Deepest division in boxing history

Buchanan in the 20s says it all. That’s depth right there.

 

In terms of greatness I'd say welter or middle but in terms of deepness it has to be lightweight. I could think of light weights that would rank about 40th that would be p4p listers now

 

How are you not gonna name Mayweather, Mosely, Chavez, De La Hoya, Whitaker, Crawford, Lomachenko, and Arguello?

 

I know the thread starter means all time.

But 1987-1991...that MW division sure as hell had some depth.

 

It has to be one of the original 8, obviously

IDKS about weight classes lower than welter, so I can't really answer fairly.

 

Because I rate them at other divisions?

And what on earth did Mosley, Crawford, Loma and Del a Hoya do to be ranked so high?

 

H2H. Depth of a division is based on H2H.

 

Guys like Henry Armstrong and Tony Canzoneri being top 20 probably swung it towards Featherweight in my head. It's pretty close though, I reckon.

 

In the last 40years its 130

DLH
Chavez
Arguello
Pacquiao
JMM
Floyd
Barrera
Morales
Nelson
Fenech
Gomez
Camacho

Thats 12 of the top 40 fighters of last 40 years

 

If you class Chavez and Whitaker as lightweights, where do they feature?

 

Outside the top 20. Probably 25-30.

But I go by résumés(at the weight), not skills, otherwise they'd be top 10 locks.

Chavez's 3 fights or so aren't enough and as for Whitaker, he basically has Nelson, Paez, Diaz, McGirt and Ramirez 2*. I don't think that's better than any in my top 20. LW is that deep.

 

It’s always going to be one of the original eight. Personally I love Bantamweight and feel the depth is crazy good:

Jofre, Olivares, Zarate, Al Brown, Ortiz, Herman, Williams, Lynch, McGovern, Taylor, Coulon, Rose, Medel, Castillo, Herrera, Martinez, Memphis Pal Moore, Canizales, R. Marquez, Inoue, Donaire, Zamora, Beccera, Macias, Escobar, Chandler, Pintor, Halimi, Carruthers, Caldwell, Rudkin, Pimentel etc; etc; etc; etc;

 

You don’t really rate Whitaker it seems. I was not a fan of his but he was incredible. Pendleton, Haugen, Mayweather weren’t slouches either and he completely schooled them. He made everyone look terrible such was his dominance and was undisputed. He also beat Ramirez twice doesn’t really matter what the judges say. I think you’ve got to factor in accomplishment/milestones and dominance as part of the equation.

Chavez, I agree, isn’t top 20. He only had about 4-5 fights there.

 

+ Morales and Lomachenko

 

I don't. Anyone half decent can be the best of a bad bunch. I don't find dominace particularly important. In my eyes, a win's a win (excluding DQs). Given who Whitaker beat, I don't find it top 20 worthy. Similar to what I don't have Foster top 15 at LHW. Similar to why I don't have Ketchel top 10 at 160. Similar to why I don't have Dempsey top 15 at HW.

As to your point, I have Whitaker top 5 H2H at 135. I rate him very highly, I just don't rate the people he beat highly, and for my mine, Résumé means a lot more than anything else.