Top 5 (top 10) boxers with the best resume

I agree with most of your reply. Two things I should clarify though.

I'm not under the impression Joe Gans invented the jab! If I've said that I was probably being hyperbolic lol. I bring it up because I actually spent that day watching boxing footage of EXTREMELY old school fighters like Langford, and then watched some less old school fighters like Gene Tunney who had a very educated jab. I didn't really see it being used outside of a pawing context in the earlier years BUT tbf I only watched about 6 different fighters both super old and less old so I guess it's not representative.

And Duran is funny because people act like he retired in 1980 lol, and like he doesn't have a James Toney shaped shaped arc afterwards. I bring him up though because even though he's usually very high he's more of an example of a strict hierarchy. He's always NOT the in GOAT conversation, if ya know what I mean. Robinson, Langford, Greb and Armstrong are the best whereas fighters like Ali, Duran, Mayweather, Pacquiao, RJJ, Monzon definitely aren't. I'd say Willie Pep and funnily enough even Ezzard Charles as example of this as well. They're always NOT the GOAT, and just on the outside, so frequently that you wonder if it's because it makes sense or if it's just been repeated so often you internalise it.

Maybe you have more esoteric and underappreciated greats than me in mind though.

 

For me, any Mount Rushmore boxing discussion based strictly on resume starts with Harry Greb and Henry Armstrong, and I’m not 100% certain it’s in that order.

We can debate the other two spots til the cows come home, but I personally can’t see either of these two not being absolute, stone-cold locks.

 

Yeah fair enough on the jab, makes sense why you'd think that too. Still a lot of bare-knuckleisms in that period. The lower workrate due to the rounds and smaller gloves definitely makes the jab feel less educated. Plus they were more of the "every shot has to hurt " mentality so you usually saw it alongside the 1-2.

And I know it's repeated often, but the old film really sucks. You can see that a guy like Jim Driscoll was very very good, but he feels like a rock em sock em robot at times. I even saw an old Ali film from his 10th fight and even he looks off.

This content is protected

Yeah I get what you mean. I also feel the Mt Rushmore of Robinson, Armstrong, Greb and Langford is mostly a forum thing, which tbf I still value much more than the average "hardcore" Boxing fan who just discovered fighters existed before Jack Dempsey and who thinks the top 5 consists of Ali, Robinson, Mayweather, Duran and Leonard. But still. Even if it's probably correct, I don't think it's as set in stone anymore as I used to. Particularly with Langford. He's still clearly special. But 90% of his resume is at Heavyweight. And if you don't really think much of it, or just that particular HW era, then he's got about 1-2 major wins in each of the other divisions he fought in to fall back on.

And yeah, I do have certain fighters in mind who are usually not given a fair shake. Jimmy Bivins, as I mentioned before. If Duran is top 15, then no way is this guy outside the top 20-25. Then guys like Luis Manuel Rodriguez, Carlos Ortiz and Baby Arizmendi. Almost certainly not that high or near GOAT status, but a guy like Arizmendi has arguably the best winning resume of any Mexican ever, and he's just nowhere to be seen even in top 10 Mexican lists. Nobody told us to have him that high even if he should be.

 

I was really impressed with Ray Robinson.

 

as a heavyweight, Ali and Foreman. 70s heavyweights were WAY better than short pudgy, small laymen of the early 1930s - late 1940s heavyweights