Ranking on the eye test.

Ezzard Charles
Jung-Koo Chang
Luis Manuel Rodriguez

Are three less obvious names I think deserve a mention here for sure

 

Many fans call Cal-Lacy a modern masterpiece.

 

Armstrong is up there, see Armstrong vs Ross. He's a mini Joe Frazier without having to worry about heavyweight power.

But of course the correct answer, which is too mainstream and modern for most, is Roy Jones Jr

 

Charles vs valentino 1949
charles vs marshall 1946


pep vs walton 1945
pep vs famechon
pep vs saddler

 

I am not so sure that Ali vs Foreman should be used to justify Ali's greatness on film. He does so much technically wrong there, and if that was the only fight you had to go on, i dont think you would rate either fighter that highly.

Ali Liston, i think was probably Ali's best filmed performance. Outclassing and all time great fighter, Blinding speed and offence. I think this is as good a performance as anyone has ever put on, if you assume Liston was as good as we (mostly) all think he was.

 

AS for one that i havent seen yet, how about Gene Tunney, he is technically very good on film, particularly in the dempsey series where he showed every characteristic needed to be classified as a great, even if Dempsey was obviously past prime.

 

1. Robinson
2. Jones
3. Duran
4. Armstrong
5. Ali
6. Pep
7. Whitaker
8. Leonard
9. Hearns
10. Hagler

If it is the eye test then it's the eye-test based on the fighter's best, not worst of days. Otherwise you're factoring record in inadvertent. Really trying to split the criteria apart is tough because it's really rarely mutually exclusive. Hard to split Pep & Ali.

 

The Eye Test is bogus, man-loving tripe.

I test on effectiveness, W's...

That said, Tony Tubbs had some dandy, subtle hips.

 

Oh we're doing our own list not ranking yours. Um, yeah well I'd definitely have Charles up there on the list near Ali & Tyson. I'd bump Hagler off for maybe Tyson.

I had an all shitty list where I did what you're talking about. Can't remember where it is or what I had.

Agree with Seamus too. The eye-test is a very tricky thing. Like the super religious girl gone slut. It's just very complicated.

*Edit* Burley does well on the eye test too.

 

Holyfield.

Mayweather for sure.


Lots of fighters look about as good as it's possible to look. imo.

 

Ricardo Lopez.

He just never seemed to make a single mistake, let alone multiple mistakes the way most guys do over the course of a bout. Add to that, he probably left the smallest window of opportunity for opponents I've seen. He simply gave away nothing.

 

If I was ranking on visuals then Chang, Marcel, Tyson LMR & Kalambay would make my top ten. Roy Jones Vs Toney too.

And probably Saldivar Vs Sugar Ramos too.

 

I actually think Floyd doesn't look all that impressive against all his best opponents, except Corrales. And I don't rate Corrales.

Castillo II, Judah, Oscar and Cotto; if I was taking Floyd against his best opponents he likely wouldn't make a top '100 fighters on film' list.