The 10 Greatest Fighters Ever, Measured By H2H Ability

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by acb, Apr 27, 2008.


Page 1 of 2
  1. acb

    acb De Camaguey... Gavilan Full Member

    9,448
    4
    Jan 6, 2007
    Would anyone oblige me with a list of the ten greatest fighters they have ever seen in the h2h sense, placing resumes aside just for now. If you would like to include a reference, such as the Pep that faced (name here), the SRR that faced... please do so.

    Finaly, if you would like to extend the list to 15 or 20 fighters, please feel free to do so.
     
    acb, Apr 27, 2008
    acb, Apr 27, 2008
    #1
  2. pryorgatti

    pryorgatti Active Member Full Member

    1,180
    2
    Nov 1, 2004
    NO ORDER

    SRR (who fought @ 147)
    RJJ (168-175)
    Pernell Whitaker (the night of the Ramirez rematch)
    Mike Tyson (that faced Berbick or Spinks)
    Muhammad Ali (that faced Cleveland Williams)
    Gugliermo Papaleo as Willie Pep
    SRL (@ 147 Duran rematch)
    Thomas Hearns (@ 154 vs Duran)
    Ezzard Charles @ 175
    Roberto Duran (@ 135)

    Honorable mentions to: Larry Holmes, Aaron Pryor, Marvin Hagler, Ike Williams, Ricardo Lopez
     
    pryorgatti, Apr 27, 2008
    pryorgatti, Apr 27, 2008
    #2
  3. Minotauro

    Minotauro Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,628
    712
    May 22, 2007
    Wilfredo Gomez at 122lbs was a beast
    Arguello at 130lbs
    Armstrong at 126lbs
    There was a thread on this a little while back.
     
    Minotauro, Apr 27, 2008
    Minotauro, Apr 27, 2008
    #3
  4. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,878
    47,827
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ok, for a dig:

    Sam Langford at light heavyweight
    Sugar Ray Robinson at welterweight
    Harry Greb at middleweight
    Henry Armstrong at lightweight
    Mickey Walker at welterweight
    Ezzard Charles at light heavyweight
    Willie Pep at featherweight
    Roberto Duran at lightweight
    Muhammad Ali at heavyweight
    Charley Burley at welterweight.
     
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    #4
  5. brooklyn1550

    brooklyn1550 Roberto Duran Full Member

    24,017
    47
    Mar 4, 2006
    No particular order

    Pernell Whitaker at 135
    Roberto Duran at 135
    Roy Jones Jr at 168
    Sugar Ray Robinson at 147
    Sugar Ray Leonard at 147
    Thomas Hearns at 147
    Wilfredo Gomez at 122
    Ricardo Lopez at 105
    Evander Holyfield at CW
    Ezzard Charles at 175

    Obviously I probably left out some big names, so feel free to critique my list.
     
    brooklyn1550, Apr 27, 2008
    brooklyn1550, Apr 27, 2008
    #5
  6. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,878
    47,827
    Mar 21, 2007
    Are youincluding men who "could have" fought at this weight, that is, guys who have passed through it between middle and heavy?

    Or just men who offically fought at 168?
     
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    #6
  7. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,541
    27,159
    Feb 15, 2006
    I guess the question is-

    "Which fighters would you not want to bet real money against whoever they fought"?

    Harry Greb at middleweight or light heavyweight.

    Ezzard Charles at light heavyweight.

    Sam Langford at prety much any weight he could make at his peak.

    Young Griffo in his own era if he were sober.

    Bob Fitzsimmons at prety much any weight he could make.

    Barbados Joe Walcott at welterweight.

    Tommy Loughran at light heavyweight.

    Jim Jeffries in a fight to the finish.

