Top 40 P4P Greatest H2H Fighters Ever - Rough Draft

Super-heavyweights get screwed in P4P discussions. I definitely mis-counted on the HWs. Frazier and Tyson are almost on their way out anyway.

Foreman would beat all those guys. If I made a H2H HW list, Foreman would be ahead of Marciano, Dempsey, and probably Frazier. But it's P4P so...

 

Corbett won the early rounds and Fitzsimmons won the later rounds. No one wins every single round (except Vitali Klitchsko). I dont think it is outboxing an opponent if your opponent eventually wears you down and knocks you out. And this is one fight only.

What other middleweight showed he could take as much punishment against heavyweight punchers? Certainly not Ketchell, who wasnt a middleweight when he fought johnson anyway.

If you insist.

Jack Dempsey - An all time great middleweight, in his prime - KOd.

Jim Corbett - Considered an all time Great heavyweight, in his prime - KOd

Joe Choynski - All time great Light heavyweight - KOd

Peter Maher - World heavyweight alphabet title holder - KO 1

Jim Hall - top Contender - KO 4

Dan Creedon - Solid contender for time - KO 2

George Gardner - A solid top 30 or better All time great Light heavy (fitz was ancient - W on points)

Tom Sharkey - KOd twice.

So who is it that you say betters this competition?

I have explained the "outboxing".

How is his chin not on par with Ali's?

He took massive shots from Jim Jeffries who was physically about on par with Foreman (but he was only a supermiddleweight at the time!) this means that in a mythical pound for pounds sense he was hit twice as hard as Ali was hit by Foreman and while he did eventually fold (as anyone will), it took a long time. Middleweight hitters didnt bother him in the slightest. No middleweight ever looked like putting him down (except when he dived against Hall).

Your reach is probably correct (i dont know). It doesnt matter that much anyway, because he likes do work in close so reach isnt of as much advantage to fitz as it would be to a Nicolai Valuev or a pound for pound monster (wouldnt he be impressive blown up to a similar size).

Thats okay, I am just clad i read your last line, i nearly replied to the rest of it first

You have confused me a bit here, i was talking about Burns, not Fitz. By the way with these guys, i am not saying they should be on the list, just that they should be considered.

I think so too, but then again it is always hard to tell and i often thing that those who are taken too early eg Ketchell and others are often overrated. I am not so sure this was the case with Darcy though.

I think he needs to be considered on par with Ali (speed wise). He was considered the fastest ever when he was active, and not until Tunney came along was there anyone even considered comparable. In reality I have no idea if he was as fast as Ali. But i always consider that if someone was fast in their own time they are likely to be fast in any time. (And same with strength and KO punch) or chin. We cant really see how fast he was, but for his time, he stood out as much as Ali did.

In saying this i do understand the concerns you had with record, but dont forget some (maybe even all) losses were past prime, and he did have more like 50 or 60 fights. Also, as stated just before, i say he needs consideration for making the list (certainly nowhere near as high as Fitz), not that he has to be there.

 

Ok, so we put all the 185-210 pound heavies above Lewis and Foreman and co even tho they all fought their careers in the same division and would go H2H at heavy in any who wins discussions :hey

 

Duran is too high at 9
Ray Leonard is too low at 15.
Perhaps they should switch places.

 

Duran is 5 tho you prolly had a typo.

 

2:54

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ohuty7v8c0A[/ame]

 

Fair enough, as I stated my view on the matter was clouded as I didn't understand the extent of the matter until reviewing the title. As you will soon figure out when it comes to list making, you will never be truly satisfied.

 

Than he's really overrated.

 

Well if Bob Arum says it must be true.atsch

 

I'm saying it, Bob Arum is just saying it for me.

 

Well your both wrong.
If you matched Roberto Duran and Ray Leonard up with the same oppoents. Within the weights they both boxed at Leonard would come out the winner more times than Duran.
If you matched them up with all the oppoents that they could posibility face Leonard would win more than Duran.

 

Perhaps that's because Leonard is a Welterweight and Duran is a Lightweight?

 

What?! Did Bert Sugar tell you that? He's lying! He's lying!

 

To be fair, Sugar rates Duran in the Top 10 and Leonard at #25.

 

That's what I thought :huh