Good effort Sir. I'd be interested to know what your reasoning was behind placing Herol Graham at #24 well above many established world champions. Did you place a high weighting on boxing ability rather than durability etc. I suppose you did entitle this 'best fighters' rather than 'most successful fighters'. Cheers.
Fitszsimmons (If you consider him a Brit) Wilde Lewis are all dead certs Also think Ted "kid" Lewis has a decent claim But according to preference I wouldnt be surprised to see Calzaghe, Buchanan "kid" Berg and Lynch in some lists
Graham had ability to be a top 10 entry, but his unorthodox methods hurt him, and cost him in big fights. But you are right I have placed him above what I would consider three proper world title holders (Watt, McGuigan and McAuley), and a number of world title holders of sound to dubious distinction. Watt beats Graham on name wins: He had two very good names (Davis and O'Grady) on his win resume (although both were open to debate) and came through with a fine Indian Summer of a career. Graham was more naturally gifted, he was a world class fighter for a lot longer than Watt, and also had a comeback that compares to Watt's excellent final couple of years. McGuigan was more talented than Watt, and has an excellent win of LaPorte, and did what everybody was supposed to do, but never could: End Pedroza's reign. Although never quite the same post Pedroza, the victory over Taylor is another plus point overall. But again compared to Graham, McGuigan's world class run, is not as long, also McGuigan never could quite produce the magic again post Pedroza, whilst Graham did show an ability to comeback from defeats, strongly. Dave 'Boy' McAuley was so much fun, the first war with Bassa was breathtaking and the battles with Baby Jake and Blanco were instant British classics. Also McAuley was sensational the night he beat the then undefeated Duke McKenzie for the IBF crown. But McAuley admitted himself, he considered himself no world champ whilst Bassa was still about, and his chin was hilariously soft sometimes, in no small part I suspect from trying to boil down to 112. McAuley made the most of what he had, and because of that will, has them eye catching victories that probably do slightly top Graham's best wins. But Herol had a deeper resume and again was world class longer, so that on top of the edge in ability is why Graham topped McAuley.
After having reviewed Grahams resume I can see that. He spent 17 years at title level which surely puts him up there. I always liked the Ingle style of fighter, hands down, using reaction speed to avoid punches, it was good to watch. A style which seems to have died off since Naz and Nelson retired, at least amongst top level operators. I think my earliest memory of boxing is watching Bassa v McCauley 1! Amazing fight.
I would have Owen Moran in my top 3-4, rather than top 30-40. I'd also have Buchanan ahead of Hamed any day of the week.
It's such a shame that Calzaghe has that SD over Hopkins which edges him ahead of Hamed in British ATG rankings.
A shame? Well each to their own, I can understand why people think Hopkins won; I can understand why Calzaghe won. At least the judges judged, and did not sit on the fence, or put out a hometown decision. But you are (indirectly) right about one thing. That '0' does add a certain cachet to Calzaghe's resume.