Sugar Ray Robinson Muhammad Al Harry Greb Henry Armstrong Joe Louis Willie Pep Roberto Duran Benny Leonard Sam Langford Jack Johnson Jack Dempsey Joe Gans Sugar Ray Leonard Gene Tunney Bob Fitzsimmons Jimmy Wilde Ezzard Charles Mickey Walker Archie Moore Stanley Ketchel George Foreman Tony Canzoneri Barney Ross Jimmy McLarnin Julio Cesar Chavez Marcel Cerdan Rocky Marciano Joe Frazier Sandy Saddler Terry McGovern Billy Conn Carlos Monzon Jose Napoles Emile Griffith Marvin Hagler Eder Jofre Thomas Hearns Larry Holmes Ruben Olivares Evander Holyfield Ted "Kid" Lewis Alexis Arguello Pernell Whitaker Roy Jones Jr. Bernard Hopkins Mike Tyson Barbados Joe Walcott George Dixon Mike Spinks Salvador Sanchez That list is in order and the main topic of discussion I want to bring up is why is there such a devide in a opinion regarding Pernell Whitaker? He's a superstar on the Classic Forum, and most people draw the line at him being one place below the great Sugar Ray Leonard, whereas guys like Monte Cox and Teddy Atlas have him down in the lower 40's. Is it simply because we tend to overrate fighters of our own era? Discuss the greatness of Pernell. My thoughts on the list are as follows. Too low - Michael Spinks, Joe Walcott, Pernell Whitaker, Alexis Arguello Too High - Julio Cesar Chavez, George Foreman, Joe Frazier, Larry Holmes Shouldn't be on the list - Mike Tyson
jofre is in the rightful spot monzon, sweet pea, hagler, charles and moore too low.. frazier,wilde, dixon, dempsey and cerdan too high
Just glancing at the list for about a minute, the first ones to be out of place were Too Low Chavez Charles Spinks Hagler Too High Ketchel Cerdan Fraizer Also where the Hell is Ricardo Lopez!!
Okay some more Way too high Dempsey High Canzoneri Tunney Atg but a little high Way too low Pernell Whittaker Low Barbadoes joe walcott And Oscar Delahoya should definitly be on this list.
He wouldn't make Monte's top 150... Let this Lopez thing go matey, you overrate him to the same extent Rooster overrates Norris. Only just noticed Dempsey. He's way to high, indeed.
Barreras my boy too,but hey i got Lopez over him Lopez should be between 25-35. Even a great boxing publication like Sports illustrated put him 10 Serious though they did.
Barrera taps Lopez's ass ****** style. Seriously though, back to the list, I'm scratching my head at having Mike Tyson on the list. Did he ever beat a great prime fighter? He had 5 years of domination and could never rekindle the same form after the initial loss. ...Mike would be at a lower end of a top 100 for me.
Addie, there is clearly a nostalgic emphasis on heavyweights, which probably explains your question about Pernell Whitaker's position to some to degree. JCC's positioning well above Whitaker says a lot about the credibility of Pernell's placement as well. Having someone like Bernard right next to Whitaker raises a lot of questions, beating lesser opposition, many of which naturally smaller, and ending up 2 spots below Pernell.
I think Mikes place is about right. I see your point of view also, but Mike was an unstoppable force when he was in his prime,and I dont think you can honestly count on one hand a fighther with a combination of SPeed,Power,and Ferociousness,in any weight class not just heavyweight.
A fighter who didn't have the capacity to overcome adversity despite being faced with it plenty of times...cannot be among the top 50 for me. His resume and longevity doesn't even give him a fighting chance here, the two best fighters he ever fought beat him, and the HW scene was ghastly during his domination. Later on Lewis, Bowe, and Holyfield would emerge...and Tyson was nowhere to be seen.
Good point on Tyson but im sticking with Him as a 45to 50 Atg. Back to the rankings Johnson a little high Foreman way high
I'd want to see his criteria before criticizing his list, but according to my own criteria, it's a pretty unjustifiable effort.