Just to clarify in case it was not clear (and this goes for @Big Ukrainian too) - this is an all-or-none type of thing. Meaning, I am only accepting submissions that include 9 lists (the original 8 + a All Time). The reason I want to do it that way is because I would like a constant sample size throughout. If you are both still interested, the deadline is still over 2 weeks away, and you can feel free to edit your lists up until the moment I (temporarily) close the thread at the deadline. If you are not interested in doing 9, no hard feelings. And no pressure.
1) Where do you see concrete criticism? 2) Did you ever think that I might know about particular divisions (like many here)? 3) Have I done something to offend you? If you took my words like reproach, it was just note.
I can’t speak for luf personally but it appears he was saying let your voice be heard and the best way to do that is by submitting your lists. It definitely wasn’t malicious in any way. Also if you don’t think you can submit the lists for one reason or another, don’t stop critiquing our lists. New perspectives, fresh insights and constructive criticism will only lead to better lists on the whole
The omission of Ebihara from a Flyweight list. Something you could rectify by doing a flyweight list and putting Ebihara in it. I certainly wasn't offended, I've said similar to a few posters because I want as many as possible taking part.
[QUOTE = "lufcrazy, post: 20547547, member: 44674"] Отсутствие Ebihara в списке Flyweight. Что-то, что вы могли бы исправить, составив список в полусреднем весе и добавив в него Эбихару. Я, конечно, не обиделся, я сказал, что похож на несколько плакатов, потому что я хочу, чтобы как можно больше людей приняли участие. [/ QUOTE] Now I get it. So far all I've done is some asian lists. Dont want to get sloppy and miss something
I feel the same way when I see Saldivar excluded from a feather list...shoot, I tear up when he is listed outside of the top 5 lol
I recently moved to Bangor Maine, and in looking up best boxers from Maine, Jack McAuliffe name came up. Now I wouldn’t call him a boxer from Maine personally, but I noticed a few things. He was/is considered one of the best lightweights ever, but is not on my list or some others. 2 it says he was the “first” undefeated champion (I believe upon retirement and not capturing the championship itself), does anyone know if this is true? https://www.albany.edu/arce/Mcauliffe7.html#navPanel so @lufcrazy @McGrain @BitPlayerVesti @Rumsfeld or anyone else? Can you confirm any of that and can you tell me about him and why he should be considered top 15. I ask this out of sincerity, desiring to know more about him not to criticize that he is listed. This is admittedly a time frame I don’t know as well as some others. Thanks
He was the best LW in the world for 8 years, that alone puts him in very limited company. The biggest criticism imo is he arguably got a gift against Griffo. But ultimately if you aren't using H2H as a criteria (imo that should be a separate list, but each to their own) I can't think of a single justification for not having him in the top 15. I mean to be absolutely honest your question is backward. He's the original ATG. When he retired the LW ATG list was him and him alone. The question is not, why does he deserve to be too 15, the question is why do others deserve to have overtaken him.
Thanks, I don’t factor imaginary hypothetical H2H’s in ratings so I did not overlook him out of that or any other factor outside of ignorance of him and the era. So I overlooked him based on lack of knowledge of him, and desiring to know more and of how to evaluate his era and him as well. So thanks for the feedback and if you can add anymore about what sets him apart/above others on the list. I see you have him 5th McGrain has him 13th, and didn’t scroll any further to see if others include him and/or where. 5-13 is pretty broad, as is 13 to unlisted. So anyone that can help me understand more and/or why he deserves consideration would be immensely helpful to me.
He was a boxing genius that had a bit of a strange career. He seems to have been favoured by local decisions more than once. "Favoured by local decisions" means something different in those days though, for example, in his insane fight with Jem Carney, only one fighter wanted to continue after the ring collapsed and that was Carney - but as per Jack's preference the fight was stopped and a draw rendered. I think probably Jack was starting to struggle there. But if you subscribe to the great man of history theory be probably did as much to move boxing technique along as anyone. As admired for his generalship as anyone I can think of and it probably meant a little more then than it does now. Borderline for the ten. I have him at thirteen. As I say, if you want to put him higher than that you need to either fancy great man of history or pioneer arguments. That's IMO. I tend to extended him the benefit of the doubt for much of his luck. After all he was fighting in barns and blacksmiths in front of dozens, not air conditioned arenas in front of millions.
can you tell me why you rate him above Packy McFarland for example? Not criticizing again trying to understand what factors set him into the top 15 and/or above.
Absolutely agree, I think Saldivar obviously Top 7 feather. Very dominant champ with super quality opposition