Top 55 Fighters, All Time

Where's Calzaghe? HATER!!



Kidding. Good list.

 

I usually have Ricardo Lopez ranked a bit higher. It's hard as hell to do what you're doing. Excellent job IMO.

Out of curiosity, why Langford over Robinson, Armstrong, and Greb?

 

Good list...obviously on our previous convos we differ on many...but I dont have any HUGE problems (Hopkins much too low, Ali, Holyfield, Hagler as well...I dont think Ryan makes it but Im not gonna argue him there...). I think its that you lend more on the earlier times of boxing, whereas I feel the game has changed so much....well you know.

But it is a really good list...

 

Is Lopez a victim of his weight class? Would he be higher had he beaten Carbajal?

I find that I may overrate fighters than I believe are the GOAT at their particular weight class. Lopez doesn't have a deep weight class, but I believe he makes up for it by standing head and shoulders over it.

 

Hard to ever question Greb anywhere from #1 to #5 on any list. His resume is too deep.

 

I personally think Fitz is a bit high, but no real quarrels there, just differing opinions. I've also never been high on Ketchell, as i can at least understand why Fitz would rank high. I don't get why Barbados Joe is so underrated while guys like Fitz and Langford are rated so highly, considering he was the smallest of the bunch, fought the best from Gans to Langford to the best Heavyweights like Choynski, as well as fighters like Mysterious Billy Smith, all while being just a 5'1 Welterweight. Incredible fighter for his era.

As far as guy like George Dixon, he's an enigma for me to rank, given his record, but also given the fact that he was considered such a brilliant fighter, and one who was robbed so often, and took the dive so often, according to reports. And those reports were back by the white media.

I don't think Floyd should rank above Arguello at all, or someone like Carlos Ortiz to be honest. I rank Ortiz around #25 as it is.

Overall though, very good effort.

 

He doesn't rank Walker or Greb higher than Robinson, but all have a case for ranking higher on a P4P list than Ali, and Greb has a case for ranking above Robinson to be quite honest.

The top 4 consensus the way I see it should be Robinson, Greb, Armstrong, and Langford, in whichever order.

 

I don't take anyone's list with such a large quantity of fighters too seriously. Never have done. Can anyone honestly put a hand on their heart and give fighters certain placements one after another and say "he was defintely better" as the list goes upwards? I don't think so.

It's very hard to go against old timers when it comes to the top 20 especially. But they get too much credit IMO. Mainly because how often they were fighting more than anything else. Some do have great resumes, but many modern greats have also fought stern opposition.


Willie Pep. A truely great fighter, perhaps the greatest defensive fighter of all-time. Personally I think Whitaker was better. He had over 200 fights. How many of those were credible opponents? Saddler, Agnott, Wright, and some others, but not many.

Fighters like Hopkins and Mayweather are as good as any of the old timers when it comes to skills. The old timers never done it any better. Only some did.