Problem with rating Canelo in the top 5 is he's only had 5 fights, and between the 5 of them at 168, only Smith (Groves) had a good win at the weight.
Including Canelo is probably due to baked in potential. There is no-one out there currently at the weight to challenge him, if there was then he would surely fight them and not have to look at the heavier weights for challenges.
Why do you rate Eubank ahead of Collins, who beat him TWICE? Don't say "Eubank was old" because age 27 is not old for a fighter. Collins is very underrated, Eubank is very overrated by some.
How many of those guys have ever been Undisputed? None of them. Canelo did what none of these guys could do all in less than a YEAR! Beating 3 Previously Unbeaten Title Holders in the process, one by complete 12 round domination and two by KO. Based on that alone, there's never been a more dominant or accomplished Super Middleweight in History than Canelo. Roy was dominant at SMW, but he never beat 3 Undefeated SMW Title Holders one after the other like Canelo did. Calslappy never did what Canelo accomplished. Based on accomplishments, you'd have to put Canelo #1. There's plenty of reasons to put guys like Ward, RJJ or Calzaghe ahead of Canelo, in terms of longevity, # of title defenses, etc. But in terms of accomplishments, you can't be better than Undisputed, and in terms of dominance, you can't be better than beatng 3 undefeated title holders one by one each in dominating or spectacular KO fashion. So it really depends what your criteria is, which each would have be a different list. (accomplishments, level of dominance, longevity, who was the most difficult to beat at SMW, etc)
Based on accomplishments Joe Calzaghe Arthur Abraham Chris Eubank Lucian Bute Sven Ottke Based on talent at the weight class Roy Jones Jr, Andre Ward Joe Calzaghe Chris Eubank Saul Alvarez
Easy enough to do that in a ghost division when you are the diva a-side "face of boxing". Look at Canelo's best wins @168:- 1. Saunders - career 160lber who was gifted the 168 belt against Ishufi. Exactly! 2. Plant - best win was Uzcat and looked like dog**** in his previous outing against Truax 3. Smith - was a walking cadaver at 168 and only has any kind of moolah there due to beating a one armed Groves. Only got the gig against Canelo by corruption as Ryder was jobbed This is Canelo's resume at 168? None of these names are even fit to lace the boots of Eubank, Benn, Collins or even Franie Liles, let along Zaggers or Ward. Also suspect is why did Canelo not aim for undisputed @160 first, given it's the more marquee division?
The question was about greatest smw, and I rate the greatest based on overall resume Eubank at SMW had beaten Holmes Undefeated relinquished ibf champ Rocchigiani Wharton Watson Drew with prime WBC champ Benn Future champ Malinga Thornton To name a few. Made something like 14 defenses at smw It's overall. I don't rate Buster Douglas overall above Tyson even though he beat him Never said Eubank was old. I have dismissed that so many times to people when Calzaghe beat him. He was no different in age to Alvarez and Saunders when they fought. Younger even I think Back to the answer it's about overall at the weight imo when someone says greatest at the weight and when looking at all the top smws Eubank faced with title defences there is only a couple I could put higher I try and rate based on actual resume and facts rather than bias opinion
Does nobody recall Chong Pal Park? A good smw and I believe was undisputed at one point I am surprised that people would put some of their choices above him This is where I think outside of easily calling the top 3 on resume of Calzaghe, Ottke and Eubank, it is difficult from 4 onwards
Based on accomplishments and you have Arthur Abraham in there who was dominanet at MW not SMW/ Froch also has to be in that list.
Good list I think just below that would be Eubank or Collins. Canelo should not be considered as has only had a few fights at that weight in a very weak era. none of those wins were against even HOF worthy fighters.