We constantly see p4p lists and hw lists. But personally I prefer the lower weightclasses from lw to mw. This is not about a ranking of fighters but about the question which middleweights you consider all-time greats and which of them are debatable. It´s also about learning a few new things about less talked about possible atgs in that weight class. It would also be nice what criteria you use to determine if a fighter is a great or not. Mine are as following: Resume (a more objective criteria) - record, quality of opposition, point of career the fighter and oppponent was and so on. Accomplishments (a more subjective criteria) - basically doing something exceptional, like beeing the first or only one to do something, a huge upset win or similar. Longevity (a more objective criteria) - not only in years but also in fights. Intangibles (a more subjective criteria) The list is in roughly chronological order Jack Dempsey Bob Fitzsimmons Tommy Ryan Stanley Ketchel Harry Greb This content is protected Mickey Walker This content is protected Freddie Steele This content is protected Tony Zale This content is protected Holman Williams Charley Burley This content is protected Jake LaMotta Sugar Ray Robinson Dick Tiger This content is protected This content is protected Carlos Monzon Marvin Hagler Bernard Hopkins So, 23 for me of which seven would be debatable. I´m open for good arguments why some of them should be on the list, especially regarding the debatable ones, and why some shouldn´t. I´d also like to see some new names you think should be on it. So, bring it on.
You missed Jones, Toney, McCallum, Aposteli. Obviously thats mainly because your biased against a couple of those. Also I thought you rated Benvenuti highly. Maybe Kalambay, Benn, Eubank and Nunn are somewhat borderline
Look at my criteria and what Jones did at mw, he doesn´t campare to the guys who are on it. What did he do at mw that he hsould be on it by the named criterias?
ok, i guess it's all based on beating Hopkins at middle. the rest were basically unknowns who he was blowing out.
Well you didn't say 'only wins at the MW limit', if your going by that criteria Mickey Walker maybe shouldn't be there, he won a controversal decision against Flowers and had few fights under the MW limit before moving up. Cerdan has many wins but only Zale and old Holman Williams stand out At 160 Jones dominated an ATG, beat a future MW titlist (Castro), an ex-WW champ (Vaca), beat top10 ranked Tate, an undefeated prospect and a couple of others who had or would fight for world titles. So not a stacked MW resume but better than first glance and complete domination of it
So, of course when I talk about great middleweights I expect people to include all the achievements in lower and higher weights. Jones career at mw is solid but nothing more. Toney did better there and isn´t on it either. Toney could be included in the "debatable bracket" though. Like I said I want to hear opinions. Of the ones you mentioned I think only Toney has a shot. Kalambay perhaps. Apostoli is an interesting one. I think there are others of his era who deserve it more but aren´t either. I like Benvenuti but like Jones he misses out due to lack of depth there - something partly true for Cerdan too but he has two exceptional wins that´s why I included him.
I know he was a WW first but whats that based on Lora, wasnt there going to be Cerdan-Armstrong if it wasnt for the war
Weighing in at MW, Marshall beat Burley, Brouillard and a handful of journeymen and also ran. He lost to Garcia twice, Jack Chase (who he also drew with) and Romero. Against top men at MW he is in the -. Not a great MW.
Not sure where Griffith stands at middleweight.....out boxed an aging Dick Tiger and beat Nino once for the MW titles. Was able to beat or be competitive with most of the MW contenders for 8 years.
Why in heaven's name would Giardello and Griffith be suspect picks? Giardello did a masterful job in outfinessing Tiger for the title at long last in Joey's career...a show of boxing wizardry..and Joey dug deep into his bag of tricks in a really brilliant display of foxiness and wiliness in turning back the red hot Carter. Griffith was a wonder against Tiger..10 lbs lighter and successfully employing a boxer's style, wisely vs Tiger..much like Giardello did..punctuating a close affair with a surprise kd in the 9th...the first time ever for Tiger..Griffith shouldn't be overlooked for his rather at times passionless, mechanic's style of going for decisions...dull fighter some say, but an all around pro who navigated the 15 round distance very , very well most of the time. ..he was a wise old pro. Giardello was a selftaught old boxing wizard.
Yes that´s what they say, there is no footage of Cerdan at ww that I know of though. He looks great in the film we have IMO and his wo wins over Zale and Williams are big. But his placing is debatable. Yep, I know that´s why I think his place is debatable. Have kind of a soft spot for him though. He beat also quite a few contenders like Joey Archer, Bennie Briscoe and was competative with the top guys even at a pretty high age. I think he deserves to be called a great mw, not in the same class as a Robinson or tiger or such but still.
Not all debatable fighters are fighters that I wouldn´t call great. I do. That´s why they are on the list. Those are the ones I guessed would be disputed picks. And so far, it seems I´m right.
