P - o - u - n - d - f - o - r - p - o - u - n - d - t - o - p - 1 - 0 - 0

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by DINAMITA, Dec 12, 2008.


  1. 1boricua

    1boricua Facedyourfear youarefree Full Member

    384
    2
    Jun 22, 2007
    Wilfred Benitez is too low. This man beat Duran, almost beat Hearns, had a ggod fight against LEonard. He also was champ at 17 years old and at 22 he was champion in three different weighs (140,147,154).
     
  2. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    You didn't 'tip me off' about him, I had mistakenly wrote Jack Dempsey when I meant Jack Johnson. As I'm sure you will see from Dempsey's rating in my 100 (around 97-98), it was clearly Jack Johnson I meant to write, Dempsey was never in contention.

    No, I don't rate Johnon anywhere near as highly as 8th or 19th, or 2nd at heavyweight. I have him at #56, and to be honest I don't really see the argument for having him any higher.

    Johnson had great size and weight advantages over both Fitzsimmons and Langford (and Ketchel and Burns and O'Brien), Jefferies was coming back from a long lay-off (6 years!) when Johnson beat him. Johnson was KO'd by Jess Willard and never really came back from it.

    When you consider the resume, achievements and longevity of guys from the same era as Johnson, such as Sam Langford and Joe Gans, I don't see how Johnson can compare.
     
  3. Jbuz

    Jbuz Belt folder Full Member

    3,506
    7
    Oct 22, 2004
    **** is he missing? I didn't see that! He should definitely be there. Top 50 for sure.

    EDIT: He is there in tier 5... not quite top 50, I think he should be but each to their own.
     
  4. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    It is impossible for anyone to come up with a definitive, unbiased, 100% honest and considered list. However, it is very possible to come up with a subjective list reflecting your own opinions on who the greatest 100 boxers ever are. That's what this is. I don't claim it as anything else.
     
  5. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    He is not missing. Check again.
     
  6. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    He beat Duran sure, but he was dominated by Leonard and convincingly beaten by Hearns. His resume and longevity do not justify a higher placing IMO.
     
  7. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    He is indeed the best 122 ever, but why does being the best super-bantamweight ever mean he has to be in the top 50? Superbantam is not a division with a rich, deep history like middle or welter. Calzaghe is the best supermiddle ever and McCallum is the best lightmiddle ever - and look at their placings.
     
  8. 1boricua

    1boricua Facedyourfear youarefree Full Member

    384
    2
    Jun 22, 2007

    Wilfredo Gomez make 17 defenses of the title, each one by KO, besides winning the title also by KO.
     
  9. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    I am well aware of all that Gomez achieved, that's why he has a high ranking in my top 100. How many of those defences were against great fighters? Gomez's resume is very good but not great. He lost to the two best fighters he ever fought (Sanchez and Nelson). Your reasoning for having him top 50 seems to rest on his punch power and KO ratio. Carlos Zarate also made it into double figures for world title defences, and his KO ratio was better than Gomez's. Should he also be in the top 50, and above Gomez?
     
  10. MaliSlamusrex

    MaliSlamusrex Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,249
    1
    Nov 10, 2008
    jimmy Wilde and Joe Louis top 10 for me
     
  11. dangerousity

    dangerousity Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,253
    2,301
    Jan 4, 2005
    Great list. Some things I strongly disagree with though.

    1) Muhammad Ali too low. In terms of Resume, H2H Ali simply is right up there, top 3. He has 4 Top 10 HW ATG's on his resume, all that needs to be said.

    2) No way Carlos Monzon is above Ray Leonard. SRL has wins over a top 10 in your list + Hagler, Hearns & Benitez! In terms of H2H & resume, how can you justify Monzon being above SRL? Heck I think SRL UD Monzon.

    3) Hopkins over Hagler. Just no. Hagler has a win over Duran & Hearns...how can that be compared to a win over Tito & Hoya? Both fighters which rank much higher on your list too. In terms of MW competition, Hagler stomps all over Hopkins too. OK Hopkins has wins over Tarver & Pavlik but in Haglers era, those guys would be hard to separate from the list of tough contenders Hagler beat. They would simply be made to look like just another contender.
     
  12. dangerousity

    dangerousity Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,253
    2,301
    Jan 4, 2005
    How would you rate him if he went to beat someone like Hopkins or Calzaghe? :) Would you, could you rate him about SRR then?

    Personally I think Pac will beat Hatton next, then fight Floyd and loose a close SD(may change my mind on that later though) and then retire.
     
  13. JoeAverage

    JoeAverage Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,150
    1
    Oct 26, 2008
    Probably no fighter has EVER fought as high a percentage of fights on hostile soil and STILL been as dominant as Monzon. Just that is an incredible accomplishment.
     
  14. dangerousity

    dangerousity Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,253
    2,301
    Jan 4, 2005
    Dominance, this guy has lost 3 times and drawn about 10 times. Emile Grifitth gave him a hell of a fight....he wasn't invincible in there. I dont see where he fights has anything to do with it...Pac virtually never fights in the philippines, doesnt seem to bother him too much. Its quite irrelevant IMO, the crowd cant help you in the ring.

    Great fighter no doubt, Hagler should be rated above him though and SRL most definitely rated above him.
     
  15. JoeAverage

    JoeAverage Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,150
    1
    Oct 26, 2008
    Having read the list carefully, I would make these changes.

    ODLH should not be on the list. He has been too inconsistent to warrant a place among the greatest of the greatest like that.

    Morales is doubtful too. I would put him right at the end and maybe not in.

    Monzon is a couple of places too low.

    Hopkins is about 10 places to high. I am not convinced of old Tarver (who Dawson beat far more easily than old Johnson) nor Pavlik (at 170). So above 160 Bernard still hasn't done enough imo. (despite some people favoring him over Pavlik. That some people were wrong does not change reality of the fight. Just like Lcy doesn't become an amazing fighter just because some people thought he was). Bernard needs to beat someone who is not old or unproven above 160 to elevate his ranking p4p all time as high as he is there. He needs to beat someone like Kessler or Dawson, or both. Then I will accept his position.