Top 40 P4P Greatest H2H Fighters Ever - Rough Draft

This is a P4P H2H list I came up with. There are no time restrictions, but I'm very guilty of omitting a lot of pre 1900's fighters that have no film. It's very difficult to assess them, and I don't have much knowledge a lot of these fighters. Of course, this isn't a 1920's onward list like my other one so there are a few fighters before the 20's. I do believe boxing has evolved and really arose in the 1920's in a big way. I may have missed a fighter so give your input. I think the biggest exclusion was Joe Gans. Just to clarify, this is not a top 40 greatest fighters list. This is a list if you stripped everyone down to the same weight. I know in a sense this is hugely biased against super-heavies that rely on their size, range, height, and jab... but that's just the way it is. P4P can be lame, silly, and childish. But it's also good fun, and a good way to really examine the skills and H2H potential among these ATG. Fighters with blistering short rises aren't short-changed as mainly all about a fighters peak.

Pound 4 Pound Greatest Fighters​

Criteria:​

1. Resume/Level Of Opposition – 20% of the criteria factors this in. Consistency is marginally important as it tells us the truth about a fighter, but the goal is to find the peak. It's more about how dominant a fighter is, rather than how long their reign last. Level of opposition is important because greatness is determined by who you rub up against. How you do against a lot of styles and a lot of great fighters tells what your ability is. Beating Bigger men helps big time. Proving yourself when with a weight disadvantage, and proving yourself through multiple weight classes is a way to reiterate your status on a P4P level.

2. Skills/Ability (Potential H2H) – 70% is based on your skills and abilities and how you potentially match up to other fighters in terms of H2H. What you bring in the ring... from natural factors such as power punching and chin, to your developed skills such as footwork and feinting. How versatile you are to prove your skills and ability in more ways than one in case Plan A goes wrong. All the intangibles; resilience will get factored. This is what you can do in the ring from what we've seen from footage and newspaper report descriptions. If you're unique and special you'll be much higher on this list than any normal greatness list. If you know how to use your strength, and how to expose your opponents weaknesses you will get featured very high.

3. Contemporary Accounts/Testimony – 10% on what you were thought of when you fought, your legacy, impact, how or if you might have revolutionized or done something special in boxing. This allows for opinion pieces and testimony to get factored in. What experts, historians, and critics think of fighters or how they examine a fighter’s skills in the ring is basically the essential to this category. Revisionist opinions or thought count for much less. This category gives more credence to older fighters.

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

Jack Dempsey

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

First thoughts as typing this out. I literally just changed Langford from 3 to 7 while typing this up. He was 3 on my list all while doing this and just changed it the last second... feels right. Second, Mike Tyson is on the list. If anything he's being underrated by me. A lot of things feel right... I was flipping Ross and Chavez constantly though. Frazier just made the list, I almost wanted to put him on more than he might have deserved it. Almost had Floyd Mayweather at the 40 spot... that might have been the better pick too. Maybe Larry Holmes deserves the 40 spot the most... :think Thoughts, criticsism, etc.

Honorable Mentions: Floyd Mayweather, Aaron Pyror, Emile Griffith, Carmen Basilio, Ike Williams, Ruben Olivares, Tiger Flowers, Edre Jofre, Larry Holmes, Jimmy McLarnin, Panama Al Brown, Miguel Canto, Wilfredo Gomez, Jimmy Wilde

​

 

I don't know, he wouldn't have made my top 50, and I was working with an outline of mainly 50-60 fighters. I'd say at least 20 spots.

Foreman wasn't even much of a thought for the top 50. He's a big strong HW that relied on his physical advantages. Even in his comeback, he was even bigger, although I'd just factor the prime 73 version. I'd say Foreman would land anywhere from 70-80. Maybe as high as 65 if I was feeling generous... most likely somewhere in the 70's though.

 

I think very highly of Burley's ability. And the only man who really had his number was Ezzard Charles. He was largely avoided, and probably the best of the black murderers crew. Part of him not having more of a chance against Robinson and other great fighters is sort of his downfall legacy wise. He also was sort of on the smaller side for MW standards. Another disadvantage.

 

I knew that would be controversial. While Bob defied a lot of the odds and took on challenges with weight disadvantages to win the MW and HW crown I don't think he was difficult to out-box. I'll consider ranking him higher, but a lot of his greatness stems from his freakish power and strategic and ring smarts. That's how he ended up beating Corbett for the title.

Well, you have to understand that a lot of this list is based on subjectivity. It's based on the idea of how one fighter does in some H2H world. Strip weight and match him vs him etc. Ali had a jab as fast as Robinson, and like Longcount says beat a better array of opponents. While Louis was more dominant, Ali was pretty dominant in his prime. Like I said, a fighter's longevity and reign aren't important in determining a fighter's ranking in this list. It's not a greatest list ever, it's more of a greatest H2H list. The only argument for Louis is that he would handle himself extremely well against most HWs and he was about 12 pounds lighter than Ali in his prime. And Ali and Louis are 1-2 on everyones HW list. I just feel Ali is as a special fighter with better abilities against better opposition. And he showed us that (That is where the resume part does come into play).

I need to study a lot of these fighters. Darcy was that great Australian fighter, right? Wilde was a complete slip of the mind. Burns and Corbett would never make it, but Non Pareil Jack Dempsey has a shot. I'll look into those... thanks for your insight and comments Boilermaker.

Great point. Leonard made a rise from my previous list, so I didn't want to get too overzealous with it. With time, the reality is he might get bumped up. I think Louis could up a tad too... it's all very hard. You try to put a science to it, but you really have a criteria and do your best to fit that criteria. I question a lot of these picks all the time. I tried giving some credence to older fighters in some sense. And I didn't want the list to look to modern.

Don't agree with Jones Jr. He never beat enough of array to really prove his greatness. I consider him special, which is why he makes the top 25. He beat Toney, Hopkins, Griffin, Tarver, Ruiz, etc. And jumped classes and proved himself in a big way. But his resume doesn't shine, and while he's special he has weaknesses which prevents him from being in the top 20.

 

Tunney beat Greb and Dempsey, along with many others.

Dempsey was a giant killer. While he not have constantly tested his skills against elites. He showed ferocity, and awesome speed, power, and skills that makes him sparkle as a H2H P4P fighter.

Maybe I overrated Tunney, but I don't think Dempsey is too high.

As for Holmes, he almost made the 40 spot. I tend to think he gets slightly overratedly underrated. He had his struggles, but didn't always beat the best and wasn't in the best era either.

He basically went from top 20 back to mid 20's. Where would you rate him over? What number in the top ten?