    Jimmy Wilde at flyweight.
     
    janitor, Apr 27, 2008
    janitor, Apr 27, 2008
    #7
  8. brooklyn1550

    brooklyn1550 Roberto Duran Full Member

    24,017
    47
    Mar 4, 2006
    Men who have officially fought at 168
     
    brooklyn1550, Apr 27, 2008
    brooklyn1550, Apr 27, 2008
    #8
  9. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,878
    47,827
    Mar 21, 2007
    Then your pick is unquestionable. As an aside - how do you feel Jones does at this weight v

    Dick Tiger
    Sam Langford
    Ezzard Charles
    Archie Moore

    All men who would have benifited from the exsistance of this division
     
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    #9
  10. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,878
    47,827
    Mar 21, 2007
    Great and brave picks. I dont' agree with Walcott at WW. Burley, Robinson, Hearns, Williams, perhaps Mosley, Whitaker should be picked to outbox him. You think he would batter peak Duran? How about Gavilan? I think Fritzie Zivic would give him clean hell too.
     
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    #10
  11. acb

    acb De Camaguey... Gavilan Full Member

    9,448
    4
    Jan 6, 2007
    Mcgrain would you answer your own question, if you don't mind? I think this goes back to a thread a little while back when you stated that h2h, Roy's chin would have been tested inevitably.

    I would guess you would take at least Tiger and Charles over him here.
     
    acb, Apr 27, 2008
    acb, Apr 27, 2008
    #11
  12. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,541
    27,159
    Feb 15, 2006
    Many of Walcotts losses reflect the schedule he fought to and the conditions he fought under.

    Over 20 rounds with 4oz gloves he would eat most of these guys. Walcott beat the top 175 pounders of his day in an era when most of them were slick boxers.

    As a puncher I would rate Walcott up with Hearns. They are the two hardest punching welterweights of all time.

    He was brutality and science rolled into a 5' 1'' package.
     
    janitor, Apr 27, 2008
    janitor, Apr 27, 2008
    #12
  13. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,878
    47,827
    Mar 21, 2007
    No, I think he could keep out of harms way against Tiger. Dick lost fights because he thought he was winning them whilst being outboxed and there is absolutley no reason for Roy to ship punches to a guy like Tiger. If he did, he would lose badly.

    Chares - I pick Jones. I consider Jones one of the ultimate rythym breakers, like Dempsey. He has a chance v basically anyone who like rythym and I think that, based upon this, he could potshot his way to a close but clear decision against Charles. He would need a masterclas to do it though.

    Moore is my pick to beat him at 175 - at 168, i'm unsure.


    Langford. Very, very, very interesting.

    Burley?
     
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    #13
  14. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,878
    47,827
    Mar 21, 2007
    I've come to consider this a sort of truth over the last year, yes.

    Saying that Robinson is a "slick boxer" is a bit like saying the Mona Lisa "looks a bit smug". Let's hear - how does the guy who mashed LaMotta the last time get caught by the wee man?

    Burley stands comparison too. Stopped one heavyweight, outpunched Smith when he was considered one of the hardest hitters in the world. Burley is also a better boxer with lightning quick reflexes. Great chin too. I'd make him favourite, I think.

    Anyone that considered his size the deciding factor would probably be beaten. But a GREAT ww with, say, massive reach included in his "complete package" should be made favourite.
     
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    McGrain, Apr 27, 2008
    #14
  15. brooklyn1550

    brooklyn1550 Roberto Duran Full Member

    24,017
    47
    Mar 4, 2006
    I think Jones beats all of them, with the toughest test being Ezzard Charles.

    By my own admission, I most likely haven't seen as much of Langford as you have. But from what I've seen, I'd classify him as primative, sorry. A level below the others you listed.

    Tiger was too flatfooted to deal with Jones' speed of hand and foot. He wasn't a quick pressure fighter and didn't rely on cutting off the ring. I see Jones winning a 12 round decision, boxing his way to the final bell and constantly moving in order to make Tiger turn and reset.

    I know you are going to disagree with this, but I'd take Jones in a wide decision over Moore. Moore's kryptonite was fast movers, and Jones has speed and footwork in abundance. Envision him throwing quick combinations and moving out of range. But then again, Moore was a much better puncher than either Hopkins or Toney, so he would definitely have a big punchers chance that the latter didn't really enjoy.

    Charles is a genuine 50/50 fight to me. He had the technical skills, timing, and long arms to overcome the disadvantage in speed. I'd imagine that Jones would win by using that speed, outmanuvering Charles, and offestting him. What your take on this?
     
    brooklyn1550, Apr 27, 2008
    brooklyn1550, Apr 27, 2008
    #15
Page 1 of 2