Best fighters to ever step in the ring

Nothings perfect my friend ( By the way, how many of Gans, Leonard,Grebs , Walkers , or Keychels fights have you ACTUALLY seen in its entirely? Thats what I thought. ) I unlike some judge a fighter by what I've seen. Not by trainers or boxing reporters of THAT era said. Most of them never saw R Robinson, much less R.Leonard. So how would we know what they would think if they actually saw them? Most of them had no film so their is no way to compare those fighters other than what someone of the era said.
I forgot Olivaires to be honest, but Monzon isn't the best Middleweight in history in my opinion, but I do rank him in my top 30 fighters ever.

 

Fair enough my friend, so if I have understood you correctly, you didnt put Greb in because you have not seen him fight, and that presupposes he would then not be ranked in your best MW of all time, for the same reasoning yes ?
If that is the case, and I suspect it is, the 99% of us that would indeed have him at say, 2/3 and in the ATG of all weights also have him very high ( lots of cases No 1) are misinformed, and are wrong to A/ judge him on his resume ( because of course we have not seen him ) and B/ dismiss the forest of articles written about him from such luminaries as Grantland Rice, Nat Fliesher, Damon Runyon, Paul Gallico, AJ Liebling, and many more great, and I mean great writers as " just there opinion " really my friend.

 

And jack sharkey and max schmeling right?

 

No.

 

You think? I always believe I have changed it too much each time I do it. I get far too carried away with the flavour of the month.

 

Maybe it’s been too long since I’ve seen a revision. PM me a recent list when you get a chance.

 

I agree.
And Duran beating Leonard at welter is why he is the best, Duran haters need to recognise.

 

But how many of those writers saw Monzon, Hagler, or RJJ? And how can one give an opinion on Greb, his style, and how he may have matched up against those 3 fighters without any film on him? It seems to bother you that I used the term "just their opinion ". Sorry if it did, but of all the hundreds of fighters that have came after Greb, and all the fighters that those writers missed because of them simply passing on. You in your honest opinion don't think some of those opinion may have changed if they were around to see the 3 fighters I mentioned and 100's of other great fighters since their era? If you don't believe they wouldn't changed some of their opinions, then in my opinion your not giving credit to the intelligence of those men.

 

With respect, the point I think you are missing is, you say how can one give an opinion on Greb with out any film of him , these writers SAW Greb in the flesh, isn't that in its own way better than seeing him on film no ? also if we carry your thought process forward , the writers that saw Monzon, Hagler, and RJJ , in the flesh, would be doubted in the future, as to their ability by people like, well I dont know maybe YOU !

 

My top three in chronological order:

Sam Langford
Harry Greb
Henry Armstrong

 

With respect, Mike. I think the point Flash is making, and one I agree with, is that old time boxing writers would have had a limited sphere of knowledge. They would only have seen fighters in the flesh and not had access to film of many thousands like latter day writers so their judgements are based on a much more limited talent pool. They could only evaluate contemporaries; and ones they had seen in the flesh, at that.

Modern writers who are talking about the likes of Hagler, Jones and Monzon will have the benefit of decades worth of other fighters on film which, while not being the same as actually watching fights in the flesh, does give them some basis on which to judge the fighters of their era against fighters of other eras.

In short, old time (ie pre-widespread access to film) writers were very well-placed to give an opinion of who was best in their day, and their day had not (to my knowledge) seen a boxer the like of Jones or Hagler. My suspicion, based on the little I have seen of Ketchel, is that the writers who raved about him would have thought aliens had landed if they ever saw RJJ turn it on. But that's another point. The point I'm trying to make is that I think modern writers' opinions should be given more credence as they have such a vastly larger pool of resources from which to do their research and form their opinions.

 

It's an interesting conundrum isn't it.

If someone is "the best" why didn't they become "the greatest"

And if someone is "better" why didn't they become "greater"

 

Joint #1 Muhammad Ali & Sugar Ray Robinson
What follows is personal choice Those two are boxings best ever though Cause CJ said so LOL

 

Phrased as above ( very succinct ) has resonated, and I will graciously concede to both Flash and your good self.

 

greb