At his absolute best. Which boxer is the most unbeatable.

at 130-135 i say floyd is best. SRR owns 140-147 range. Jones jr at the 160-168 range.

 

I would go with Hagler. Almost all of his losses and draws were disputable (or worse), and the final fight with SRL he lost mostly outside the ring (by agreeing for bigger gloves, going 12 rounds instead of 15, larger ring and whatever SRL demanded). And he wasn't at his prime anyway.

RJJ and Whitaker are also good calls. I can't make my mind on Ottke in Germany - on one hand, decisioning him was close to impossible and he had decent defence, on the other his opposition was quite bad compared to others and IMO top fighters would've stopped him anyway no matter what is the "German scoring" at the time of the stoppage.

Lewis and Hearns have mediocre chins - I mean, mediocre for ATG fighters, I do not want to start a discussion that Lewis took some good shots from Mercer, Briggs or Vitali.

No doubt SRL was great fighter, but he was lucky to have a draw with Hearns in one fight and to knock him out in another. And, as I said, he won the fight with Hagler partly outside the ring... not to mention about his loss to Duran.

Ali has always stylewise problems with Norton (and partly Frazier).

 

Yes I understand a W is a W & even tho I did score the fight for DLH I don`t think it is the robbery everyone makes out... but that`s not my point, my point is that Oscar is nowhere near the best ever or unbeatable at 147 & look at his fight with Tito.

Trinidad was the undisputed best in the world for a spell at 154 that`s true... but this thread is about which fighter was `most unbeatable` as in if you put them vs any fighter at this weight from any era would they be unbeatable... there are plenty of fighters that would beat Trinidad thru history at 154 lbs, IMO that isn`t even debatable.

:good

 

The argument(s) i've heard for any Heavyweight in history being able to beat a 64-67 ALI are the hollowest compared to the other gentlemen named.

Ali clearly. Followed by 160-168 Roy Jones. I don't see anybody beating a Middleweight Roy Jones either.

 

Most people go either way on this fight actually, its not like they overwhelmingly vote in favour of Chavez vs floyd, floyd gets his voted as well.

My pick is Chavez tho, I think he was just a greater AND better fighter overall.

 

I won`t argue too much with the accuracy thing, both are amongst the most accurate fighters I`ve seen so it doesn`t matter if floyd is more accurate, he fact is Chavez was accurate enough, he didn`t waste many punches & he made every one count.

I would admit that floyd is a good infighter technically... but to suggest he is anywhere near Chavez in that department is ridiculous at best... your talking about one of the best infighters in the entire history of boxing here, think about it.

 

hey puta, Why are there no Mexican Warriors on your list mother****er?
JCC Sr. is the GOAT and was unbeatable cabron. shove this racist list up your culo homie.
i voted for Sugar Ray Leonard, but im not happy about it :twisted:

 

Ali of 1964-67 fought Norton & Frazier ?... that`s interesting stuff, you learn something new everyday on here :thumbsup

 

I think it is debatable simply because you really can not compare eras you can go based on opinions but we would never really know because we cant pit them against each other.

That said I think at 154 he was a beast... most unbeatable to me then again I am a bit biased I will admit that much, I dont think Hearns chin could hold up to a Tito left hook Not sure how it would look Hagler vs Trinidad, but keep in mind Hagler is very hittable as well, I just do not see why I should rule out Tito here Power is always a factor and Tito had that power that would end your night if you made one mistake

 

John Mugabi had power and arguably hit Hagler more than anyone else with good shots. Haglers chin is one of the best ever.

 

Tyson

 

My guess is that Hearns chin holds up to a Tito left hook far better than Tito`s chin holds up to a Hearns right hand, who would land first ?... I`ll go with the more skilled & quicker boxer with the reach advantage... but we`ll never know as you say.

Also, if you want to know how Tito would likely do vs Hagler, just watch him vs the only great MW he ever fought in Hopkins, different type of fight but same result.

 

Chavez definitely vicious on the inside. They are polar opposites on the inside. Floyd is majority Defensive and counter/smothering while Chavez is offensive and damaging. Both great at what they do.

 

Probably would end up the same but its hard to say honestly, I mean I used to ask all the time in the gyms with the old timers Holyfield vs Ali, or DLH vs Ray leonard.
All of them would say its a matter of opinion and that you can not really say who from which era would beat who from which era. you just cant, back then for example they didnt have the technology nor the health information that they do today, so in a sense that could be a huge advantage for fighters of this era vs previous eras.
Then again back then they trained like a different type of animal they had 15 rounders fought more often and for much less, advantage for the old guys.
there are just too many what ifs, to even make sense of it..

 

true, you can never tell what would happen until it happens, only thing to do is judge from what you`ve seen, its all you can do.