Top 100 welterweights according to Goldman

I disagree with the ratings of Hearns, Benitez, McLarnin, Rodriguez, Gibbons, Graham - all too high.

I also disagree with the rating of Ryan and Basilio - both too low

 

I generally like Goldman, but Indrisano ,Holdberg,but no Walker or Armstrong ? Very strange criteria used here,imo!

 

McLarin is #7

 

Odd ratings--I would wonder at his criteria.

Questions that occured to me:

1. Graham over Gavilan?

2. Where are Mickey Walker and Henry Armstrong?

3. If Eddie Perkins, why not Duilio Loi?

4. Jimmy Doyle and Chuck Davey? Was Davey better than Bobby Dobbs or Doyle better than Bernard Ducusen?

5. What about Marty Servo? He gave a young Robinson his toughest fights at welterweight.

I would personally rate Young Corbett III and Lou Brouillard higher than he does.

I have no problem with Hearns being in the top five.

All in all, not that impressive a performance, with the ignoring of Walker and Armstrong, as well as Kid McCoy, rather hard to fathom.

 

Is Felix Trinidad not in that list? Please tell me i missed something.

 

As I said in an earlier post, that list is from the early 90s. It was before Tito was proven.

 

Sorry i just realised what i posted. My bad.

 

Also, why Whitaker isn't it also. Benitez at 5:shock:

 

I pretty much checked out mentally early on in this list but I think Gavilan is too low and Benitez is too high for starters. I don't see Benitez above Griffith. Sounds like there are some atrocities further down the list.

 

I sent Herb Goldman an E-Mail about those ratings and here's what he wrote back:

Hank:

Of course I remember you! I submitted a list of new electors to Ed Brophy, but don’t know how many he added—if any! Will investigate.

Regarding those lists: I ranked each man in only one division, and had already rated Burley as a middle. I ranked Armstrong and Ross at lightweight.

Believe I ranked McLarnin. Please check the list again, although someone told me I left Mario D’Agata off the bantamweight rankings.

Re: Basilio. He split three fights with Graham. Billy had a better winning percentage, though he never fought Ray Robinson. Carmen was an exciting fighter, and has a certain “magic aura” through being a “Golden Age of Boxing on TV” performer. But I quote Paul Pender: “He fought with his face. After awhile, you’d tire yourself out by punching his face.” I favor the boxer, while conceding that Basilio had “guts to burn.” Carmen would be remembered as simply a better-than-average welterweight champion were it not for the two fights with Robinson, who was way over the hill at the time.

My perspectives have changed since I made those all-time top 100 rankings, and could do far better jobs now. Should have ranked Burley as a welter; also Gustave Roth, whom I ranked as a light heavy! (Roth, at welterweight, would rate quite high.)

Have never gone for the idea that the old-timers would have buried the moderns. Can you imagine Joe Walcott squaring off against Thomas Hearns. Talk about Mutt and Jeff! Joe would have been demolished by the first good hook—a la Tiger going out against Bob Foster.

Good to hear from you.

--Herb. G.

This content is protected

 

thanks for tat hhascup

always nice to hear from the man who made the list and his explanation and reasons for each amn

 

This is a ridiculous list. If I didn't know who this person was I would think he was a casual fan who only knows that somebody named Sugar was a great, and so puts the too most recognizable Sugars on top. Gavilan is way too low. Leonard is way too high. Where is Armstrong? Where is Ross? Benitez above Griffith? Benitez won a split decision over Palomino, a fighter who defended the world title several times. Palomino is ranked, what, 37, it looks like? And where is Duran? He beat the crap out of both Palomino and Leonard. It's the list of an apparently clueless person.

 

He is wrong about Carman, He does not tired easy. In his prime, he had 15 round stimia. He gave a prime Kid Galvian hell(I had Carman ahead on the score cards) Not to mention he deck him. Robinson was STILL a top fighter, I think he had the Basilio wars before he fought Fullmer.
Also his fights with Demarco are legend.

 

I realize this is not necessarily your opinion, Henry, but Herb Goldman's, but I have to take issue with what he says about Basilio compared to Graham.

1. "Graham had a better winning percentage"--yes, but Graham lost only 3 out his first 85 against pretty soft competition. He had apparently, off the boxing register, fought five fights against rated men, Tony Pellone, Tippy Larkin, Aldo Minelli, and Terry Young, and had gone 2-3. Basilio got off to a very slow start in his career and was erratic early, but I don't think the final winning percentages are all that important given that Graham had such a padded recored.

2. How did the two men do against top opponents:

Champions:
Graham-----Won 3, Lost 7, drew 1---Defeated three champions, Gavilan-to whom he lost three times-Giardello-to whom he lost twice-and Basilio-to whom he also lost once and with whom he also drew once. He also lost to the ordinary lightweight champion Paddy DeMarco. Now Graham may have been shafted by a decision or two here or there, but the same argument could be used for Basilio.

