Greatest Fighter Ever ?

robinson and ezzard Charles isn't far off

 

Langford said Gans. Fitz said Gans. What we're looking at when we view the film of Gans-Nelson I is an extremely serious entity for this distinction at work, one who dropped the Durable Dane twice in the first 15 rounds, with one punch from each hand.

Blackburn, who competed against Gans, Greb and Langford said it was Sam.

Post WW I, the tide seems to have been turning a little from Robinson to Greb, as Harry has gotten increased scrutiny and reconsideration.

From WW II on, SRR seems to have a lock on it. This is somebody who would have had both the LW and WW Titles attained before Pearl Harbor even took place, given the chance, and he should have been the sport's four division champion.

Going from 1950 to the end of the classic championship round era, my personal choice is the Duran of DeJesus III, Palomino and Montreal.

Was no longer watching boxing after the championship round era ended, but for RJJ to go from 160 to a decision over Ruiz at HW was an impressive result, and got him as close to ATG P4P consideration as anybody from the 12 round era is ever likely to get. If he'd retired after Ruiz, there'd be some serious debate about that.

Overall, I typically lean towards Gans among Queensberry era greats. 45 round stamina, and he was utterly dominating Nelson in a situation where he could have produced a stoppage at will. [Today, that one likely would have been stopped in the 15th.]

 

No jones jnr in poll= fail poll

 

You can't vote for a fighter that you can't watch fight or not be able to determine abilities because of film quality. That being said I choose SRR. He could box like few others and could also ko a man with one punch.

 

I vacillate between Greb and Langford.

 

I'd like to have seem Duran on that list, because when he was "on" he was as good as any fighter who ever lacked up a pair of gloves and I still shake my head in amazement when I watch him fight Barkley, it just boggles the mind that a guy with so many disadvantages (age, size, reach, strength, height, power) could find a way to win that fight.

Anyway, Greb's who I voted for.

 

You cannot but I most certainly will.

 

I love all that you typed about Gans, Greb, Langford, and Robinson. Just wanted to throw that out there. Duran was magnificent in those two bouts but Ali, Monzon, Leonard had the same moments of brilliance. Anyway, I just wanted to say that.

I am surprized by that Roy Jones Jr. comment coming from you, even though because it is coming from you I know need to take that claim serious.

 

Got to be Robinson.

 

Greb

 

There can never be a Henry Armstrong again...Inhuman stamina had he...Funny, I saw Henry Armstrong fight twice, both in losing efforts. In 1943 my dad and I saw a faded Henry Armstrong lose a decision to a prime sensational Beau Jack at MSG...Beau younger, fresher outsped Henry...A couple months later a taller younger Ray Robinson
who idolized Armstrong decisioned Henry easily, never going all out and keeping a faded Armstrong at bay...a dullish fight, but not a boo in the MSG crowd out of respect to Henry...Armstrong was only 31 at the time, but after Zivic stopped him in 1941, Henry
was on the downside...But it is possible that Sir Fritzie Zivic, had the cruel inside style
to always give Armstrong trouble...
P.S. I always fantasized a featherweight fight between the young tremendous punching
Terry McGovern '[pre Corbett] and Henry Armstrong..? As a youngster reading old boxing magazines, almost all the writers chose Terrible Terry McGovern to defeat Armstrong at 126...What better fantasy fight then that one ?

 

Pryor vs Armstrong?

Nice post BTW,

 

I don't like the bloke but he is one of the greatest ever.how can anyone compare a fighter from the turn of the century to jones is beyond me.if every other sport improves why not boxing ?? in all probability jones would ko the like of Langford and ketchel in minutes

 

I think langford did enough to prove he could last 3 rounds with roy 'god' jones