1. SRR 2. Henry Armstrong 3. Roberto Duran Willie Pep, Benny Leonard, Tony Canzonari, Sam Langford are right there too.
The Hearns loss doesnt mean much imo legacy-wise, and i understand what you mean about the Leonard one, but there is an argument against this. The man had so many bouts and this is just one loss, i dont look so much at the manner of the loss (though you have a point), or the win for that matter, more the name who that loss or win was against, which is the first and foremost thing that should be considered. Like i said, i dont like Ali, but any1 who doesnt think Ali is a h2h monster in his prime is being a bit silly imo. Say what you want about close fights or anything, but the man is ridiculously difficult to beat. His resume was amazing aswell, cant see how you can disagree with that. EDIT: Also, Duran in his prime i hope you dont underestimate. You look at the 135 Duran and you are simply viewing one of the finest practicioners ever, and this is a p4p scenario so you should think of the man in his prime before considering other aspects which enhance his claim to the top 3. And also, i think arguing that you cant have a HW in the list simply because he is a HW is not a valid argument, i understand your reasoning, but if a guy is a freak of nature such as the one i chose, and can do things that smaller men can even better than them, then he may be considered
Ive just edited my post, have a look. The man should be considered first and foremost in his prime. A lightweight going up against 154-pound prime Hearns and getting beaten (even like that), doesnt lose much creditibility when you consider his achievements
How would you rate Robinson if Maxim had flattened him like that? Would you hold it against him or dismiss it?