HW resume against opponents who have, at one time or another, featured in the top 10.

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by lufcrazy, Aug 23, 2011.


  1. edward morbius

    edward morbius Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,986
    1,262
    Sep 5, 2011
    hhascup

    Henry, I am confused about something. I thought Conn gave up his lightheavy title in 1940 to campaign as a heavyweight. Anton Christoforidis defeated Melio Bettina in Jan of 1941 for the title and then Gus Lesnevich defeated Christoforidis in May, 1941. Conn was the #1 heavyweight contender when he fought Louis in June.

    Where am I going wrong?
     
  2. hhascup

    hhascup Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,685
    178
    Dec 27, 2006
    Your right about that But Conn was still recognized as the Light Heavyweight Champion by Ring Magazine before he fought Louis in 1941. This is just another eason why I included the Light Heavyweight Champions.

    What is even worse is that Conn was out of boxing for over 4 years and was rated #1 when he fought Louis the 2nd time.
     
  3. edward morbius

    edward morbius Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,986
    1,262
    Sep 5, 2011
    "Conn was still recognized as the Light Heavyweight Champion by Ring Magazine"

    Thanks, Henry. Didn't know that.
     
  4. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,507
    21,898
    Sep 15, 2009
    There is absolutely nothing difficult with it at all; it's just data sorting.

    Pre tunney it takes a bit longer and there are incomplete records to deal with but 99% of the data is available through google.

    This was just my first step, I next intend to only include "meaningful" fights which is a bit more difficult since it includes much more context.

    I've already done a judgement on each hw number 1's legacy, plus i've watched all the peak footage I can find so I can judge their skillset.

    Resume is just the last obstacle. As I said it's just data sorting. Takes time but not at all difficult.
     
  5. hhascup

    hhascup Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,685
    178
    Dec 27, 2006
    I've done all that before. The most difficult thing is finding out who was rated at the time they fought them.

    I also have lists of ratings that go all the way back to 1881, but there yearly ratings. The Ring Ratings started back in February 1925, and at 1st it was just yearly ratings as well.
     
  6. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,507
    21,898
    Sep 15, 2009
    I think more than that is required tbh because, for instance, floyd wasn't rated when ortiz fought him, holmes wasn't rated when tyson fought him etc. Then on the other scale you have examples like ali being rated 1 when spinks fought him then you have the inconsistency between the ratings policy when they stripped all their champions.

    I'm just doing this to get a sense of greatness for each fighter. One of the few reasons I don't just look for guys rated when they fought.
     
  7. hhascup

    hhascup Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,685
    178
    Dec 27, 2006
    That's the exception!

    I have it both ways, if they were ever rated and when they were rated as well. Conn was rated #1 but didn't fight for over 4 years.

    There a lot of boxers that were well past there prime and years since they were rated, that fought Champions as well.

    Example:
    Ali fought 49 fights against fighters that were rated in the top 10 at one time or another. He fought 37 times against fighters that were rated when he fought them.
     
    Bokaj likes this.
  8. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,507
    21,898
    Sep 15, 2009
    Yeah I have no idea how he overtook bivins in the rankings.

    Ofcourse you're right there are some cases with shot champions but i'd argue beating a shot champion is usually as good as beating a fringe top ten guy and usually results in said fighter entering the top ten (recent example being helenius)

    As much as I hate to admit it, there's no real formula to greatness. All you can do is sort through the data and make a decision.

    I'd say johnson's win over jeffries was highly significant despite a 5 year absence.
     
  9. ironchamp

    ironchamp Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,365
    1,033
    Sep 5, 2004
    Great Job LufCrazy!!
     
  10. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,507
    21,898
    Sep 15, 2009
    Cheers ironchamp!
     
  11. ronnyrains

    ronnyrains Active Member Full Member

    1,211
    833
    May 27, 2014



    Hhascup:
    Really like there's someone else who does that rating research, Somehow I have always been intrigued by it, I always had a problem going with Ring or the WBA, I also get the newspaper wires' of the times, and they usually used the WBA, Personally i'd say the Ring was better, until Don King got his mitts in them, But they really had no jurisdiction, like WBA- who were very biased, as Ranking Frazier from a much deserved #2 to #9-the Tournament of 67-68. And Charles Liston July 1969 #2 then next month #5 for no apparent reason!- Whom do you go by?? Ring has where they did not miss a month in their publications until late 1980's-WBA you did not know what they were going to do, And I thought Randy Gordon was one of the best, for World and International boxing, but they did not start their rankings until late 1971.-boxing illustrated- day late, dollar short, did like the top 50 thou-only reference for the prospects, and lesser knowns.
     
    sweetsci likes this.
  12. ronnyrains

    ronnyrains Active Member Full Member

    1,211
    833
    May 27, 2014
    WOW , I CANNOT TELL IF THAT IS YOU OR ME, I'M NOT KIDDING, I'VE done Muhammad's like yours to the letter , I know I have not done Joe Louis opponents so i believe to be yours, I would like to use WBA buts its hard to get month to month every month, not like Ring which was gosphel! AND I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID. . I have 1959-79 100 % ACCURATE . how would one get a copy of your findings Hhascup? AND Thanks for chiming in!

    How are you MONTHLY ON THE WBA?, AND YES MUHAMMAD ALI 32-5 (20 KO RING) , AND 32-5 (19 KO WBA)
    WBA WOULD TURN ME OFF LIKE FRAZIER #2 TO #9 . But like you said, newspapers favored WBA Ratings, Ring TOO some mostly -WBA
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2019
  13. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,104
    8,802
    Aug 15, 2018
  14. ronnyrains

    ronnyrains Active Member Full Member

    1,211
    833
    May 27, 2014
    Hhascup: I have done about 30 heavyweights on here vs rated Top Ten Opponents, I call it 'Ten Count' -if you want to check them out. ON BOXING 24

    Jerry Quarry 'Ten Count'

    1967
    Floyd Patterson - # 3- Draw 10
    Floyd Patterson - # 5- Won 12

    1968
    Thad Spencer-# 2- Won KO 12
    Jimmy Ellis - # 3- Lost 15 WBA

    1969
    Buster Mathis-# 6- Won 12
    Joe Frazier - NYSAC Heavyweight Champion - LOSS 7

    1970
    Mac Foster - # 1- Won KO 6

    1971
    Jack Bodell-# 8- Won KO 1

    1972
    Larry Middleton - # 7- Won 10
    Muhammad Ali - # 1- Lost KO 7

    1973
    Ron Lyle - # 3- Won 12
    Earnie Shavers - # 6 - Won KO 1

    1974
    Joe Frazier - # 2- Lost KO 5

    1975
    Ken Norton - # 4- Lost KO 5

    Overall record: 53-9-4 (32 KO)
    Record vs. top 10 rated opponents : 8-5-1 (4 KO).
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2019
    Bokaj likes this.
  15. ronnyrains

    ronnyrains Active Member Full Member

    1,211
    833
    May 27, 2014
    I woke up they other morning and realized, why the heck Muhammad Ali fought Evangelista when he could have fought undefeated Duane Bobick (Madison Square Garden) instead. Really Insert some more interest in the sport like only he could! --I say MSG because Bobick was being promoted there, and fought undercard of ALI VS DUNN vs Bunny Johnson in Munich! A lot prestige glamour and money , would have went through with that one.