Your top six pound for pound all time and why

Some people don't understand the concept of pound for pound. It is to compare the skill and the resume of fighters of different weight classes. You can be "p4p" even if you stayed in one category but beat great fighters. Hop was p4p #1 before the Taylor fight. Hagler was also p4p #1. I think that Tyson was once p4p #1 too. You can't "size up" or "size down" fighters because it's just not logical. Different weights require different athletic abilities. Of course if you beat great fighters in different weight classes it adds.

 

Ferdie Pacheco, Angelo Dundee, and Mr. Marvel are wrong, wrong, wrong.

I am careful not to boast about Robinson's being 5 time MW champ. Because it usually means losses... The Spinks win was very impressive to me when I was 8. It ain't anymore.

Historically, Heavyweights are the weakest division.

Yeah, but they're heavyweights. Historically, Heavyweights are the weakest division.

That means that heavyweights have lots of big and clumsy guys and walking whales. They're pretty slow. If you know what you're doing, they're easy to fight.... don't believe me though... Ask Langford. And Greb.

By the way: Historically, Heavyweights are the weakest division.

Put Ali over Armstrong or Duran. I dare you.

Apology accepted.

 

No, no, and no.

 

Ray Robinson
Henry Armstrong
Willie Pep
Muhammad Ali
Roberto Duran
*Harry Greb* (reputation is immense, but NEVER seen him fight)typo

 

1. Joe Gans
Skillwise he was the best boxer of his era, and what an era it was. Nearly perfect combination of defense, offense and ring generalship. Could have boxed less cautious, perhaps, but this would mean more risk, and could have prepared better for certain fights, but overall there's little way of improvement.

2. Benny Leonard
Although he had not very impressive start, and for several years was only one of the best, losing or drawing fights I'd expect him to have the better of based on his abilities, but he improved quickly and proved his superiority over anybody at his weight in a great era.

3. Sugar Ray Robinson
Offensively he was on a par with anybody. Very deep resume, although a bit inconsistent after moving up in weight. Some improvement in defense and in-fighting would be good to be ranked even higher, but when you have achieved what he had, it's hard to ask for more.

4. Roy Jones Jr
Pound-for-pound head-to-head he's the best fighter there has been, as well as the most talented fighter in history. Without even trying very hard outclassed anybody standing in his way. Nonpareil versatility and ring generalship.

5. Packey McFarland
Possibly the single ATG in history to never have let an opponent get the better of him in a fight. His single reported loss was a disqualification in his first year in the ring. Outboxed the boxers, and outslugged the sluggers. Extremely rare combination of styles, a boxer-puncher with perfect defense, who is swarming his opponents almost non-stop. The things to be wished for, more punching power and more evil attitude in the ring (not to carry his opponents till later rounds, but try to finish them early).

6. Floyd Mayweather Jr
Skill-wise he is on a par with anybody in history. Perfect record, with world titles in 4 weight divisions.

 

No, I probably wouldn't put him in the top 5, but I think there's an argument to be made that he belongs pretty close to it, perhaps even in the top 6.

 

Sure it is. The weakest, or close to it. It's the flagship division, no doubt about that, but celebrity rarely translates into depth. Ask Paris Hilton.

 

I got him anywhere from 11-14. Which is exceptional. So I shouldn't complain too much.

 

It's fierce competion up there, so it only takes small differences in how one values a fighter for it to translate into pretty large difference in how one ranks them.

 

My top 20

1. Henry Armstrong
2. Sugar Ray Robinson
3. Sam Langford
4. Harry Greb
5. Ezzard Charles
6. Mickey Walker
7. Archie Moore
8. Barney Ross
9. Sugar Ray Leonard
10. Pernell Whitaker
11. Benny Leonard
12. Willie Pep
13. Roberto Duran
14. Joe Louis
15. Bob Fitzsimmons
16. Gene Tunney
17. Barbados Joe Walcott
18. Muhammad Ali
19. Wilfredo Gomez
20. Alexis Arguello



I've moved Langford up a few places since my last list, used to rotate him and Charles for 4th and 5th, but on re-evaluation he has snuck into my top 3. In reality very little distance between my 1 to 5.

 

1 sugar ay robinson best mix of boxer/puncher
2 harry greb beat 18 world champion n gave gene tunney 1st lossn only loss
3 henry armstrong 3 titles simultaneous almost got half the titles in boxing at that time
4 sam langford fought 4rm lightweight thru heavyweights
5 willie pep best pure boxer n won a round wit out throwing a punch
6 muhammad ali great boxer great opposition pulled of big upsets n first 3 time heavyweight champion

 

You can't have Whitaker and Leonard that high. They only had 40 fights. Just joking of course :good

 

Interesting. I am a monster Duran fan, but I think Charles's resume means he has to be above Roberto. Why do you think otherwise at the moment Pea?

 

Wow no rocky marciano in your top 20 even though he twice beat your # 5, dominated ur # 7 as well as ur # 14 and is arguebly the best 185lber we have ever seen? Thats rough. who else is going to beat him at 185lb. I would say going by your list, you can easily squeak him in at 19 or 20.

 

Ezzard was a light heavyweight at the end of the line. Archie Moore was a light heavyweight and aging, which showed itself in stamina issues at heavyweight. Joe Louis was at the end of the line. Charles accomplished far more at light heavyweight than Marciano did at heavy. Same for Moore. There are lots of 175-185 pounders who would beaten Marciano. Charles would have beaten him at they met a few years earlier. Here are two other light heavyweights who would have beaten Marciano: Bob Foster and Michael Spinks. Evander Holyfield would have beaten him, as well.

No offense, but you seem to have an extremely unrealistic opinion of Marciano's abilities (as well as others from a period you have appear to have nostalgized, if the other thread is representative of your thinking).