How come the strong consensus is Ali and Louis are the top 2 heavyweights of all time?

3 and 4 after Ali and Louis if historical standing is a parameter in ranking.

 

I agree that changes in refereeing, gloves, and rules have influenced how boxing has evolved, but I don’t think that fully explains the differences in skill application across eras. While some older fighters had exceptional footwork, the general level of ring movement and positioning has advanced, particularly in how modern fighters integrate it with defensive and offensive sequences. You mentioned Pep and Robinson, and of course, they were brilliant at using angles, but their style of movement was different—more fluid and reactive rather than the systematic angle-cutting and pivots that fighters like Lomachenko and Usyk have refined today. The distinction isn’t that fighters of the past lacked footwork but that modern fighters, especially at the elite level, have made it a more universally drilled skill across weight classes.

Regarding the jab, I never claimed it wasn’t a fundamental weapon in the past—it absolutely was. But the key difference is that today, nearly every elite fighter incorporates a well-developed jab, whereas in the past, it was more selective. Many top fighters historically relied on other weapons without consistently building their entire offense around the jab. Today’s fighters tend to use it more systematically in setups, feints, and range control, making it a more common skill rather than something reserved for the very best technicians.

On combination punching, I’m not saying today’s fighters throw better combinations in every way, but the way combinations are structured has evolved. Older fighters often worked more in tight, compact bursts on the inside, whereas today’s elite fighters tend to throw at mid-range with greater emphasis on positioning and exit strategies. The game has become less about relentless pressure and more about tactical positioning, which is why inside fighting has become less prominent.

The point about Pacquiao and Mayweather benefiting from favorable conditions is fair in the sense that they had longer careers due to better management, but their skill level—particularly in areas like defensive responsibility, ring generalship, and adaptability—still represents an evolution from previous eras. Mayweather’s style, for example, took the shoulder roll and counterpunching to a level of refinement never seen before. Pacquiao, on the other hand, is a great example of how southpaw fighting has evolved. In the past, southpaws were often awkward, one-handed fighters relying almost exclusively on their left hand for offense. Pacquiao represents the fully realized, modern southpaw—ambidextrous in attack, using angles, head movement, and hand-fighting to create openings rather than just relying on a natural stance advantage. He wasn’t just a physically gifted outlier but a product of how southpaw strategy had developed into a complete system rather than a stylistic oddity.

I don’t disagree that fighters like Pep, Robinson, Louis, and Ali would still be competitive today—they were outliers who had skill sets advanced for their time. But that’s not the point. The argument isn’t whether individual all-time greats could compete today; it’s that the overall skill level and tactical approach of boxing have progressed. There are always all-time greats who could transcend eras, but the average top-level fighter today generally operates with a more complete set of tools than in previous decades.

So, while some skills have been lost (inside fighting being the most obvious), others—like footwork integration, jab usage across the board, defensive structure, ring positioning, and the refinement of southpaw strategy—have clearly advanced. It’s not about dismissing the past but recognizing how the sport has evolved while maintaining its core fundamentals.

 

I like what you write but just cannot agree on some aspects. Langford cut off the ring very well, as did Gans, as did Fitz by all report. Fighters have known how to walk, manoeuvre and trick their opponent right into a danger zone with feints and footwork for over 100 years. Pep pivoted and angled off to open up punching combinations as did Robbi - in fact, prime Ali's footwork, circling, changing direction, slipping, weaving and spinning when his back touches the ropes, whilst blading and hiding his chin behind the shoulder is more Pep like than it is like Robbi who he was often likened to for fluidity of movement IMO. This wasn't a reactive movement type of boxing, this was a rhythmic pugilistic dance that they used to feint their opponents off-balance, change headshots, angles, open up punching opportunities. Usyk and Loma are from a newer school but they aren't the rule - they're moreso the exception. I propose that elite fighters will be elite regardless of era and regardless of stylistic nuance of the day - that Canzoneri didn't fight out of a high guard doesn't mean that he is lesser skilled than Winky Wright.

Floyd used the shoulder roll and played in areas where he was relatively safe. He didn't really do anything different outside of being a greater athlete at the shoulder roll and counter style than what did George Benton, Archie, Ezz, Toney at times. Indeed, I would venture Toney sitting in the danger zone, without Floyd's excellent balance and footwork, countering and rolling with the shoulder as requiring a higher degree of skill than Floyd doing so and using his forearm to the face to push down and off balance his opponent in pure boxing terms. There is of course great skill in how Floyd employed his framing and leveraged his reach.

As far as back as Jem Mace, there have always been boxers who used footwork and a great jab to get in and out of danger, control range and angle off when boxing. I just cannot marry myself with the notion that it is a relatively modern thing and that older fighters were much more short-range fighters when I can see Gans down to Benny Leonard using a strong jab and pivotting around it, keeping their opponents from setting feet, framing and slipping and sliding with footwork to keep them turning and to keep landing jabs.

Southpaw improvement is probably moreso that they're no longer converted to orthodox - I don't see that southpaws have evolved to a point that they are superior to the best orthodox fighters and I know this isn't your point but my genuine reaction is so what? Hand fighting is a very old school skill - I was doing it in Muay Thai ages ago - guard and wrist manipulations, hand checks, elbow checks and traps, shoulder checks - all these skills have been honed in catch-as-can and other grappling formats. Jack Johnson was an extremely dominant fighter in manipulating his opponent's arms and gloves at his whim, as have others been.

I still don't see how the jab is now all of a sudden more widely integrated when the jab has been a commonly used punch since LPR days and definitely since Dempsey plied his trade. Louis' jab is an ATG jab - we forget how good his jab was because of how good his punches and especially combinations were generally. I am not seeing where this evolution of a well-developed jab being common for most fighters arose - again, what's the cut off point for where you can say this is a modern era and a certain percentage of fighters employ a well-developed jab?

Funnily enough, PBF is of Roy's era and wasn't spoken of in the same breath when Roy was at his mercurial best - Roy never used a jab with any consistency (the Paz fight is probably the one that I recall him even trying to use a jab somewhat consistently and he soon abandoned it and reverted to type if I recall correctly), preferring to lead with leaping left hooks and right hand leads. This is a stylistic preference and one that overcame more orthodox, arguably skilled fighters for a very long time.

 

I think we’re mostly in agreement, but I’m focusing on how skills have become more refined across the average elite fighter, whereas you're pointing to individual outliers. There have always been fighters with great footwork, angles, and defensive techniques (Pep, Gans, Robinson) but these skills weren’t as widespread or systematically trained as they are today. What fighters like Lomachenko and Usyk represent isn’t just personal talent but a broader evolution where movement, angles, and positional control are more universally drilled rather than being the trademark of a select few.

Same goes for the jab. Of course, great jabs existed but in the past, plenty of top fighters got by without one. Today, it’s a fundamental tool that almost every elite fighter develops. The shift isn’t that the past lacked great jabbers, but that a well-developed jab is now an expectation rather than a specialty.

With Floyd and the shoulder roll, I agree Benton, Toney, and others used it well, but Floyd took it a step further, turning it into a full defensive system that dictated range and controlled exchanges, rather than just a countering tool in the pocket. Likewise, southpaws have evolved beyond relying solely on their left hand, Pacquiao, for example, became a complete two-handed fighter, something much rarer in older generations of southpaws.

I’m not saying past fighters weren’t skilled. I’m saying that what was once the domain of a handful of exceptional fighters has become the baseline for elite fighters today. The greats of the past would still be great, but the average elite fighter today has a more well-rounded, systematized skill set than those of previous eras.

 

1a Ali
1b Louis