Top 10 middleweights

Very good and fair rationale.

 

1. Harry Greb
2. Sugar Ray Robinson
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Marvelous Marvin Hagler
5. Stanley Ketchel
6. Mickey Walker
7. Jake LaMotta
8. D*ick Tiger
9. Charles Burley
10. Bernard Hopkins

Next 10 (rough order)Tiger Flowers, Marcel Cerdan, Tony Zale, Billy Conn, Tommy Ryan, Holman Williams, Mike Gibbons, Gene Fullmer, Emile Griffith, Joey Giardello

 

I guess my point is that he should be considered as a relevant topic for discussion in any division for which he could make the weight during a significant portion of his prime years. So, yes, he is a wildcard, but to me that is a reason to include him in several divisions rather than exclude him. I think this is particularly the case when we consider that he was never allowed to fight for a championship in any division. Thus, as a personal preference, I am content to limit the categorization of fighters like Ezzard Charles and Harry Greb to the divisions in which they won titles. In Langford's case, I am open to more speculation just because through no fault of his own, he was never given a chance at a world title. This is just my personal preference, just like yours is to consider Langford only as a heavyweight.

 

He fought for the Welterweight championship, and would have fought for the Lightweight championship, had he made the weight.

 

Somehow I missed or forgot that he fought for the welterweight championship. Somewhere in the back of my mind I remembered that he recorded a draw with Walcott, but I failed to connect that with a championship opportunity. Thanks.

I wonder how our discussions about Langford would have been differed and how the trajectory of his life and career would have changed if he had been granted the decision over Walcott, which he apparently deserved.

 

I understand Monzons top rating and saw most of his fights live but I saw his flaws also. Old man Griffith, past his best days and slow as molasses avoided almost all of Carlos punches in their first go (stopped when Emile got leg cramps in the 14th) and landed clear right leads throughout in the rematch just by timing. Not only do I think Ray would have done the same with far more power but I would easily take Emile in his prime over Carlos also.

 

Fair points. Despite my original post, I'm not blind to Monzon's shortcomings. For example, I don't really rate his performance against Napoles, where the smaller guy had him backing up and even holding until Napoles' eye gave out. I realise also that he could be a slow starter, a little vulnerable to speed. But even on those off days he kept finding a way to win. He might not have been the division's best fighter, but he was its greatest champion. And when he did get things clicking, he was pretty devastating to watch.

 

In this discussion Marcel Cerdan definitely is worth a mention. He only loss 4 x in 111 fights and yes he won the Title from a past a prime Man of Steel and lost a title to Raging Bull in his first defense but he was hampered by a dislocated shoulder and was heavy fav to win rematch before airplane tragedy. Had he won the title back he would have face Sugar Ray instead of La Motta.

 

Robinson beat LaMotta, Turpin, Olson , Fullmer, & Basilio to win the title.
Robinson lost the title to Turpin, Fullmer, Basilio, & Pender (SRR retired once after the Maxim fight, with Olson gaining the MW title).

 

Monzon made Benvenuti, Napoles, Griffith, Valdes, Briscoe - all great boxers- look ordinary.

Because Carlos was Extraordinary.

It's not Carlos' style, or physical attributes or tendencies that need adjustment. It's your "eye-test".

GOAT.

 

Hagler
Greb
Robinson
Jones
Walker
Monzon
Cerdan
Nunn
Ketchel
the talent drops off considerably below this and we are left with the Bernard Hopkins of the world

 

1 Monzon
2 Greb
3 Robinson
4 Hagler
5 Steele
6 Walker
7 Gibbons
8 Burley
9 Tiger
10 GGG
11 Giardello
12 Zale
13 Abrams
14 Hopkins
15 Soose