Basilio-----Won 8, lost 6---defeated six champions, Lew Jenkins, Ike Williams, Tony Demarco (2), Johnny Saxton (2)-also lost decision to Saxton, Sugar Ray Robinson-also lost decision-and Don Jordon. Lost to Gavilan in disputed decision, Fullmer (2), and Pender.

Contenders rated when they fought them:
Graham-----won 6, lost 10, drew 2

Basilio-----won 8, lost 8, drew 3

Hall of Famers:
Graham-----Won 3, lost 6, drew 1 (Gavilan, Giardello, Basilio as above)

Basilio-----Won 4, lost 5, drew 1 (defeated Jenkins, Williams, Graham, and Robinson. Lost to Gavilan, Graham, Robinson, Fullmer (2))

3. Best opponents defeated:

Graham-----Kid Gavilan, Carmen Basilio, Joey Giardello, Art Aragon, Paddy Young, Aldo Minelli, Terry Young, Tony Pellone

Basilio-----Sugar Ray Robinson, Ike Williams, Johnny Saxton, Tony DeMarco, Lew Jenkins, Don Jordan, Billy Graham, Gil Turner, Art Aragon, Gaspar Ortega, Pierre Langlois, Peter Muller

I would say Basilio has the more impressive list.


Evaluation-----Graham does have a better winning percentage, but his record is padded. One argument for him is that he beat his top three opponents pretty much at their physical peaks, but he did not prove himself better than any of them, losing 3 of 4 to Gavilan, 2 of 3 to Giardello, and splitting even 1 and 1 and 1 with Basilio. Still, all these series were pretty much dead even with several disputed decisions. After those top three, however, only Aragon and perhaps Paddy Young seem anything more than a fringe type scalp. One could dock Basilio on the basis of Jenkins being totally washed up and Williams over the hill. But he still has the impressive wins over Saxton, DeMarco, Turner, Aragon, and Ortega. Robinson was past his best certainly, but his last five fights prior to meeting Basilio featured two spectacular ko's of Olson, and one of Fullmer which came only three months prior to meeting Basilio. Robinson had lost only 5 fights in 17 years and none to a welterweight. I judge Basilio's win over Robinson, along with his slightly better performances against tough opposition, putting him ahead of Graham.

"Carmen would be remembered as simply a better-than-average welterweight champion were it not for the two fights with Robinson, who was way over the hill at the time."

I think this is a bad argument. Basilio did defeat Robinson. It is not fair to deny him his achievement. Robinson, after all, was coming off the ko of Fullmer.

 

Here's the STATS on both of them:

Graham fought 22 different opponents 32 times that were rated in the top 10 at one time or another.

Basilio fought 21 different opponents 31 times that were rated in the top 10 at one time or another.

While they were rated Basilio fought 19 while Graham fought 18 plus 1 if you count another Champion at another weight.

Basilio was rated from June 1953 to February 1962, for a total of 87 months.

Graham was rated from March 1947 to February 1955, for a total of 64 months.

Billy Graham (32)

Aragon, Art - 1-0-0
Basilio, Carmen – 1-1-1
Carto, Frankie – 1-0-0
Castellani, Rocky – 0-0-1
Cesario, Johnny – 1-0-0
Crawford, Davey – 1-0-0
DeMarco, Paddy – 0-1-0
Dussart, Kid – 1-0-0
Fuentes, Ramon – 0-1-0
Gavilan, Kid – 1-3-0
Giardello, Joey – 1-2-0
Larkin, Tippy – 0-1-0
Lewis, Charles Cabey – 1-0-0
Minelli, Aldo – 1-0-0
Pellone, Tony – 1-2-0
Pruden, Fitzie – 1-0-0
Shans, Cleo – 1-0-0
Thomas, Eddie – 0-1-0
Trigo, Mario – 0-0-1
Vejar, Chico – 0-2-0
Young, Paddy – 1-0-0
Young, Terry – 1-0-0

TOTAL – 15-14-3

Carmen Basilio (31)

Andrews, Al – 1-0-0
Aragon, Art – 1-0-0
Cesario, Johnny – 0-1-0
Davey, Chuck – 0-1-1
DeMarco, Tony – 2-0-0
Felton, Lester – 0-1-0
Fullmer, Gene – 0-2-0
Gavilan, Kid – 0-1-0
Giosa, Eddie – 1-1-0
Graham, Billy – 1-1-1
Jenkins, Lew – 1-0-0
Jones, Harold – 1-0-0
Jordan, Don – 1-0-0
Langlois, Pierre – 1-0-1
Ortega, Gaspar – 1-0-0
Pender, Paul – 0-1-0
Robinson, Sugar Ray – 1-1-0
Saxton, Johnny – 2-1-0
Turner, Gil – 1-0-0
Virgo, Ross – 0-1-0
Williams, Ike – 1-0-0

TOTAL – 16-12-3