In my opinion his first fight against Louis is the single greatest performance in the history of the ring. Can he be rated above Sugar Ray Robinson?
Well then, you have answered your own question... If you wanted to, you could have Eric Crumble as your number one. And in a era, where it seems everybody's opinion counts as much as anyone else; and it is a case of who shouts the loudest, wins, you could if you spin it right get your opinion accepted...
People have Charles in the top 5. Conn was at least every bit as good as them. All you English clowns rate Chris Eubank and Joe Calzaghe as 2 of the greats of the modern era which is ridiculous.
Hello Smitty. Conn is magical and you can make a case for his being ranked very very high, but #1 is to far up the rung. Nor can you make the case upon one performance in general. But keep digging. Conn is a beast. He only gets better the more you look, something that is true of only Fitz, Langford and Greb of the confirmed greats.
I can't see the logic in rating a fighter based on a loss. You could make a case for him being high, but not #1. Not close to #1.
The double standards on this forum are a joke. Just like the underating of Dempsey and overating of guys like Fitz (though still a great fighter) I think most people here have never even been in a ring before.
ABSOLUTELY NOT. The greats of all time have SEVERAL great performances against SEVERAL other potential greats. The GREATEST fighters are the ones who prevent other great fighters from being able to claim the no 1 spot. that is why the robinsons, and ali's typically get on that list of candidates. Conn allowed louis to say "you can run but you cant hide" and further solidify his greatness with a comeback win from the jaws of defeat, something all time greats do.