Ring magazines 80 greatest fighters the last 80 years

43. Khaosai Galaxy
44. Roy Jones Jr.

this is all you really need to know about these rankings. the ring hated jones so much. they pulled crap like this all the time. go back and look covers that featured jones and what they said. galaxy was a fine fighter and a hof'er for sure but even those that hate jones should be able to admit that jones was the better fighter.

 

I disagree with it but then again I disagree with most lists, as most of us do.

 

making me not want to look at subjective lists like this. There is no way to make a good list. People have favorites and non favorites. We can argue some, but guys like Pryor being so high on the list are a little ridiculous. If a guy had a full long career if someone rates them high or low you think, ok that is what they think, but Pryor didn't fight enough to get him that high on the list. His career was not long.

 

Bernard Hopkins was already ahead of your boy by 17 spots in 2002

 

Mike Tyson is far too low. Michael Spinks 30 places higher? Really?

Tyson terrorized and dominated the glamour division for a good 4 years. What the **** did Basilio (all due respect) do that came close to that?

**** Ring Magazine.

 

How do Slacker Jack's efforts from 1922 to 1926 (remember the past 80 years as of 2002), rank 65 places higher than Tyson's accomplishments from 85 to 95? What is the ****ing logic behind that assertion?

 

Yeah Dempsey had less than ten fights. and he lost some of them. But why put someone obscure like Chang or Johnny Dundee when you can have a past prime Dempsey!

 

This content is protected

- this is the man who bashed up Jack Dempsey !!!!
He lost once - and revenged the defeat against Harry Greb

 

who is my boy? Hearns or Pryor? Well active fighters do well sometimes when they are fighting, and then after 10 years go to where they sit for awhile like Hopkins. Ring magazine has never had a good poll.

 

Yes, Mike Spinks is greater than Tyson.

 

Galaxy in the top 100 is bad enough.

 

Hearns man. I'm saying it's a complete disgrace to have Hopkins ahead of Hearns in 2002 when at that time he only had Trinidad, Johnson, Holmes, Vanderpool and a few others on his resume. Even now in 2012 i wouldn't have Hopkins ahead of Hearns although they aren't very far apart.

Hearns top 35

Hopkins top 45

 

That thing in your avatar is just hideous. :-(

 

These lists are ridiculous. They are meant to be correct for other guys who rate them also. I always rated Tommy over Marvin, no knock on Marvin, I just thought Tommy proved more in his whole career against better fighters in all divisions. But Marvin was dominant at 160 that is for sure.