Top 35 All Time reveal - Boxing Survey Series

I only see a few fights in 1937 that fit that description ... he was in the mid- to upper-160s by the next year. If split verdicts over Teddy Yarosz and Oscar Rankins are significant in his legacy at 160, I’d say that tells me all I need to know.

What do you see on his resume at or around 160 that makes you count him anywhere near the top middleweights of all time?

 

Wait, what? Teddy Yarosz was arguably the best Middleweight of the era. Certainly on the short list. You dismissing him in the same company as Oscar Rankins really tells all I need to know. Conn beat him 2/3. He also beat Fred Apostoli (another fighter on the short list for best Middleweight of the era) both times they met.

Add in Young Corbett III (among the best at Welter and Middle), Babe Risko (the bane of Yarosz), Vince Dundee, and Solly Krieger (who was more of a career Middle even if the fights took place well over the weight limit) and you’re looking at 6 fighters he beat that were among the very best of the time. 5 if you discount Krieger due to the weights. He beat most of them more than once.

He also beat a prime Tony Zale, but that was post-Louis when he was a full fledged Lt. Heavy and had 11 pounds on him.

 

I think we need to crowdfund a salary for @Rumsfeld so he can quit his job and do this forum full-time.

I promise not to steal all the money and spend it on hookers and blow.

 

I literally listed the three fights where Conn was 161 or 162, which is what you’re asking about. Look at at the question (from you) that I was responding to.

Why bring up the fights at 161/162 and then bring up all these other fights as if I slighted mentioning them when they have zero to do with the question I was answering? It’s like asking me about Henry Armstrong’s resume at featherweight and jumping up and down and screaming about the welterweight wins I left off. Sheesh.

As for the other fights you mention: Risko was at middle and Dundee was one of those slightly-over-the-limit bouts; but how do you make a case for a guy as an all-time middle by citing Apostoli (167 3/4) and Kreager (163) ... those are not by any stretch middleweight fights.

I mean it’s like you want to make a case for Marvin Hagler at lightweight by saying he beat Duran, or at welter because he beat Hearns and Duran.

Fact is, Billy never won a title at 160 and while he has a few nice wins he doesn’t have an ATG resume in the division.

 

LOL, wow, you went above and beyond. I asked if we were gonna quibble about exact weights between fighters who were career Middles. You then took my off hand mention of 161 or 162 pounds (which was basically to say “are we gonna argue over a few pounds or recognize that these fights were between natural Middles”) entirely literally and equated it to making a case for Hagler at Lightweight because he beat Duran.

Well done. You almost disguised the fact that you gave zero input on the actual fighters. Why, though? Because you can’t even spell their names correctly, much less discuss their standing in the context of the era? Didn’t respond to my point about Teddy Yarosz, either. He was one of the very best Middleweights of the era, and you dismissed him as some sort of second rater. Why do you believe that? Can you state your case? Can you tell me anything about him at all? Apart from his weight.

 

You said, and I quote:

“Before we begin, are we counting“ these less-than-a-handful of fights in Conn’s career was the question. My answer was if you think those few fights make him an ATG at middle, have at it. I wasn’t debating the quality of opposition, I was answering your question.

You call it an ‘offhand mention’ but it’s the entirety of the post I was replying to. If you had said, ‘Let’s debate the merits of the opponents in these few fights in his career,’ I would have answered differently.

Did I misspell Krieger’s name? Sorry, I work with a guy named Kreager and type it in emails several times a day. I guess that means I don’t know anything about boxing.

If you think Conn is an ATG middleweight, why don’t you make a case instead of asking questions and getting into a tizzy about getting a direct answer to them that doesn’t include something you apparently thought should have been implied.

Now riddle me this: Why did you include Apostoli in discussing Conn’s resume when Billy came in at 167 (and 167+change in the rematch)? How does that make any sense? And then you bring up Zale, lol?

You’re all over the place.

Yarosz (that’s the one I should have misspelled, haha) was indeed a very good middle. Haven’t ever seen him included on anyone’s ATG list. Maybe you have him right behind Conn and above Hagler and Monzon? I think Teddy even held a legit version of the 160 title for a weekend or so before dropping it.

Since you brought it up, where do you rank Risko all-time? I mean if Conn beating Yarosz makes him an ATG at middle surely the Babe is up there too?

 

Bro, you were the one who turned it into a “tizzy” with your response. I then responded to you in kind.

I mentioned Apostoli because he was a career Middleweight. Up to that point so was Conn considered one, and both men were closer to Middleweight than Lt. Heavy. Conn was outgrowing the division by then and moved up full time from there. Call it a Lt. Heavy fight then. I’m sure it technically was classed as one. Same with Zale, which I clearly pointed out upon first mentioning him.

I don’t know where I’d rate Risko. Not in the same class as either Conn or Yarosz, though.

I also already said in another post that I get it if people rate Conn more in a pound for pound sense than at any particular weight class because his career was so spread out. I just disagree.

He beat several of the best fighters of his era at both Middle and Lt. Heavy, often multiple times. He was plenty proven at both weights against the best. Would having a bunch of other fights at either weight against lower level guys help his case? I don’t think so, but others seem to. Otherwise how do Spinks and Foster rate as highly as they do despite few top tier wins? I won’t even get into Roy Jones.

 

Also, I’ll leave this. This was considered a Middleweight contest despite the fact that Conn weighed over 165 and Krieger weighed 163. There are several like this, and others which are labeled as divisionless. For what it’s worth the Apostoli bouts were indeed considered Lt. Heavy. So it would seem there was a cut-off point.

https://boxrec.com/en/event/11542/17489

 

Can’t wait to see all the holes people pick in the HW list, no doubt that will be fun

 

Interestingly enough, Conn was never once ranked as a MW at the end of the year.

He was ranked as a LHW and/or a HW from 1937 to 1945 (obvs the war was in between these years)

I don't know if he was ever ranked monthly as a MW (hhascup would have the answer, he's a legendary historian who used to post on here). From what I can gather, though, Conn was never considered a MW, just a small LHW.

 

This content is protected

 

Yeah I’d like to see @Bujia make his case for Conn as an all-timer at 160.

Top 3? Top 5? Top 10? I don’t think he rates in the top 30 or maybe 50 based on resume.

Odd place to plant a flag, but I’d like to see where he thinks he belongs.

Conn was good. Conn was not, IMO, great. His greatest thing was being narrowly ahead of Joe Louis in a fight where he got knocked out. That doesn’t make you an ATG in my book.

 

You know nothing about any of these fighters. You don’t even hide that fact. I’ve already explained my position pretty clearly in stand alone posts, but you’re one of those that can’t see the forest for the trees. Or rather you choose not to. You focus on one or two things to over analyze, dismiss everything else, and intentionally provoke so the discussion has no chance of being productive.

My fault for chomping at the hook, though.

 

All this because you asked a question about if fights at 161 and 162 pounds counted as middleweight and I answered it literally rather than give you a dissertation on each guy you mentioned (which, I point out, you also failed to do).

Your position is absolutely not clear, but you can make it so:

Where do you rank Billy Conn all-time at middleweight? Or do you just want to debate how other people didn’t rank him without telling us how you feel?

I don’t think I’d have him in my top 30 at that weight, frankly, but I’ve never done a list that deep. Just don’t see it. As pointed out by @lufcrazy he was never ranked at middleweight in a year-end ranking and there’s no indication so far that he was EVER ranked at that weight during his lifetime, so even his contemporaries didn’t think much of him at 160.

But please enlighten us about how high he should be on the all-time list. I’m guessing you don’t have the minerals to expose yourself.