Top 50 All Time Boxing Fan Favorites - SURVEY RESULTS FINISHED!

Very surprised to see how low Sugar Ray Leonard ended up especially when you see that the other 3 members of the 1980’s ‘Four kings’ all ended up in the top 5.

 

Mild surprise in seeing Walcott as high as he is, and while it's certainly no surprise to see Frazier represented well, #7 was an eye-popper.

Great job again Rummy! These are always fun.

 

What jumped out at me:

1. Wondering if people misunderstood the assignment. This wasn't about greatness (in terms of either standing relative to era, or number of elite prime scalps on the résumé, or transferable h2h value in a time machine) - it was about fan-faves. Anyone saying Harry Greb, of whom there's virtually no footage, is among their favorite boxers of all time? Yeah, they're full of **** on that front. I'm sorry, that just seems an utterly disingenuous pretense to me. Your favorite based on what - reading about him? May as well be a fictional character then, mayn't he? No contemporaneous firsthand written account is substitutable with nor equivalent to being able to watch someone compete (whether live, on a movie theater screen, or a pixellated internet stream - at least something visual). Maybe there's a few inches of 8mm reel of him out there in the attic of some jerkoff collector, but for all intents & purposes there is none 'out in the wild', accesible omnibus for global public consumpion. Ergo, he should be disqualified from inclusion on these lists, along with anybody else from pre-filmed eras. Now, before people get their knickerbockers in a twiddle - no, I'm not saying people couldn't be great fighters without film or video cameras both preexisting and being in use when they fought (and saved into posterity), but that greatness is simply never going to be verifiable in the same way or with as much granular certainty as those whom audiences can view in active competition so as to adjudicate. Nor am I ruling out that if you could time-travel and watch him from ringside, he or anybody else from his or prior eras couldn't well end up being your all-time favorite. They certainly are not able to be someone's "favorite" in the spirit in which this survey was meant, however. Your enjoyment of reading of his exploits can put him in the same company as Melankomas or Theagenes of Thasos, where he can be your favorite "historical boxer to read about" - but not with the Sugar Rays or Pacmen or Golden Boys. Apples with oranges. Just wanted to express my disappointment and dismay with the results being skewed by his inclusion, on several people's lists. That's a top 50 spot taken from somebody else that a soul alive has actually seen fight, which is a damn shame. I'm surely going to draw loads of flack on this point, and that's fine - people are going to surely quote me with their hackles raised and spit invective at me passionately defending their right to include whoever the hell they want for whatever reason...and yeah. It totally is your right to name Greb on this list...but it also is my right to feel you've kind of ruined the fun and integrity of the whole thing by doing so. You'll never convince me including him on this isn't ridiculous, and if you're just as likely to never be convinced of it not being ridiculous, well - enjoy, luvs. We don't have to all always agree. But we also don't have to keep mum when we think others are being silly and (whether or not they mean to) essentially trolling a serious endeavour...at least, a serious amount of effort undertaken by Rummy, undermined in no small part by a handful of cheeky hipster respondents conspiring to cook the books.
2. I am heartbroken and for a moment felt personally responsible for Hagler losing out to Durán. It very nearly is my fault and my burden alone to carry - but not quite, as it turns out. You see, Hagler is my favorite of all time - and that is a longtime known thing, not a knee-jerk recency bias response to him passing away this year. The first match I ever had my son (at 7) watch and score along to was Hagler vs. Leonard, and my alt when I got banned from here a year ago was literally in re: that very fight, and I have real-life sparring partners in common with Marv, and have sat and marveled (pardon the sly turn of phrase) at firsthand accounts of people that were part of his camp back when I was but a tyke or still a glimmer in my dad's eye in the 70's and 80's. He is my #1, albeit not a firm with-a-bullet number one, as I've made clear my top 6 basically constitute an interchangeable Mt. Rushmore of equal import. That means there's a 16% chance on a given day I'll list him in the highest spot. If I had happened to do so, per Rummy's tabulation rubric, then his points total would leap up per the weighted allocation system. As it is, I put him fourth, behind Izzy Vázquez, Cristian Mijares, and Mikkel Kessler - all of whom I adore, but none of whom made the overall top 50 in Rummy's survey, and any of whom I'd have gladly bumped down a spot to make room for Hag to seize the throne. 4th is good for 65 points, meaning that I deprived him of 35 by not having the foresight to list him first, given he was in the best position of my Rushmore quartet/sextet to actually contend for supremacy. 35 points added onto his 1923 puts him at 1958 - still thirty shy of Manos di Piedra's lofty 1988. Bitterly close, but there's still naught my reshuffling could have done to affect the outcome. Hat's off to Durán, even though he wasn't in my personal list (and given how many were left on the bubble causing me sore regrets, he mightn't even have made a top fifty list of my favorites either) - but I do see the fascination with him, and his astonishing C.V. and longevity, and his incredibly well-rounded abilities. I'd think him being something of a scumbag outside the ring would bar him from being hailed as the most celebrated, but, goes to show how deeply appreciative of his in-ring work everybody was for that respect to withstand any dings or demerits his personal behavior might cause to inspire reservations in us.
3. Was anybody else surprised, on the subject of "brilliant within the ropes, but kind of a schmuck without", that PBF of all people got so much love and placed so high in the Classic forum, of all places? Not meaning to cast aspersions that most in here aren't willing to be objective and give the devil his credit where due, but to my recollection he is almost never spoken of favorably in historical matchups on this section of the board and engenders nearly automatic over-compensatory underrating to adjust for the blind loyalty he gets from his legion of fans in the General (where he is already polarizing).

