Bert Sugar's 100 Greatest Fighters(What Do You Think?)

Not really, there's more that two fighters in history that deserve to be rated over him.

No they don't. Plenty of people have always rated Saddler there or at least tied with Pep for that spot.

Charles and Duran have credentials far outside of just being the possible best in a particular weight class.

If Pep isn't the #1 FW of all time, then what is the case for making him the #3 P4P fighter ever?

 

top 8 is great then it loses the plot

 

In his book 'Mean Business' Stephen Brunt writes a number of pages on McLarnin and he also described how McLarnin supposedly "battled jaundice that forced six and four month layoffs" (page 158 ) This is described as happening not too long after the fight with Jackie Fields, so if you can look at Jimmy's record and find any significant time being taken off by him between fights, you might have the reason. I would guess that it would fall close to the Snell and Farr fights.

Also, the L.A. Times on Oct 10th, 1926 describe how McLarnin was recovering from what the paper called a "severe cold" which put the fight with Snell back a little with a delay.

i.e. McLarnin may not have been at his healthy best for the Snell fight.

 

If I had to choose fighters to win any style of hand to hand combat competition with or without gloves I would pick these 13 men for skill, fearlessness, athleticism, reflexes, killer instinct and heart.

FIGHTERS

Fedor Emelianenko
Bruce Lee
Rickson Gracie
Chuck Norris
Joe Lewis
Mike Tyson
Jack Dempsey
Royce Gracie
James Jefferies
Harry Greb
Anderson Silva
Rocky Marciano
Roberto Duran

 

I do not like the omission of Michael Spinks.

 

I think I wonder who made that list for him.

 

There seems to have been no thought process at all, there is absolutely no excuse for someone who calls themselves a boxing historian to have Jack Dempsey anywhere near the top ten, a lot of people (not me) dont even have him in the top ten heavyweights. You could say he is more in favour of old fighters but then why is Chavez so high and Fitzsimmons so low? The list might as well be called Bert Sugar's Famous Boxers Names I've Pulled From a Hat.

 

Blue too low
Red too high

 

Tracy callis and cox's corner rate Armstrong as the #1 FW, does he fit in at all??? Although he was ahead of Pep in Sugars list as well

 

bump

 

the original book came out around 1985 and had great huge pics and was a hardback and better. The list was different too. Greb was 3, Pep 12, Duran 17, Leonard 56, Dempsey 5 beautiful better book all around. loads of big 12 by 8 pics and more fum.

 

Enough chunks can't be blown to fully express how nauseous this makes me.

 

a lot of old and dusty fighters in bert's list. big surprise!

 

Terrible list.

 

The list really is nowhere near as bad as the comments is this thread make out.
I wouldn't never expect a list of top 100 boxers to match my own opinion or even 50% of it, in terms of order etc.
As long as it has a good amount of the right names, that's a decent list.