The Top 100 Pound for Pound All-Time Greats

See? This is why I seek council with you.

 

I'd rate Patterson above Wlad on a P4P list just because of the Moore win.

 

News to me.

We're talking P4P anyway. So yes, one or two HW spots can mean a world of difference in such context. Sorry.

Why else is Langford so lowly rated as a HW, yet is ranked as the GOAT in some posters mind.

If you're asking me who the greater fighter is regardless of weight and believe it is Wladimir. Well, I'm not sure what to tell you.

 

Pattersons achievements below heavy are...well, there aren't any really.

Both Wlad and Patterson have their rankable achievements at heavy. And I agree it could go either way (both are 180-200 material at best IMO)

 

I'd rate kalambay , benn and eubank over wlad

 

Then what the **** are you disagreeing with.

 

Nah.

 

Wlad's 200 at best

 

I wasn't counting, I thought we were past that already, hence my guesstimate.

 

Patterson may not have been better at 175.It could have been a similar situation as Ellis circa 160.

 

I just think Patterson was clearly a better fighter. That doesn't mean he was necessarily a better HW. I understand how these seems confusing on the surface considering most of what Patterson did at HW. But Patterson was basically Cus's vision of a HW champion. I can only imagine how great he could have been at LHW had they not try to build him up and throw him for HW contention. I can see why they did it. There was a huge gap after Marciano for the taking.

It's pretty simple. I don't take P4P into much context when talking about HW. Wlad has the record, but his best wins are over good smaller man (Byrd, Haye, & Chambers). These guys are HW and I treat it as such but when we're now talking P4P that matters. Wlad has far too many deficiencies, and is a bit too limited and not versatile enough for me to rank him above someone as great as Patterson was as a fighter.