 

Disagree wholeheartedly with your first point. I don't see how it's the least bit disingenuous to consider one you've only read about to be your favorite. If it's a book or a magazine story or such that stimulates your interest, what difference does it make? How does that play into an attachment any less than seeing the actual fights?

I'm an example of this; Sanchez was my favorite fighter long before I saw him fight. Watching him in actual combat is great of course, but it didn't drive my preference. I can totally see then where the Greb voters are coming from.

 

You are correct, this was NOT about greatness. This was a list of favorites. You don't need to see a person to have them as a favorite - to suggest that makes no sense. It's like saying FDR can't be my favorite President because I wasn't alive when he presided. I can know enough about him from the public record and his accomplishments to make that choice. This was STRICTLY about favorites. I consider Roberto Duran and Muhammed Ali to be in the top 10 of all-time, but I did not include them because I'm not comfortable with them as human beings, therefore I tended not to root for them. That criteria could be considered right or wrong, but there was no list of rules or guidelines to follow when selecting our favorite fighters. If it was to be a list of current fighters - or boxers from only the respondents' lifetimes - the list would have been totally different for me - and possibly for others. But I don't think it is wrong for any person to make any selection. It was really all in fun anyhow. Please bear in mind that 60 participants does not make for an accurate poll of favorites. Not even close. This was done in fun. Heck, in a poll of thousands, perhaps Hagler would have finished higher than Duran.

Thanks to Rumsfeld for the project.

john

 

Welcome aboard John, post more!

 

I've got nothing against him but with how much the forum trashes Mayweather I was surprised he made the list. Seeing Greb on the list but not my #1 hurt a little bit inside. I thought the list ended up being really interesting and should introduce newer fans to some new boxers to watch (or read I guess)

Edit: Just to clarify, I've got nothing against people who voted for Greb.

 

Nice, thoughtful post. I beg to differ on a few points:

1. Is the idea that before the age of television, video and film being widely available (much less the internet) that no one had any favorites beyond their local club shows? My Pop’s favorite fighter coming up was Floyd Patterson and he’s told me in glowing detail how they used to crank up the car and sit (sometimes in the cold) and listen to his fights on the radio, long before he ever saw him fight. Does audio count … but written word not?

I myself was fascinated with Henry Armstrong long before I saw so much as a 5-second clip of him fighting. I came up at a time when there was televised boxing most weekends but I’d scour magazines to read about these exotic guys from lower weight classes or foreign lands long before I’d actually eyeball them (if I ever even did) — Eusebio Pedroza and Alexis Arguello and so many more. Or guys who predated me — I was a Willie Pastrano fan long before I saw him because I knew some boxing people that knew him and would tell me colorful stories from their time with him. (Kind of like your shared sparring partner stories on MMH.)

