The Top 100 Pound for Pound All-Time Greats

Definitely - it makes Jack a lock for the top 150 IMO.

This crew of fighters - they all beat hell out of each other. I'm interested in the ones that distinguinsed them from one another. Jack never did this in anything like the way Zivic did for me.

And, as I've said, even Joyce nudged out in front of him by dominating Ike.

Right now Jack would be behind Mandell on the list for re-introduction.

 

Final ruling:

Jack is out. Sorry fellas.

 

Everybody knew where he was gonig to be, approximately. You yourself turbo said, "can he be #100?" He didn't make it. He's either #102 or #103 currently. Joyce was the surprise (for me anyway). Someone had to miss out i'm afraid.

 

Making the call wasn't easy, and it surprised me, but allowing that i'm not re-opening it to deabte, youse deserve to hear my logic.

These lightweights were an absolute murderer's row of beasts and *******s. All of them were pushing for a place at the bottom of the list and seperating them was very difficult. Jack is the natural choice but you yourself tried to argue Jack based upon his victories over Zivic - who is on the list.

But Zivic is grasping at the 90's based upon wins over a near-prime Armstrong (4), Charley Burley (21), LaMotta (83). The list itself is generating gravity.

Overall, Jack has the argument for the better resume, but did he distinguish himself from that pack in accordance with this list? Not really, and certainly not to the same degree as Joyce. Ike (42 I think off the top of my head) and Joyce met in their primes and Joyce waxed him 3-1. He dropped him. He outfought him. These guys don't really carry style advantages against one-another, it is more attribute-advantages. Joyce just wouldn't ****ing go away. He got dropped for two and got up and dropped Williams. Unreakable type ****. He was fast as ****; but he didn't run.

In March of '45 he beat Ike clear, no card gave Ike more than three rounds. In '43 he split a pair with Armstrong. In June of '46 he got to old Armstrong before Jack and beat a guy who hadn't lost in 12 (wins included Zivic and Ramirez). Close fight - Armstrong could and some should have won it. But give him his due. Give this man his due.

And i'm not saying Jack was **** and overated. I'm saying he was as great as you say he was. I'm saying Joyce gets the shitstick and deserves more. Here, he's ranked a handful of spots against a guy that beat him same as Frazier is over Foreman. He's good for it, i'll vouch for him.


I'll get to Fitz/Charles later we'll get a proper look. I'm coming from a place where I consider Fitz better but the Charles action on this list is crazy indeed.

 

Having said all that i'm looking now at Chang and how he compares to Jack and Mandell /switching Foreman and Chang.

 

Cocoa Kid lost 56 fights. I'm not even sure he has a clean year. Booker>CK.

 

Honesty now: when you look you say "yeah he deserves that spot."?