He's there, at 51 lol. There was a thread asking between Hagler and Hopkins' greatness a couple if weeks ago and I came down on Hopkins side. I think both are above Harada but I could be wrong. Tbh I'm not overly informed below LW and I'll have a look at a couple guys. I'll have a look He's got a very good résumé, I'd say you should check him out. He seems exciting as well. He was in consideration, he's floating between 70-80 **** I forgot to put him back in Jofre's , he's at 39 in my notes and was taken out and moved up a couple places, I just forgot to re-type him He'll be there when the next 25 comes along Tbh I was thinking he was a little low. It didn't sit well with me that he was below Dick Tiger His longevity is awesome and he has a great résumé. Tbh I think if I was to move Pone down I'd move Perez with him. But I don't know his résumé completely Ye I've seen people who don't like that. I don't rate the guys he beat to put him at top 10. And I'm brittish so it's not an agenda
Woops can't believe I missed it lol. I'd definitely check out Midget Wolgast. Some of the older posters like McGrain etc think very highly of him, got what's is worth. The was a good article on him. I'll try find it. And yeah the 60s - 70s middles I definitely need to check out. Though I'm quite familiar with Briscoe and Monzon. I'd also suggest checking out Eduardo Lausse. Guy must've been one of the hardest punchers ever, and he also had some very dynamic skills. Dropped Fulmer and made him run the whole bout.
Also 2 things 1. I can't see a win for Wolgast over Brown 2. Brown's got an excellent résumé, I'd say he's top 75 worthy, you?
Maybe I'm misremembering. It's been a while since I've done Wolgast in depth. I've been watching Hasegawa at the moment. Ah yes actually I was wrong. Even still Wolgast has a ridiculously strong record. Here's that article https://www.badlefthook.com/2013/4/...lgast-all-time-great-flyweight-boxing-history
I forgot to mention, but another I'd ask about is the lack of Tommy Ryan, who I think was better than Walcott. Edit: Another would be Billy Conn
Jersey Joe Walcott seems an odd pick. I am glad that he is finally getting his due, but surely a lot of heavyweights have a better claim to a spot?
Not too often pal. I've never had much interest in lists other than an as intros to fighters I know little about tbh. I find it too difficult to separate fighters beyond a select few and tend to work in tiers and levels rather than specific rankings. I've never worked out any hard and fast criteria based on strict percentages though. I'd take into account quality of opposition beaten as the main thing and then try to work out other lesser factors cohering into a whole. So, dominance, longevity, how they appear on film etc but also things like margins of victory in important fights and character (brave or great showings in defeat, fighting great opposition condensed into a small number of fights, giving rematches, coming back from defeat etc). The character thing is as important to me as dominance and fighters beaten tbh and doesn't get enough credence for me, especially where a lot of older fighters are concerned and where dominance over less threatening opposition comes into the equation. I know that I'd have Greb, Armstrong, SRR and Langford as a locked in top four without argument. The next group would in no order probably comprise of Benny Leonard, Charles, Fitz, Duran, Pep, Ross, Moore, Gans, Ali. Maybe Louis, Canzi, McLarnin, McFarland, Dixon etc. Beyond that it gets nebulous and highly subjective. I can see how RJJ, Ortiz, Jofre, Harada, Napoles, Mayweather etc might land a rough tier together, but I'd have a lot more sympathy for Ortiz than I would for Mayweather because of Ortiz's insane quality of opposition and him being not far behind in terms of dominance. I enjoy reading this type of thing when due diligence is taken but hate it when it's ill-informed, throwaway or too biased.
I have to agree with you there. I never made my own list because, to be honest, it's too ****in long winded, and I'd rather spend the time watching boxing, actually boxing and researching. Adding top 100 list to this is mind numbing, and takes a bit of the fun away IMO. I much prefer film studying fighters styles. Fair play to George though. It's a commitment making these lists, and they do really solidify your knowledge. The lists from old posts really helped me out when I first came on here. Making a list means your open publicly to scrutiny and snark, and almost no one will agree with the full list anyway.
And Kid Lavigne. Edit: Kid McCoy too. Worth considering those guys, not saying they are locks or anything.
