I'm thinking of fighters that could be considered near the ass end of a P4P top 100. Do any of these fighters in any way shape or form belong at the end of such a list? Nino Benvenuti - A fighter I can see many having much higher then at the end of such a list. Was 71-1 at one time, and has myriad wins over multiple ATG's. Marlon Starling - Never dominated or cleanly beaten. Came close to upsetting the some of the best in the world at times. Michael Nunn - Picked up titles are three different weight classes and beat good, if not great talent the entire way. Fought from MW to CW. Came within I believe a single point on my card of beating Graciano Rocchigiani up at 175 in Rocchigiani's backyard. A few others... Virgil Hill Johnny Nelson
Nelson- No wear near top 100 worthy Hill-No Starling-No Nino-Maybe, but i could think of better fighters so in my list probaly No Nunn-Maybe a case could be made, but still no
Benvenuti is the most accomplished, but I can't in all good conscience say he was one of the 100 best to have ever done it. It's not so much a knock on him or the fighters listed, it's just that the history of boxing is too damn rich.
Benevunuti I could find a place for. As much as I like Starling, no. Don't forget I don't rank fighters without seeing a substantial amount of footage of them.
When you get past the top 40-50 then there's a lot of splitting hairs going on. Benvenuti would definitely be in the debate. I'd say yes. The others... Starling too lazy in certain fights. Nunn didn't quite do enough.
Agreed. My thinking was that some people value certain accomplishments over others... As in title defenses higher then other accomplishments... And Virgil Hill for example had a ridiculous amount. Just curious.
