i think that when you conside he weighed within or around the Light middle limit for all his middleweight fights in the 60's there is a good argument.
Sugar Ray Robinson and Stanley Ketchel weighed about the same. Among others. Nino Benvenuti has an argument to be above Emile Griffith.
Yep, the LMW but you either go by how good someone is at a weight or go by achievement at the weight or combination of those 2. Griffith didn't fight many fights officially at the 154lb weight and he certainly isn't the best unofficial 154lber, I'm not even 100% convinced he was the best sub 154lber of his generation
Who would you pick out of his generation above him? I want a discussion here because I think there are plenty of greats whose best weight would be 154 but fought at 147 or 160.
You could make some good head to heads at 154 then. Talking about Benvenuti, him and Griffith had 3 close fights, Griffith winning one of them. Benvenuti was at the middleweight limit and Griffith was at the lightmiddle limit, give or take half a pound.
1. Obviously if I was going to choose someone it'd be Benvenuti, although I'm not sure who I rate higher, but Napoles has a case for being better below 154 given he beat Griffith 2. Yes if were looking at who'd be a bad ass at 154lbs but didn't necessarily compete much for titles there you can pick from: Robinson, Burley, Holman Williams, Leonard, Walker, Hearns, McCallum, Roy Jones, Galivan
Neither did Griffith, I don´t think you can count a title that was only recognized in Austria. And this is not what the thread is about. 1. Benventui has a case but those fights were close and you could make the argument that Benvenuti just had a style advantage. Napoles, well that was an impressive win but you can make the argument that this was not the best Griffith since he was weightdrained and he didn´t fight at the weight for around 3 years, competing at mw at the time. 2. Jones? Come on, he would not be able to hang in with the best there. Far, far too inexperienced. Even you should know better here.