Now I personally, on my list, stayed within the lane of guys I most like to watch because that’s the best evidence I have to myself of who I like. I can say ‘oh I love me some Ruben Olivares’ but truth is I hardly ever watch him and when I do it’s usually because of who he’s fighting, and while I admire him I am much more likely to dial up a Jose Luis Ramirez video.

But I think it’s completely valid to say ‘my favorite fighter is John L. Sullivan because he fought in the days when you’d just go at it in the heat for 75 rounds if that’s what it took and blah blah bah’ if that’s how you feel.

If Rummy wanted to stipulate that your favorites had to be fighters with ample video/film, he’d have done so.

2. I think Marvelous Marvin got a recency bias bump due to his untimely death being proximate to this poll. Do it 2 years before or 2 years from now and he might not be as high as No. 2. Of course there’s no way to tell. I don’t think I have him on my list because while I admire his accomplishments and the fighter he was, he’s a guy I really never took to then or now as a real favorite to watch.

3. This goes to your point about Duran as well as PBF so I thought I’d address both here. I’ll split my thoughts into two sections:

A) You drew the line at Duran being a ‘scumbag’ when there’s Sonny Liston on the list? Not to mention how many people admire Carlos Monzon and fighters who’ve done things way worse than Duran. Lol. if we want an All-Choirboy Team, well, that’s a different kettle of fish. Some people can separate the artist from the art and admire the art — and even then for myself it’s kind of murky … some athletes and musicians and actors I can enjoy their work knowing they’re not good people, others for whatever reason I cannot separate it and refuse to watch or listen or acknowledge them in my life. I’d imagine you can look at your favorites across many spectrums and say the same.

B) You contradicted your first point here — this isn’t a list of who’s greatest all time, so people picking against Floyd in mythical matchups with ATGs has nothing to do with who’s their favorite. I’m certain there’s a ton of middleweights better than Frank Fletcher, in his day and all time, but Frank’s one of my favorite fighters to watch. I admire Mayweather’s artistry and while he is/was a tool and while I think Hearns and Robinson and some others beat him, that wouldn’t stop me putting him on my list if he cracked it (in my case he didn’t). So I really don’t get what you’re getting at here.

 

@Rumsfeld

I expected you to make a 1-2 minutes highlight video of each boxer and tell something about strengths, weaknesses, records, legacy...tell some stories etc. Sorry I based my expectations on the old videos. Thanks anyway for so many excellent videos!!! No offense, best wishes

 

I am, I did not expect Duran anywhere near the top 5.
I'm happy about Hagler though, he's one of my favorites.

 

Leonard was not as exciting to watch as the other 3, since he was more of an out-boxer. The others were more inclined to actually fight/brawl than him, and that is why.

 

I disagree with you and am on IntentionalButt's side. How on Earth can you say someone you've never seen fight is your favorite ?!?
That sounds incredibly stupid to me. This is supposed to be about how much enjoyment one gets from watching someone box, not about how much one might respect a boxer for his accomplishments.

 

I didn't notice that specific criteria in the instructions. In that case, you may as well just blow up my picks and redo the entire poll. The next time be sure to include "must have watched them and derived enjoyment from the experience' as a rule.

By the way, I have seen (on film) my number one pick, Joe Gans, so I guess he's okay.

john

 

That’s a good definition of favorite for you. That doesn’t stop other people from having favorites that they know/heard/read about.

Did people not have favorite boxers before film and video was widely available and fights were broadcast on TV and the internet and such?

 

Then their definition of favorites is a really weird one.

Yes, but some of them actually got to see their favorites fighting, or at least heard the fight broadcasted on a radio. And those of them who didn't get to see their favorites fight, would probably change their opinion had they had the chance to actually see them.
Choosing someone as your favorite, like it probably was in Grebb's case, just based on what others wrote 100 years ago, seems really stupid to me.