Ranking the Greats: your assistance please

Say however many things you want to say, SS. The article is gonna be published and I want all my bases covered.

As to RG. I agree completely and that is how I see it as well.

I understand your point... but it's a tough sell. I am committed to scoring categories based on what was, not on what may have been or what surely may have been... does it discriminate against modern fighters? Yep. But I'd say it's warranted.

I will be on guard about this point. I am looking to use one fighter as the gold standard and then rank the others accordingly. Moore and Duran for example, both could get the highest scores. I'm also thinking of including those fighters who fought so often in so short a span as scoring high here... is that fair? Greb for example -dead at 31 but that crazy ******* had 45 fights in 1919.

I thought about that, and did that with the Greatest atg HW thread. However, there are hundreds of fighters who have to be considered and a larger numerical range allows for more differentiation. Robinson would get a 10 for RG. Duran would get perhaps a 9, but relative to other fighters that 9 may not leave enough distance between Duran and say James Toney.

 

Listen, complicate the hell out of me. I welcome it. Nit-pick and nag me til I call you mother-in-law!

Excellent points. I think that you are convincing me.

 

Glad to see you and thanks for posting.

Great points. I'd say that "Ability to get up for and perform at one's greatest for the biggest fights" is threaded underneath a few categories. The psychological edge thing, and I'm thinking of Robinson drinking blood in the presence of Lamotta would be under RG.

 

I still chuckle about that time you put up a drunken post taking credit for one of my posts. And then you had that "drunk top ten" thread. Classic, classic stuff.

 

By all means! As long as you're not reduced to typing with your nose pressed to the keyboard.