ESPN'S 50 Greatest Boxers of All Time...

Me thinks I shall come up with a list of authorised names to call certain posters :smoke

In any event, I see Johnson ranks rather high... I'm still trying to put a decisive finger on the why in that one.

 

All names will be based upon whether I like or dislike a particular poster's avatar

Back to the thread point:

In any event, I see Johnson ranks rather high... I'm still trying to put a decisive finger on the why in that one.

 

those who i think they might be higher:
monzon at 45??he deserves a top 15 easy imo
roy jones at 46?he desereves a top 30 imo
mayweather needs to be in the top 30 also
tyson should be a little bit higher imo
those who i think they might be lower:
de la hoya definitely
emile griffith shoudlnt be on that list
napoles should be a little bit lower

im ok with the others

 

Well, for one, i think Whitaker is WAY to low...

 

What are you, a ****?

 

Joe Frazier above Whitaker. Ridiculous.

 

Ali too high but still top ten. Jack Johnson should be in the 40 to 50 range if at all on this list. Monzon should be way higher. Frazier and Foreman are a bit too high also. But generally, a very good list.

 

This just goes to show you that many posters on ESB have greater knowledge and understanding of the sport and it's history than the so-called-experts who write for ESPN, Yahoo, CBS, etc.

 

It's a terrible list.

 

Ali #1, SRR #2. Put Marciano in top 5. Monzon and Haglar should both be higher. Was Salvador Sanchez on the list? If not, where do you rank him, I'd put him top 30.

 

ESPN's list is quite possibly the worst top 50 list I have ever seen, and that's including reference to some of the lists I've seen on the ESB general forum, which is REALLY saying something.

 

We don't know what criteria they used for their list. I'd abstain from criticism until I knew what principles they compiling it.

 

As they said:

The fighters in this list have been assessed on four main criteria:

In-ring performance: A subjective measure and, to some degree, unquantifiable, but an important one. There's more to being considered a great fighter than compiling wins and collecting championship belts. There's also the manner in which the fights are fought and the wins are won -- the skill, the talent, the heart. Muhammad Ali brought a whole new style and panache to heavyweight boxing. Rocky Marciano and Evander Holyfield each defined fighting heart. Roy Jones Jr. and Floyd Mayweather Jr. at times displayed flashes of skill and superiority of a kind rarely seen in a boxing ring. At his peak, Mike Tyson didn't so much knock out his opponents as send them flying across the ring.


Achievements: Blistering power or silky smooth boxing moves aren't enough. Boxing's landscape is littered with fighters whose achievements did not end up matching their skill or talent. Almost all the fighters on this list fought at or near the pinnacle of the sport for years -- most either won multiple world titles or defended one title multiple times. Stanley Ketchel defended his middleweight championship 11 times in a short life that ended at 24. Harry Greb won the middleweight title despite being half blind in one eye, and went on to fight light heavyweights and heavyweights. George Foreman won the heavyweight championship of the world, lost it, retired, came back 10 years later and regained the crown at age 45. Henry Armstrong held world championships at three weights at the same time.
The exceptions all have good reasons for being so. Sam Langford, for example, was denied the opportunity to ever contest a world championship bout. Marcel Cerdan was injured during the first defense of his middleweight title and died in a plane crash before he could win back his crown.


Dominance: A factor that arguably works against those from eras with deeper talent pools, but one which rewards those who stood out from among their peers. Joe Louis was heavyweight champion for 11 years. Robinson suffered just one defeat in his first 123 bouts. Cerdan lost only four times in 110 fights, and each of them was due to disqualification, dodgy judging or injury. Pep allegedly once won a round without throwing a punch.


Mainstream appeal: This is the wild-card element. It's a disadvantage for most modern fighters, who compete in a time when boxing is no longer a mainstream sport, but it also conversely greatly boosts the candidacies of those few contemporary boxers who have achieved crossover recognition. In particular, it substantially elevates De La Hoya and Tyson, two boxers who might otherwise not be as high on this list -- or even on it at all. De La Hoya is perhaps the only active boxer with widespread name recognition outside of boxing circles, and nobody brought a buzz to the sport in recent decades to anything like the degree of Tyson -- who, for better or worse, remains synonymous with modern boxing in the public mind.

This list, then, is not just the 50 greatest fighters of all time. It is the 50 fighters who were the greatest in their time. It is a tribute to the boxers who have gone before, and to those who have strived to reach the standard their predecessors have set.

 

Well, the last point is quite probably what has made it so unusual, as compared to what you usually see on this forum or other sites. Most other ratings consider only first two points, and to some degree the 3rd one.