Top 100 ATG - (My Personal List)

I guess it depends on what criteria you put the great emphasis on.

Of course Mike has a very clear edge in a p4p sense being a 3 division champ, but its harsh on a heavyweight to put to much importance on p4p achievements because obviously they got no where to go from heavyweight.

Mike was champ for longer seeing as though Sonny only had a short reign.

Sonny's non-title record is very solid, people often overlook that.

What splits them for me is that I think McCallum is just the better more skilled fighter on film, he has the deeper resume and the greater longevity as a champ and top contender.

 

This content is protected

How you have the nerve to be so arrogant astounds me!!!!?

You think a man who had been comprehensively laughed out of town for placing the great WILLIAM JOPPY at 143rd in his top 200 ahead of Erik Morales and Azumah Nelson would be very very careful about commenting on other peoples' knowledge and lists - but apparently not!!!!!!

As I have told you again and again, I do not believe Jack, Montgomery or Jefferies merit a place in a top 100. I cannot find enough information and sources on George Dixon to be able to make a serious and definitive judgement on his career, and to be honest, I don't believe you can either. You are including Dixon in a list because you don't want to be seen to exclude him in case anyone thinks it is a hole in your vast knowledge lol, but the information on Dixon in existence is scant, and you don't strike me as a true historian who could have researched enough on him to be able to make a proper assessment. Because historians don't rate Joppy's!! :good

 

I did not include him because I do not believe he merits a place in an all-time top 100.

 

Just had a mad thought whilst going through this list. imgaine if there was a way we could have got all these great fighters to have a pound for pound competition..... obviously wishful thinking

 

No Jim Driscoll, no Jim Jeffries, no George Dixon.
Oh well perhaps you list is the best of the last 25 years type list, DINAMITA.

My list was put together after the Hopkins/Calzaghe bout, i could not believe the disrespect towards Calzaghe on this site at that time,particularly from you DINAMITA, so i created a list to show some of the doughnuts, on this forum, look this is where Calzaghe stands on an all time list, it had to be a top 200 because at the time, some people were saying he would not make their top 100 {fair enough}, i figured that even the most biased of posters would be hard pressed not to have him in a top 200, that would be enough to make some doughnuts stop and think top 200 all time 'he must be good', and give the boxer some overdue respect.
If i had done a bona-fide list i would have ended up with lots of old boxers that most of the people that i was targeting would not have heard of and i would have had virtually no responce, so i needed a list with the best of the current crop on {Joppy,Hatton etc}as well as the all time greats to stimulate conversation, interest and debate.

Your bona fide list on the other hand, was not designed to stimulate conversation, it was your attempt at a serious list and if you think that Dixon,Jeffries and Driscoll dont belong on your list, that is fine, but be aware that most experts would have those boxers on their list.
The Intenational Boxing Research Organization rank George Dixon as a top 30 p4p ATG, Jim Jeffries as #7 all time heavyweight and Jim Driscoll as #9 all time featherweight. {and their lists are only a few years old}

 

Yes, with Langford and Greb in the top 4 it certainly does have the appearance of a best of the last 25 years list. atsch

- You wanted Calzaghe to get his due after the Hopkins fight.

In order to achieve this, you did NOT...

- Make a thread in the immediate aftermath of the bout calling for people to give Calzaghe his due.

- Make a thread at any point calling for people to give Calzaghe his due.

- Make a thread specifically about the Hopkins v Calzaghe bout.


Instead, what you are claiming you did, is...

- Wait for the best part of a year and then write an entire top 200 list placing Calzaghe at a pretty nondescript and acceptable 86th place...



THE MOST BLATANT AND WOEFUL LIE I HAVE EVER READ ON THIS WEBSITE.

This content is protected

The best of the current crop..... atsch

Yes, you are an expert it seems......

Yawn. As usual, you crave validation by making your own lists like others. I don't. For me, there is absolutely no way that Jim Jeffries in the 7th best hw ever - and because someone else thinks so does not mean I will automatically change my mind.

Most boxing experts would lampoon your laughable overratings of guys like Dempsey and Johnson. If you ask guys like McGrain and Sweet Pea, they will back my placing of them and be at odds with your own.

 

There's actually a ton of information on Dixon available online nowadays, my friend, and if someone was to take the time, one could do some extensive research on the fighter even via the free newspaper sites that are available to us (Brooklyn Eagle, Chronicling America, etc.).

 

Sonny's over-rated. Of course the guy could box & punch, but his resume is over-rated. Wins over a natural 175 in Floyd Patterson, very good wins though, and a couple over decent contenders like Eddie Machen, Cleveland Williams, Nino Valdes & Zora Folley isn't enough for me to rank him over McCallum. His title reign is one that is short and weak.

McCallum was a superb fighter and ranks highly P4P because he achieved success over a number of weight classes, champion at light-middle, middle and then incredibly light-heavyweight. Wins over Julius Jackson, Donald Curry, Milton McCrory, Michael Watson, Steve Collins, Herol Graham, Sumbu Makalamby, a draw with James Toney, great resume.

 

Brilliant post :happy

McCallum is often a bit underrated because he lacked the 'glamour' of other big 80s fighters. But he was absolutely magnificent. Cracking resume, great skillset, one of the very very best fighters of the last 25 years.

 

Are you referring to primary sources? To be honest mate, although they may be very very interesting reading, I don't see how they would be a basis for a definitive assessment of a fighter's career and greatness. Reports by the white media lacking in details/stats from over a century ago would make great reading, but I'm not ready to make a judgement on a man on that basis, and give him a specific placing in a list. Just my opinion.