Was the ring mag annual 1999 P4P ratings the best top 10 P4P in the history of the sport

That's insane. For every weight there's more or less a guy in argument for top 3 at that weight, smack in his prime.

 

Looking at the the actual ring rankings, for 1946, the depth is simply astonishing. (or perhaps the rankings poor i would have to look at career stages in more depth).
Heavyweight has Joe Louis up the top. I think he was probably considered number 1 P4P by most people in this year, even if he was about to falter. I cant see No 2 ranked Tami Mauriella forcing his way into the top 10.

In the Light heavy alone you would had Gus Lesnevich and Billy Fox, both ranked ahead of Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore! Billy Fox was 37-0 with 37 Knockouts! Lesnevich was the champion, but he had some awful losses at this time, i think it is likely that ring could justify leaving him off the Pound for pound list and i think he would rank below others, but this still means that Billy Fox needs to be ranked somewhere, before Charles and Moore even make the pound for pound list. Charles had a huge 1946 with wins over Moore, Bivins, Marshall and others. I dont see how Moore could possibly make the top 10 list. He just lost to Charles, and Ring clearly rated Billy Fox above him as well. The other divisions are stacked.

Middleweight is a stacked a division as well but i am not sure how it ranke in comparison to the others. Tony Zale the champion, i think was a pretty Clear and well thought of champion and would have been the leading ranked fighter in the division. He was on a 7 fight KO streak including the Rocky Graziano fight and hadnt lost since he fought Billy Conn (who was well thought of because he went on to scare joe louis). I think he holds up as the no 1 fighter in the division ahead of the listed no 1 contender Jake Lamotta who was ahead of Charley Burley and Rocky Graciano. Graciano clearly couldnt make a top 10 p4p. Burley and Lamotta would be in contention in hindsight. Lamotta had already lost to Robinson, so he must rank behind him. He had a win over Holman Williams and Satterfield among others, but as good as those might seem in hindsight, i cant see ring raising him into the top 10 rankings unless he sneaks in down the bottom. This means that Burley, who had been unbeaten since his loss to Holman Williams, almost 10 fights ago is virtually no chance of a top 10 ranking.

Welterweights have Robinson at number 1 with his win over Tommy Bell to take his first world championship. He already had the win over Lamotta so he definitely ranks above him, but i am not sure his ranking would necessarilly fare in comparison to other champions. You would think he would be down the list a bit, he didnt even beat the incumbent, Marty Servo who had retired after losing to Rocky Graziano.
Tommy Bell, Tippy Larkin and Beau Jack were the other ranked welterweights. Bells Losses to Lamotta and Cecil Hudson as well as the Robinson loss pretty much rule him out of the top 10 which means Tippy and Beau Jack also were not a chance.

lightweight has John Montgomery Ike williams and johnny Bratton as the top 3. Bob Montgommery had just avenged a second round ko by Wesley Mouzon but i have my doubts whether this would lift him into the top 10. He also split a series with Nick Moran jsut a year earlier and had lost a series with Beau jack not long befoe. Ike williams had just won the NBA lightweight title and was on a good run of wins but he had lost the year before to Sammy Angott and he did also have a draw in 1946. I dont think he could force his way into the top 10 especially since he was ranked behind Montgommery.

Willy Pep was very well thought of. He hadnt lost for years, since he lost to Sammy Angott (there is a name that keeps bobbing up) and he already beat the Bantamweight champ Manuel Ortiz. At 107-1-1 his 3rd win over Chalky Wright was the last fight he would have before his famous plane crash. No 1 ranked Phil Terranova was on a decent win streak but i dont see how it could lift him into the top 10, despite beating Sandy Saddler, who had not yet fought in his winning series of fights with Pep.

Bantamweight has Manuel Ortiz as champion and Harold Dade and luis Castillo as contenders. Ortiz' loss to the second ranked featherweight Carlos Chavez rules him out of at top 10 position. Harold Dade didnt have a bad win streak and in 1947 he did actually bea ortiz. But at then end of the day, i dont think there were any wins that stood out to rank him over the champion and i cant see how he has a claim for top 10.

Flyweight has Jackie Peterson who many say was one of the best flyweights of all time. But at the end of the day you cant make the top 10 pound for pound list when you lose to Theo Medina, Ricky Monaghan and Bunty Doran. I doubt he would ahve made the top 10. Rinty Monaghan was ranked the no 1 flyweight and he actually had a better claim than Jackie Paterson. Especially since he just beat Paterson adn Doran. It had been a couple of years since he lost to Ike Weir and a year since he lost to Joe Curran. He also had the disadvantage of basing himself in Britain. I dont think he would have made the top 10.

so, Puting that together i would guess the 1946 list to read as follows:
1. Joe Louis
2 . Willie Pep
3. Tony Zale
4. Ray Robinson
5. Billy Fox
6. Ezzard Charles
7. Jake Lamotta
8. Charlie Burley
9. Harold Dade
10. Bob Montgomery

I think this is close to what the rankings would look like. Some really good fighters not good enough to make it.

 

Fine input as usual Ted. Oh the memories. So much going on.

 

Crazy isn't it!

 

Great post, it's a mess to work out isn't it. A good example is that i could pop Duran into the 82 top 10 but in reality if it was compiled late after he was beaten by Benitez Duran would in no way be in the top 10 the experts would put forth as he was thought to be washed up.

The name would look great in there, and with hindsight we could maybe ease him in but the fact of the matter is he would simply not have been there in real time. 1946 carries many such examples as well.

So much boils down to how you want to compile.

 

That post was based on what the Ring Pound for pound rankings would have looked like, not necessarilly how i would have ranked them in hindsight or even at the time. If Billy Fox didnt crack the top 10 then Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore must both definitely miss out, because they are actually already ranked behind him by the Ring.

I used the Feb date for the simple reason that this is what boxrec used as their lists I wouldnt mind looking at some other years, but it was time consuming and i dont think i will have time for a while. I cant imagine a better year than 1947 after looking at that. I think that places 10-20 would be as strong as some years.

Their is a decent argument that fighting in this years was the Greates ever Heavyweight (Louis) Light heavy (Charles or Moore), Welter (Robinson), Lightweight (Pep or Saddler). And quite a few others who have a decent claim for top 10 ATG in their weight division. That is an unheard of top 5 and there are so many others who were also very, very good fighters. Many not too far from prime either.

What other years would be best to give this year a run for its money?

 

1982 as JohnThomas1 said. Holmes, SRL, Hearns, Hagler, Spinks, Sanchez and Gomez all in their prime. And Benitez, Pryor and Arguello as a bonus.

 

I think of my lifetime that late 90s/early 00s felt like the strongest pound for pound. A lot of greats there.

(I was born in 1985 started following the sport in early/mid 90s)

 

'47 has a very strong shout if one just look at the best fighters at the time instead of which were thought to be the best at the time. SRR, Pep, Louis, Moore and Charles - four of those have a good case for the top 10 ever. That's a bit crazy.

Louis was clearly past his prime, and how about Pep?