Top 5 (top 10) boxers with the best resume

He’s number 1 since Duran started his career.

 

Greb/Langford/Robinson/Armstrong/Duran/Fitzimmons/Charles/Ali/Louis/Pep/Gans/B.Leonard will be staples.

 

Mayweather isn't apart of it.

 

Great fighters rarely beat great fighters in their primes but it's moreso the calibre of fighters that proceeded him, their ring activity, who they beat, the sheer dominance of them at their best, the absence of PEDs, 15 rounds fighting, one recognised champion per weight class, fewer weight classes and less ability to either wait guys out or avoid the very best.

Would Floyd stand up under Robbi's, Greb's, Pep's etc. schedules? Would they match his record, given the same favourable home turf environment, schedule, access to IV drips that Floyd enjoyed etc? Greb's 1919, Robbi's 128 - 1 - 1, Pep's ability prior to the crash, even achievements after the crash would certainly suggest so.

 

Charles, Greb, Moore, Ambers, Pacquiao, Ike Williams, Robinson, to name a few. Floyd doesn’t belong in the conversation, no elite level opponents at their best

 

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Roberto Duran
4. Joe Gans
5. Harry Greb
6. Sam Langford
7. Joe Louis
8. Floyd Mayweather, Jr.
9. Willie Pep
10. Sugar Ray Robinson

 

Hello, ikrasevic.
(Pound for Pound is not really something I am good at, but I gave it a go.)
It is listed ALPHABETICALLY.
I corrected my flawed format.

 

Since you’re asking about résumé, almost all of the answers should be older fighters many from way before Muhammad Ali. The reason for that is simple. The great fighters fought more often and they fought each other more often. That’s how they made the money. So guys like Ezzard Charles, Harry Greb And Willie Pep will always rightfully be near the top of many lists.

It is why you cannot solely use résumé as a reason to pick the greatest fighters. You cannot reward or blame a fighter for the era they fought in. It’s really quite simple, if Manny Pacquiao was fighting 70 or 80 years ago, he might’ve had 200 fights and if Harry Greb was fighting now he might’ve had 40. That does not change how great they were, it just changes their résumé. That Is why choosing the greatest fighters is so tough and should be done based on how great they were within their own era.

As for my list, I will go with the following.

Harry Greb
Ezzard Charles
Ray Robinson
Willie Pep
Muhammad Ali

 

Logically, whilst you can't fault a fighter for fighting in their own era, you must discern elements of greatness when choosing which fighters deserve higher ranking amongst the greats.

A fighter's greatness in their era ranks them as amongst the best, if not the best, in their era, but amongst the greatest, if their skillset and era is not as great as fighters that came before them and/or after them, they have to rank lower than fighters who achieved as much, if not more, in a greater era, against a better calibre of opponent, in more demanding conditions.

Surely, in the latter, their greatness is more fire-tested, more qualified and therefore more substantial in assessing hierarchies of greatness?

 

You make some solid points.