Maybe I'm finally admitting it

I think that the following fighters were greater in terms of acomplishment:

Bob Fitzsimmons

Sam Langford

Harry Greb

Henry Armstrong

Who was better in terms of ability head to head?

I don't care, much less will I try to work out the impossible.

 

In actual h2h boxing terms I think robinson and louis are the clear 1 & 2.

 

:good

 

I don't think Bob Fitzsimmons accomplished more than Ezzard Charles.

 

Wow. Louis gets p4p love.

I disagree.

 

Me, too.

 

A third agreement of disagreement on Louis. A tricky case as he tore down bigger fighters, but was himself troubled by smaller opposition. Perhaps the greatest HW but not top tier P4P material IMHO (He's somewhere around the 15-25 bracket I believe). Interestingly enough, if Louis is a close 2nd to Ali at HW how far apart are they considering their prime weight difference was about 12 lbs apart? I think most have Ali ahead on a P4P curve but that's a debate I'm willing to hear about. Who really ranks Ali #2 besides casuals?

 

Langford was the best. Incredible fighter.

 

I always think when looking at resume its tit for tat between Robinson , Armstrong and Greb.

When looking for some ultimate H2H fighter on a P4P scale i would say its pretty much tit for tat between Robisnon and B.Leonard.

With him being in both elite brackets imo then its very fair to regard him as the greatest.

 

Louis is nowhere near the best fighter ever or even in the top tier, I'm in agreement with that. I've never really understood the Armstrong over Robinson thing, either. Ray just outdoes him in virtually every category for me - resume, peak ability, dominance/consistency, longevity, etc.

Basically, I can understand Langford or Greb outranking him in terms of greatness because they beat a more impressive list of fighters, plain and simple. Ray was the best ever though, I have little doubt about that. Factor that in, and yeah, I consider him the GOAT.

 

2b fair , Louis , Ali , d Klitschkos and maybe / probably even George Foreman r not even top 100 p4p .

crappers go about "Louis is not top 5 p4p , more like top 15-25 " because they never had a top 30 list .

 

First and foremost ;-)

Secondly, I know what you are saying. The best way to put it would be 'Joe Louis needed you to stand in front of him'. But he was a potent offensive force nonetheless, with a very good resume as well as a long title run. I think his victories over opponents big and small prove he is just about the best fighting force of all time at around the 200lb mark. For that reason alone, he'll always rank in the 11-15 range for me for 'greatness', and will always be one of the most dangerous men I have come across.

In terms of fighters that threw beautiful textbook combos, I think there's a clear differential between Louis and say, Ricardo Lopez.

Thanks for the reply, did you get the PM I sent you?

 

It's certainly hard to pick a clear deficiency in Robinson's overal ability. If forced, I'd say his defence wasn't superb, but it was still very good.... plus, with unsurpassed offensive capabilities, that is your defence. It seems that only when he started facing naturally bigger dudes, this became somewhat of a weakness.

Still, less a weakness than for instance Pep's lack of power.

By the way, I believe Langford deserves to be mentioned among those names.

 

What's the issue with Joe Louis?