Where do you stand on this issue? Here are 3 examples. Holyfield is still active in the hw division but many years past his best. Morales is still active but hasn't fought at sbw for many years. Wlad is still active and arguably in his prime. I'm not so much interested with where or how you rank these fighters but more how confident you are ranking them. Should we wait for a fighter to retire before ranking them or should we wait for them to just leave their division or even their prime? an active fighters ranking can change all the time and I'm wondering how worthwhile it is ranking them whilst still active.
The list is going to change. Often, probably. Things are too subjective or too close between a lot of fighters for it not to. There's almost always more great fighters of the past to discover or more information/context to learn about one you're already familiar with. If an active guy's ranking goes way up or way down then that's what happens. Knowing that the list is never really going to be invariable or concrete, I don't see any reason not to rank them, if you are already confident in calling them ATG's, that is. There's not much reason for lists apart from the bit of fun of it anyway.
Yeah that's how I see it at the moment. Lists always change especially when you learn more about obscure old timers like Langford, McFarland, gibbons etc. I only use lists as a way of furthering my appreciation and understanding of boxing history.
This has inspired another question: Who ranks higher? Fighter A: A 20-year old who, say, defeats 5 ranked/high level opponents -- or Fighter B: a 35-year old who defeats 10 ranked/high level opponents. Does the fact that Fighter A was so young elevate his accomplishments? And thus making his career as a whole more impressive than that of Fighter B?
good question. like luf said, i take it case by case. usually, i don't care much about age rather than form. hopkins at 36 is different than floyd at roughly the same age, duran at the same age and ali at the same age. he was peak form there and his wins aren't better or worse because of his age. hopkins' later wins against pavlik and tarver, when he was older or moving up in weight, would be ranked higher based on his age for me.
I'm more bothered about a guys prime than his age tbh. Like you say guys age differently. Look at Tyson and Moore for instance.
