The Top 20 Welterweights Ever

Absolutely.

He still gets beaten to a pulp by Hearns.

So you have Benitez above Hearns for what reason? And going over the list I'd make Hearns a clear favorite over at least 15 of them.

Your ranking for him is not so bad.

 

Well then you're totally off, sorry to say, if you think Mayweather was better than Hearns. You'd favor Mayweather over Hearns? How is that even possible? How?

Benitez was more talented, yet Hearns clearly outboxed him and beat him. Hearns was also 32-1 as a WW with 30 KO's, and was clearly outboxing Leonard before getting caught late. Mayweather over that? Benitez over that? Hell, Duran, Whitaker, DLH over that? How?

I do not underrate Hearns. Most I know see him in this light.

I'd favor him over, from your list:

Burley(interesting fight, you could make an argument the other way)
Walcott(head to head, how does he accomplish a win?)
Armstrong(see above)
Duran(obviously)
Lewis
Napoles
Benitez(obviously)
Britton
Gavilan(tough call though, could be the other way around)
Zivic
Basilio
Ross
Williams
DLH
Whitaker
Mayweather

That's head to head. Overall, I rate Hearns as is:

1. Robinson
2. Leonard
3. Napoles
4. Griffith
5. Gavilan
6. Armstrong
7. Walcott
8. Walker
9. Hearns

 

Umm....:shock:

Here's mine:

1/ Robinson
2/ Armstrong
3/ Leonard
4/ Napoles
5/ Gavilan
6/ Griffith
7/ Basilio
8/ Hearns
9/ Burley
10/ Walcott
11/ Ross
12/ Trinidad
13/ McLarnin
14/ Curry
15/ Britton
16/ Lewis
17/ Zivic
18/ Whitaker
19/ Duran
20/ Rodriguez

 

Now that's more like it, even though mine is a bit different.

 

Thanks...there's some latititude to include a fighter like Benitez (based on talent), or Starling and Graham (based on better resumes at the weight), but, by and large, the majority of the fighters that have to be included, in my opinion, are included.

 

Here is my list its subject to change.

1)Henry Armstrong....most might disagree but he defended the welterweight title 18 times in 2 and half years with 14 stoppage wins. So great he won his first title at 126 bur defended his welterweight title more times than any champion in history. A bit undesized but busy reign and pound for pound greatness get him my number one spot. While collecting and defending his titles he won 50+ fights in a row and had a spell with 27 str8 kayos.

2)Ray Robinson
3)Kid Gavilan
4)Ray Leonard
5)Tommy Ryan
6)Carmen Basilio
7)Jose Napoles
8)Charlies Burley....avoided like the plague at 147 and 160 by Robinson
9)Emile Griffith
10)Joe Walcott
11)Mickey Walker
12)Jack Britton
13)Ted Kid Lewis
14)Barney Ross
15)Jimmy McClarnin
16)Luis Rodriquez
17)Thomas Hearns.....some may think he is a little low but talent-wise he is top 5, accomplishment wise he is lower top 20 best win at the weight was over Cuevas, made his bones at higher weights
18)Billy Graham
19)Pernell Whitaker
20)Roberto Duran

 

Not bad...I think the body of work that Hearns did at 147lb prior to becoming champ is a bit underrated...but, not bad.

 

I dont think he would lose to most in the top 20. The SRL rematch should have happened sooner and when it did he got ripped off on the decision.

 

thanks man:smoke....he did oliterate Weston, future champ Bruce Curry, former champ Angel Espada and Cuevas but there were too many people with deeper competition than Cotto at the weight

 

Cotto?

People may have had deeper comp than Hearns, but it was how he did it at the weight that ranks him for me, and how high he rates head to head. Still though, I don't rank him too high overall, but head to head, top 5.

 

My bad I meant Hearns* but yea like I said head to head and talent-wise he is easily top 5, he did handle his opposition at this weight with ease outside Leonard, but his best wins were at higher weights. Had he faced Duran and Benitez at 147 and not 154, he'd be top 10 maybe high as 6

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

I respectfully disagree

Mayweather is definitely not a better fighter than Thomas Hearns at welterweight. Hearns knocked out Pipino Cuevas cold in 2 rounds and defended his title 3 more times (all by knockout, barely losing a round). He was outboxing Sugar Ray Leonard. Had it been a 12 round fight, Hearns would have won a comfortable decision. He lost because of Leonard's ability to bring the fight to him in the late rounds and also his punch resistance.

Hearns would have soundly beaten Floyd and I would actually pick a mid round technical knockout. His height, reach, and potent left jab spell trouble for Mayweather. Hearns would have kept him at a distance all night and Mayweather would not be able to potshot him and would not be able to effectively counter him. Hearns would have outworked him during the fight. He also had the timing and speed to connect (and certainly the power to hurt him). You cannot outbox Hearns; you need to pressure him, get inside, and have the power to seriously hurt him. Mayweather could not do what Leonard did - no way. It's basically a stylistic nightmare for Mayweather. I have trouble seeing how he wins more than a round or two.

If you want to say Mayweather's RESUME at 147 is better with Mitchell, Judah, Baldomir, and Hatton, okay...I guess there is a case to be made there. But I'd still give Hearns a solid edge with Weston, Espada, Bruce Curry, Cuevas (who was better than anybody Mayweather has faced at the weight), Primera, and Shields. Plus, I hold his performance against Leonard in higher regard than Mayweather's victories over Mitchell, Baldomir, and Hatton.

 

I'd have to assume McGrain has re-thought this one, and rightly so, as he is by no means an unknowledgable or unlogical poster.