Please Participate--All-Time Welterweight Survey (POLL CLOSED!! )

who is marlon sterling

 

looks ok by and large

 

if we're being picky,benitez is too low but otherwise its good

 

cotto to high

 

Could use a Pea and/or a Cobra, but other than that...pinch of salt, yeah just right.

 

When will people learn, democracy does not works!!!

Seriously, great work Rumsfeld, and the list is not that bad...

 

Some interesting observations:

Freddie 'Red' Cochrane is the longest reigning welterweight title holder ever. He did not get a single vote (though the reasoning is probably clear).

The next longest reigning champ is Jose Napoles, with a 5 year reign (interupted). He ranks in 4th place.

The Third longest reign is Tommy Ryan. with 4 years, who retired undefeated as a welterweight title and relinquished his title and soon after won the middleweight title. He ranks 15th.

Pernel Whittaker also has a 4 year reign. Being displayed on full technicolour screens and being a very recent champion usually gives fighters a massive advantage in these polls due to common knowledge. Whittaker ranks 17th!

The next longest reign is Sugar Ray Robinson, also with 4 years, although his reign was not taken by beating the previous champion, Marty Servo, who vacated the title and Sugar Ray Robinson was handed it by beating (on points) Tommy Bell , the (now) unknown fighter, who had in the previous two years lost 6 fights, including a previous loss to Sugar Ray Robinson! Not really the best way to establish an undisputed lineage title and one would expect, it would have been at least a couple of years before Robinson would be credited as the undisputed champion especially since the previous unbeaten champion, although fighting heavier opponents, was still weighing in under the limit, and only relinqueshed the title (according to boxrec) due to a aching nose. Robinson ranked number 1 on every single list bar 2.

Incidentally, as a bit of a side issue, Marty Servo beat the Red Cochrane, the longest reigning champion ever, lost 2 controversial decisions to the great Sugar Ray Robinson, one of which was apparently loudly booed by the crowd and actually was a win according to the referees decision, and probably would have been a newspaper decision if the fight had taken place just a few years early when these decisions were relied upon. He did not even get a mention, let alone a vote in this list.

Emille Griffiths 4 year reign was an interupted one. He ranks 6th.

The next longest reigns are 3 years. They are Palomino, curtis cokes and Kid Galivan. Palomino reigned until losing focus and having two close points losses to Wilfred Benitez and Roberto Duran both of whom were all time greats according to this survey. He ranks 29th.

Curtis Cokes, who would have reigned a lot longer if he hadnt met with the all time great in Jose Napoles, was not ranked at all!

Kid Gavilan and Joe Walcott ranked 5th and 9th respectively.

All in all, it quite clear that legacy and length of reign is not valued highly at ESB, in the welterweight division. I am not sure why, though i tend to suspect the division needs a lot more discussion on the board which would greatly change the rankings, imo.

 

Sign of an intelligent board imo. The length of a reign is quite a meaningless gauge in and of itself as to a fighter's worth.

I'm more disappointed that a guy like Billy Graham, who never even held the title, didn't get a mention. He was better than at least 10 of the guys named in that top 35.

 

It can be, with the prime example being Sam Langford or Harry Wills, or even Red Cochrane.

But, at the end of the day, the way to establish a legacy is to win the world title and defend the world title. It is difficult with the lower weights, because you need to consider what weight, if anything you give to performances at higher but similar weights. I dont believe, in making an alltime great list based on film and totally subjective opinions because it is impossible to pick. I watched Shane Cameron vs Friday Ahunya not long ago and they both looked technically pretty good yet David Tua, who had looked dreadful previously beat Cameron in a round and would in all honesty almost certainly dominate Ahunya. In an all time great list you can only use results that occurred to rank fighters, imo. Longevity is a large part of that.

saying this, i agree with your general point, and the lack of consideration given to other lesser known fighters is also a little disappointing. As i pointed out previously, Marty Servo beat (on the referees card) the man who was no 1 on every list bar two, when that man was in his prime and at his best weight, yet i dare say that in 90% of the lists he never even got a thought let alone a vote. This is why i am firm in my opinion that lack of knowledge played a big part in this particular poll and why i think the division could do with so much more discussion on the board.

 

Thats a good list although i feel that Leonard and Griffith are too high. After reviewing Griffiths fights with Rodriguez its pretty clear who is the better fighter, and i feel that Napoles and Armstrong achieved more than Leonard at the weight.

All in all however it is a good list, but i would like a classic forum guru to explain to me what Jack Dempsey ever did at welterweight to deserve being in the list?