Top 10 fighters of past 30 years from light to middle.

After rereading the thread, I think it's clear that bigtime9 has better knowledge of boxing than Sweet Pea.

 

I've heard his spiel before, that's why I own him when he starts trying to place duran and sweet pea ahead of leonard, hearns, and hagler, roy or floyd. all of which had better careers and accomplished more than his beloved sweet pea

 

Exactly. And you can bet that Leonard, Hearns, Hagler, Jones, or Mayweather would never get stopped by a bum like Carlos Bojorquez.

 

the operative word is arguably which means it is not a fact:deal Duran's best body of work was done at 135. after that he won titles at 147, 154, and 160 but never had a successful defense of those titles. Duran only had 12 title defenses all of them coming at 135. Hardly the sign of an ATG legend.

Roy jones won titles in 4 weightclasses and defended his titles over 20 times, roy was never defeated in his prime, and reigned as p4p one of the best fighters for over 15 years. duran did not domiante lightweight like jones domianted light heavy weight:deal

so by beating leoanard he becomes the best fighter since 1975:nut what happened in the 2 rematches:deal your nuthugging is pathetic:roll: and for your info duran was fighting for close to 5 years before he got that gift decision against barkely. hardly the sign of a dominant champ. and before you use the age excuse bernard hopkins is still going strong. and davy moore was like 12-0 when duran beat him. I mean have you went back and analyzed some of the guys duran was fighting, utter bums:deal

once again duran beating 12-0 davy moore for the 154 title is not a bigger accomplishment then hagler beating hearns and being recognized as the best middleweight ever. duran beating barkley is not a bigger win then hagler over john the beat mugabi. duran after winning the 160 title
lost it in his next fight and continued to fight bums for another 9 years before getting another title shot, hardly the hallmark of a great champion:deal

duran lost to kirkland laing, patlawlor, robbie simms and vinnie pazienzia. you compare hearns defeats to durans and you look stupid, as usual.:roll:

what great things did duran do at the higher weights he beat 12-0 davy moore and got blasted out by hearns in his first title defense:deal he retired for 2 years after that and went on a bum of the month tour, before finally 5 years later getting a gift decision over barkely. after losing the 160 title (duran did not defend any title outside of 135 successfully) duran fought another 9 years never winning another title ( big geroge won the heavy title at the age of 50 so don't use his age as an excuse:deal

and hearns held both the 175 and the 160 wbc titles at the same time duran has never held titles in multiple weight classes simultaneoulsy like leonard, hearns, floyd, armstrong, robinson:deal

benitez had a great career but he did not have a better career then durans, benitez was the better fighter and proved it.

 

so true, and guys like pat lawlor, and robbie simms. you have way too many duran huggers who have never looked at his career in total only looking to capitalize off his big wins but forgetting everything in between.

 

The fighters he did beat are worth more than the ones Hopkins beat. Hopkins best wins are over Johnson, who was never anything special at all, Tarver, yet again, a decent fighter, and Tito, who was above his weight class.

Whilst De La Hoya doesn't have a Grade A resume, he has wins bigger and better than those three.

Despite being old, Chavez was still elite. Top 10 P4P, surely? He beat the person who handed him his first loss, beat Taylor again, and then a couple of prosects too. Take away the draw to Whitaker, and he would have beaten everyone he had ever fought. He was still a force. More so than Johnson and Tarver were.

Whitaker should have come into the fight at 42-0-0. It's a disgrace he wasn't, to be honest. People like to talk about him being a drug addict and whatever, but that's nonsense. He was still ranked VERY highly.

Ike quartey was another really good win. He was ranked highly too. This kind of win is what sperate the best wins on DLH's and Hopkins' records. There can be absolutely no excuses with Quartey. With Hopkins' best opposition, can always add "But" after them, whereas with a guy like Quartey, the ground was even, both men were top class and at an even weight.

Those three wins from De La Hoya are better than the three best on Hopkins record. Without a doubt. I'm sure if you did a comparison of the places they were P4P, there would be a massive difference in where these 6 guys were all ranked.

 

My god you are an idiot

 

keep slapping yourself because floyd is definitely in the top ten..accomplishments wise and even head to head....dont focus so much on your dislike for him....look at the facts.

also sayin Castillo actually beat him means nothing because it only shows up as a W as with many fighters who have close fights.

 

diego corrales was top 5 p4p in 2001 by ring magazine.

castillo was #1 ranked by ring @ 135

Genaro Hernandez was 130 ring champ and p4p #1 at 130

I've already shown you they were produce proof that they were not.

yes he was by boxingtalk:deal

 

1. Ray Leonard
2. Roberto Duran
3. Marvin Hagler
4. Pernell Whitaker
5. Bernard Hopkins
6. Floyd Mayweather Jnr.
7. Julio Cesar Chavez
8. Thomas Hearns
9. Alexis Arguello
10. Roy Jones Jnr

Mentions: Sugar Shane Mosley, Oscar De La Hoya, Aaron Pryor

 

Bigtime uses whichever rankings fit his arguement.

Boxingtalk is as notorious for hugging Floyds nuts as Maxboxing is for hating on him.

 

Dominga whats the story behind your screen name?

Did domingo get banned or what?

 

I dont think sturm was a journeyman...Ingrate....Castillo is and was the best at 135 pre floyd and post floyd Ingrate...Floyd beat an undeafeted Corrales..Ingrate ODH lost what 4 fights against probably the best opposition in boxing.....ingrate.

 

Dear Sweet Pea,

From an objective standpoint;
Firstly Hopkins,
Was a dominant middleweight champion for TEN YEARS - Whether you think his competition was up to scratch or not, he dominated all contenders available to him, beat pretty much all of them decisively, before losing two relatively indecisive decisions to Jermain Taylor at an advanced age.
He then jumped up two weight-classes to fight the linear light heavyweight champion, the man who has two decisive victories over Roy Jones Jnr, Antonio Tarver, and beat him in a very comfortable fashion. He then defended his title against Winky Wright, a top5 P4P fighter at the age of 42. I don't think the victory was incredibly decisive, but it was the majority opinion without a doubt.
To accomplish all this, especially at his advanced age, places him very highly on my list - And he's not yet finished either.
42 years old, never been stopped, never beat beaten decisively (Roy Jones was a clear loss, but not a throrough defeat in my eyes) and still fighting top tier competition. He is one hell of a fighter.
Actually, Roberto Duran constantly singles out Bernard Hopkins for praise in his interviews.

As for Floyd;
He beat the top-ranked fighter/s at 130, 135 and 147, making him the linear champ in these three weight classes. He was a titlist at 140, and 154, and his career is just beginning. He's achieved all this without barely receiving a scratch on his face, let alone a loss. It's not so much the fact that he's accomplished all this, but the manner in which he's done it. Relative ease. In my eyes he is a natural featherweight also, but due to his skillset he's not restricted to this weight-class. The way he handles bigger, stronger fighters is exemplory.

Like I said, my rankings are very objective - So if someone says "Oh, but that era was weak" I see it as a subjective criticism based on (often anyways) the fact someone doesn't like a particular fighter. I think Joe Louis' era was weak but I don't take it away from him, objectively his dominance is undeniable.

 

Damm.