for me. Bernard, he's come on late but had a lot of close fights . Toney is probably 4th or 5th for me Wladimir and Joe 3rd tier.
     
  12. ApatheticLeader

    ApatheticLeader is bringing ***y back. Full Member

    10,798
    3
    Jul 20, 2004
    I thought you were still talking about Nunn, I never bothered reading the post. I in the main agree about Toney's resume being superior to Lopez's.

    And the 91 version of McCullum that Toney drew with was still a top fighter, definitely. He won the WBC title directly afterwards without another defeat between, so yeah, he was still top quality. As for Jirov, as he moved up to heavyweight you can only really go on whether he seemed to be regressing as a cruiserweight, and he didn't, so he counts as a good win too.
     
  13. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    701
    Dec 6, 2009
    Yes, Marquez IMO still hasn't proved his greatness as there are too many question marks on his record(not his fault) such as Pacquiao 2, maybe Norwood, and John. The skills have always been there but I question whether he's great or not as I consider him very good overall FTM. The pressure on him as the "last great Mexican" has risen him up in people's eyes because Morales & Barrera are much more faded though it's hard to justify if he's on the cusp of greatness or already there.



    Calzaghe did not beat Hopkins and not fighting Ottke(regardless who's fault that was) or Dawson late in his career instead of fossil Jones hurts him. He was very good but I think of Jones more highly as a SMW for the very short time he was one. Lacy was NOT the kind of guy to have a defining fight against but he was good and that was a good win for Calzaghe which he should've had earlier. IMO Kessler was his defining fight but it doesn't look good that he only tested himself much later in his career. I heard 5 0f the 7 ranked guys he fought in his reign had losses b4 Joe fought them(sigh).




    I already adressed Shane/DLH earlier in this thread though I feel he gets a bit underrated nowadays and gets too much criticism for his loss to Pacquiao though he lost against the best p4p fighter now and was shot. I do agree that rivals should not be ranked in the same tier because they're rivals.
     
  14. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,176
    Sep 15, 2009
    Tier One

    Manny Pacquiao, Roy Jones Jr, Bernard Hopkins


    Tier Two

    Oscar De La Hoya, floyd mayweather jr, toney, morales


    Tier Three

    tzyu, lopez, norris, mab, shane and tito


    Tier Four

    Lewis, wlad


    Tier Five

    Jose Luis Castillo, Rafael Marquez, calzaghe, winky


    Ok tier 1 is the true elite, guys who wouldn't look out of place on a top 30 atg, their greatness is evident and their mix of resume, legacy and skillset puts them above the others imo.

    Tier 2 are guys just outside that top set for 1 reason or another. For example oscar has the resume but not the dominance. Floyd has too many gaps that are not necessarily all his fault but I wouldn't make him a clear favourite, toney had his dismal spell at lhw and if it wasn't for his legendary swansong at hw i'd argue against him being mentioned.

    Tier 3 guys who had a very good career across multiple weights or a great career in 1 weight.

    Tier 4

    These guys where dominant champions who cleaned house but they're competing with such great peers in their respective divisions they will find it difficult to stand out.

    Tier 5

    These are guys who look out of place imo. Just something about them makes me question their inclusion.

    Yeah calzaghe doesn't stand up to scrutiny, I mean he was champ for two defences and his best victory is over a 42 year old! The winner of s6 probably overtakes him at the division anyway.
     
  15. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    Calzaghe was not as dominant. During most of his time he didn´t fight the man who was ranked number one by ring magazine - Ottke. And even afterwards he wasn´t dominant. Kessler was there as his next big rival. And after they met he moved up, had big money fights and retired. Sorry, he was never the dominant smw champ his nuthuggers make him out to be. For most of the time he was just a beltholder and and only at the end he was the champ for a short while. Wlad in comparison is seen as the champ now for three years and the consensus best since more than 5. And he is very dominant, cleaning house beating everyone the Top10 has to offer, or the men who beat them - he even beat the man who beat his brother, Byrd - but Povetkin who avoids him. That´s better than what Calzahge did.
    You might say Calzaghe´s win over Hopkins helps him up there, well, I had him losing that one.

    I don´t hate Calzaghe. I liked him. A bit gutted that he didn´t make more of his talent but that´s how boxing sometimes goes. I don´t like his nuthuggers though. They are annoying.



    Nah, I think Floyd has excellent work done at 130/135 and he looked as good as anyone there. Above it´s getting thin but even there he had one or another good performance - Hatton, Mosley. He needs Pac to cement his legacy though. Desperatly.