The Top 100 Pound for Pound All-Time Greats

to be fair the first time I ever discussed mayweather with a poster you remind me greatly of (so I assume you have the same views as him :hey) the response I got was something along the lines of

"luf, no offence but nothing anyone ever says will convince me that Floyd belongs in a top 100"

you are like the immovable object on that front.

 

Stop ****ing quoting then!

I know you know who Young Corbett III was really; but "it is telling" that you hadn't considered him and did not remember when reminded. I had no problem with YC3, it's fairly obvious.

Yeah, Holman did well to beat a heavier Moore. But it was close. And Moore lost due to low blows. Then stopped Holman in a rematch. Like this is actually better than Ike going even with a #4-8 welterweight... You can keep mentioning Burley but you overrate him as it is. Would you like to see his record for comparison?


Jimmy Leto
Nate Bolden
Antonio Fernandez
Jack Chase (x3)
Aaron Wade (x3)
Joe Carter
Billy Smith (x2)
Bert Lytell

Billy Soose
Holman Williams (x3)
Archie Moore
Fritzie Zivic (x2)
Cocoa Kid

Those are the rated boxers I could find, equal to the lists I produced for Williams and Williams. Burley was considered one of the best of his day. But you still overrate him. And apparently I overrate Ike Williams, who is considered a top eight and sometimes top five in what is surely the deepest historical division.

Lloyd Marshall above Ike? Really? Do you not think it is you doing the overrating?

 

if it's a one off deduction that is in line with the rule set the fight is under (in that specific example that is the case) then I have to include it due to how explicit the rule is (whether is agree with the rule or not).

In the case of Mares v Agbeko the crossing point was the painfully obvious low blow that the ref began to count Agbeko for thus seeing a 4 point swing in scoring, times like that - as consistent as that - I consider the fight a no contest (makes me rethink Armstrong's Lw loss now, were the points really merited)

Mainly though (those two circumstances aside) we have a deduction that is based purely on the refs call such as Ottke v Reid and times like that I try to use my own judgement whilst reminding myself that the scoring will in reality be affected by that deduction hence changing potential strategies (maybe a fighter comes out swinging looking for a kd purely due to the deduction).

It's a difficult situation and 9 times out of 10 I reckon I take the deduction as that's the most realistic reflection on scoring. Would JMM and MAB played out the same had the kd been scored? I have no idea all I do know is it wasn't given, MAB then hit him whilst down and 10-8 became 8-10. So the usual way is I just take note and say something like "JMM deserved the victory on points, but were it not for the ref's decision it could have been all different". Give it an asterix so to speak.

I don't think I've made that very clear, which is fair enough because it's a murky case by case situation.

 

Manassa is seeming a bit childish and over personal here. It's like a part of him dies every time McGrain defends his position on ranking Holman above Ike.

Kind of reminds me of an article I read when Woods again beat Gonzalez by 8-4 type decision where it was basically said that no matter how often Gonzalez tries, he's gonna come up short and should look for a different avenue to the title. Manassa has thrown everything he has at McG but isn't willing to accept his position remains as was. Should really be time to move on.

I wasn't entirely thrilled when noone agreed with having the fab 4 in my toop 25 but I aint gonna go jump off a bridge over it. I feel Manassa needs to chill abit so I reckon we all agree with Moore being in the top 10 and that should pacify him a bit :good

 

Nope. Why would I?

A #4-8 lightweight making way for Holman Williams by four or five tiers. My gripe is that simple, but it evolved into then overrating some of the fighters he beat.

 

Okay then, I'm out of this. Won't reply anymore.

 

If it makes you feel any better, Moore is in my top 10 purely due to the research ya did on him, convinced me he belongs :good

 

****. I really am out of here before I get battered any further. But if you can't see the **** you're typing...

I'll be a lurker from now on.

 

I'll say Pacquiao is higher. More weight classes (which is one of Floyd's plus points as his ring record is horrible) better level of oppo' and while not as consistent he has the better wins and was seen as one of the very best for a long period of time.

Luf; I can just about see him in the 80-100 bracket, but that's because he does tick certain boxes, even if it's in a cynical, manufactured manner I can't outright change my criteria to spite him. He makes it.

 

Okay this seriously is my last post. Keyboard issues ([url]http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?p=14770833#post14770833[/url]) and I cant stand your constant ****.

You were talking about tiers and rated Holman in tier three. Yes, it happened. That was your initial thinking, and it was four or five tiers.

Bye

 

:good welcome to the dark side