The October issue of Ring surveyed many boxing writers and historians on the greatest fighters of the Modern Era (post-WWII). They were each asked to rank the 20 greatest fighters with 1st receiving 20 points, 2nd receiving 19, 3rd receiving 18, etc... with first place votes bracketed. The top 20 is as follows (HT to chrismart83 on scene): 1. Ray Robinson - 396pts - (17) 2. Henry Armstrong - 339 - (1) 3. Muhammad Ali - 324 - (1) 4. Roberto Duran - 296 5. Joe Louis - 293 6. Ray Leonard - 258 7. Willie Pep - 246 - (1) 8. Archie Moore - 189 9. Julio Cesar Chavez - 171 10. Ezzard Charles - 164 11. Pernell Whitaker - 132 12. Floyd Mayweather Jr - 118 13. Marvin Hagler - 117 14. Carlos Monzon - 98 15. Eder Jofre - 86 16. Sandy Saddler - 82 17. Roy Jones Jr - 80 18. Rocky Marciano - 77 19. Bernard Hopkins - 66 20. Ike Williams - 55 Others receiving votes: Charley Burley - 53 Evander Holyfield - 42 George Foreman - 41 Billy Conn - 39 Larry Holmes - 36 Manny Pacquiao - 36 Kid Galivan - 28 Salvador Sanchez - 28 Emile Griffith - 27 Jose Napoles - 27 Holman Williams - 27 Mike Tyson - 26 Joe Frazier - 22 Alexis Arguello - 20 Marcel Cerdan - 20 Carlos Ortiz - 20 Ricardo Lopez - 19 Jake LaMotta - 17 Ruben Olivares - 17 Pascual Perez - 12 Marco Antonio Barrera - 9 Oscar De La Hoya - 9 Michael Spinks - 9 Tommy Hearns - 7 Miguel Canto - 5 Bob Foster - 5 Jimmy Bivins - 4 Lennox Lewis - 4 Sammy Angott - 3 Authors and historians surveyed were: Ron Borges (Ring), Bernard Fernandez (Ring), Doug Fischer (Ring), Norm Frauenhiem (Ring), Lee Groves (Tales from the Vault), Craig Hamilton (Historian), Thomas Hauser (Author), Kevin Iole (Yahoo Sport), Matt McGrain (Historian), Clay Moyle (Author), Martin Mulcahey (Historian), Patrick Myler Author), Jack Obermayer (Writer), Adam Pollack (Author), Cliff Rold (Historian), Michael Rosenthal (Ring), Mike Silver (Author), Tim Smith (Ring), Springs Toledo (Author), Anson Wainwright (Writer).
I know this was done for Ring but...does no one think that they could have had at least 1 Asian writer/historian involved? Ring is supposed to be the "bible of boxing" not the "bible of American and British boxing" Joe Koizumi could have been a very worthy addition to those surveyed
I guess maybe they mean since WW2 started? I remember The Ring being all inconsistent when they had their "Top 80 Fighters of the Last 80 Years" list, in 2002. They didn't put Jack Johnson because the great bulk of his meaningful work wasn't done in the previous 80 years from 1922-on, although he fought a lot after 1922. Yet they had Jack Dempsey really high on there. He was what, 4-2, or 3-2 from 1922-on? With one of the wins basically set up with low blows.
It's not bad, but should 6/20 of the opinions have come from Ring Magazine guys? I'm also not seeing the opinions of any of their main competitors from ESPN or this site for instance who would qualify as experts. Someone said that they'd like an opinion from Asia, and so would I. I'd also like to know what South America, Mexico, and Europe had to say about it.
Considering steroid Testing was only introduced in 2002 and commisions got a hold on the sculduggery in boxing. I have Pac, Mayweather etc at the top of the list