The number one is Henry Armstrong. It's not even up for debate.
Very pleased to see Pep's name mentioned because usually he seems to be left out of lists like this. He was rapid. Especially if you're talking...
If Witherspoon gets into the Hall of Fame, I'll squeeze my nuts through the gap in a park bench and stand up very quickly.
... And we can guess his power and chin were slightly better relative to his weight. Fractionally more agile, had a tiny bit more stamina (less...
You know full well I haven't seen any, and neither have most other people (some limited rare footage exists) - I, just like others, go on what...
Napoles wasn't a middleweight champion, though you might have made a typing error.
Wrong. He certainly achieved the most at 147lbs, but was a small welterweight - at 140lbs he was a more fearsome, youthful puncher.
I think so.
Why? I thought you read the same lines as me when it comes to separating raw durability from the ability to survive; there are many factors;...
Several contenders. And he went tooth and nail with a dominant champion who happened to be more capable than an '87 Hagler. He looked better than...
I didn't mention accomplishments. I said Hearns & Leonard never proved their abilities fully as middleweights - meaning their head-to-head...
Briscoe was a genuinely dangerous opponent when Monzon & Valdez beat him. Against Hagler, he was finished. And no, your first paragraph doesn't...
... Marciano also ate a lot more punches than Camacho. Say the latter had better survival skills if you will, but Marciano had more raw durability.
The very fact you mention Briscoe proves to me you don't know a whole lot about the era/s.
Nope. I'm confident that Valdez was a better middleweight than anyone Hagler ever fought.
