LOL @ross and Armstrong either beating Mayweather or having a better WW resume. You're aware Armstrong was protected from Burley, Cocoa Kid and Holman Williams?
It's not my job to defend anyone, I've said that before. All we can do is lament the fights that did not take place. But I rank on H2H. Armstrong beats Floyd, of that I have very little doubt and tbh its very rare I see anyone truly argue against that point. As for Ross. Much closer and harder to call. But I feel Ross has a stylistic advantage, can back Floyd up behind his jab, and throw enough combinations to take the rounds.
Mine would be: 1. Ray Robinson 2. Ray Leonard 3. Henry Armstrong 4. Jack Britton 5. Emile Griffith 6. Kid Gavalin 7. Ted Kid Lewis 8. Luis Manuel Rodriguez 9. Jimmy McLarnin 10. José Napoles 11. Mickey Walker 12. Barney Ross 13. Floyd Mayweather Jr 14. Tommy Ryan 15. Manny Pacquiao 17. Young Corbett III 18. Fritzie Zivic 19. Oscar De La Hoya 20. Curtis Cokes HM - to Carmen Basilio.
From the top of my head, whatever the criteria I don't understand how Ross can be below McLarnin, and I think Napoles is way too low! I'd love to find room for Pacquiao one day in my list, I think he's deserved it, but losses against Marquez and Mayweather make it hard for me. The Bradley and Horn losses could have gone either way, so no issue there. But losing clearly to Floyd and JMM makes it a tough call imo.
I think Napoles' rep is based in how smooth he was on film, and beating a weight drained, old Griffith. I think his legacy gets overrated, whilst his H2H abilities get underrated. Just at WW? I think McLarnin has better key wins at 147, whereas Ross' best work is around 140. I don't really take losses into account, and he was injured vs Floyd. I just think Floyd beat better fighters at 147 than Pacquiao did, but that could still change.
Napoles looks awesome imo Well Barney beat McLarnin 2 out of 3 and arguably all 3. Plus he's a 2 time WW champ and had a reign for about 4 years.
Agreed, Nap is one of the best ever. Yeah, I know that Ross is a beast, but I prefer wins over Ross himself, Mandell a bunch of times, Petrolle twice, Corbett III, Ambers and Canzoneri.
Man ill have to agree to disagree. I don't feel that beating a bunch of light weights whilst weighing as a welterweight is that impressive. Ross beat the same guys but just weighed a couple of pounds lighter.
He rates way up there. He beat Diego Corrales at his best, and re-matched Castillo. His win over Canello looks better with each passing year. Yeah Floyd was a thug, but he was also a special boxer who moved up in class several times and was never officially beaten. Most of his hall of fame opponents didn't come close to beating him. I've viewed him as a special talent for the past 15 years and think he would have beaten any one of his opponents had they been 4 years younger. Yes--some those fights had they taken place 4 years sooner would have been closer, but they would also show Floyd at his best, which he didn't have to show in most of his fights. The real elite level fighters can be so much better than the rest that fans can view them as boring.
I'm not sure I do tbh, it's tentative rankings based mainly on his ability to win. But I certainly don't rate the JMM victory as a great victory for him.
Actually, he has a bunch of smaller guys on his roster. Maidana - former champ at 140 Ortiz - contender at 140 Mosley - champ at LW Marquez - champ at FW Hatton - champ at 140 Judah - Champ at 140 Mitchell - champ at 140 Does that make these wins bad? No, but it is interesting to see how many top WWs moved up in weight first.
There's a diffence, imo, between beating a former lightweight who never did much at welterweight and beating a former lightweight who did do much at welterweight. But I don't rate the maidana or mitchell victories neither. I'm not too fussed about his victory over Judah neither.
Why is Ross above Pacman? Pac has been a welterweight elite for more than a decade while Ross has been rated at WW for only three years