Who has a better argument as to being the greatest fighter in the history of their respective division? Why? Because your threads all suck.
Well played. Technically, the "respective divisions" mention would disqualify the Non Pariel by the insistence of multiple divisions and Freddie being a noted middle without a namesake in another division.
I pick Dempsey because I think he is top 5 at heavyweight whereas Steele just gets in my top ten at middle,and I think the divisions are comparable for quality.
Rarely do I disagree with you so. Dempsey doesn't even make the Top Ten in the heavyweight division. Steele has a good argument for #3. And the middleweight division is one of the two best in the sport's history while the heavyweight division is definitively the second worst.
I'd rate Steele just below Apostoli at middleweight, and I'm not sure Apostoli is quite top 10. Dempsey would almost certainly make my top 10 at heavyweight, but I guess that position is entirely disputable too. To be fair, the MW division is far more stacked historically.
I think we agree more often than not, only that Kid Blackie is more often a subject in these parts than not. I was trying to link a middleweight ranking done on another website but apparently that is verboten. Google boxing+scene greatest middleweights. It's a ranking I endorse. Steele at #5.
A few years ago Steele would not have been on my radar now ,thanks to Classic I have learned a bit about him. He looks explosive on film, fast ,elusive ,unpredictable, and explosive!
For whatever it is worth, people would not have thought Steele worthy to clean Dempsey’s spit bucket, while he was actually active. If Jack Dempsey walked into the room back then, it was like Muhammad Ali walking into the room today.