Part I: Classic's Consensus P4P Top 10 Inclusions

I only choose boxers that Ive seen reasonable footage......

1. Robinson
2. Ali
3. Pep
4. Armstrong
5. Duran
6. Leonard (Ray)
7. Louis
8. Chavez/Whitaker
10. ??????????

 

Willie Pep should be a lock for any top 10 list, he was the best `boxer` that ever lived.

 

Haven't watched enough of him to have a really informed opinion. It was clearly a great win for Robinson, though. How highly do you rate Gavilan h2h at welter?

 

Yep. It isn't bad.

 

Are you suggesting that we include a H2H measure where the candidates for the top 10 be in hypotheticals against each other...?

 

Bokaj gives me the idea to craft another category for the p4p rankings, one that really separates the elites:

"significant past prime/past weight/past injury wins."

--such a category would give Moore, SRR, Armstrong, Pep and Greb their rightful due.

 

maybe against other fighters in their weight class...head to head a favor pep and saddler over armstrong...because that's the only way we can evaluate how good their skills are. how can you evaluate the overall skill of a fighter if you do not extend your imagination..

it's only 20% and it would not much be a factor...

 

A prime Liston makes my top 5 h2h, possibly my top 3. Frazier is probably just a bit outside my top 5. Foreman is hard to call. He could be a nightmare for most, or very overrated. It's hard to tell since he met so relatively few quality opponents in his prime.

 

i feel moore accomplished more than charles..but people rank charles over moore for his skill and h2h wars. when he is at his best, nobody can beat him at light heavy..

so now, if we set a criteria 100% resume based...did charles really accomplished more that moore?

 

I'm convinced that it would make a mess of things. Who says Pep would beat Armstrong? It is just as likely that he would not and there is no basis for either opinion unless you read Nostradamus. It is pure conjecture. Taking the record as it stands is not. That is where you can more accurately evaluate skills. If you don't like the comp, then you can take points off for "level of comp".

And how would the category be structured? Like this?

"My personal opinion about how this fighter may or may not perform against other historical fighters in his weight class although I'm confused myself when I think about it because every weight class has a different number of peers in the elite group and styles make fights, therefore 20% of my measure is whimsical."

 

I would agree with you this far though: we can devise a "Greatest H2H fighters in every weight division". That would be fun.