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

James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, and Mike McCallum are all All Time Greats

 

We are using the word Great, that is a very special word IMO, and I only rate 35 fighters as great. Hopkins may one day get there, McCallum was excellent, but is a level below great.

Toney has tainted his reputation with his drug abuses, I want a clean sport, so I ignore proven drug cheats. I did have a lot of time for Toney, I do for Holyfield and Jones, I hope I do not have to go down the same path with them in due course.:-(

 

In your opinion, not mine.

 

Who are those 35 fighters?

 

You only count 35 fighters as great? So what happens when a fighter comes along that is better than #35 on your list? He is no longer great even though he is retired and hasn't done anything? That simply means you change your criteria for greatness whenever you choose.

Hopkins is greater than DLH.

He beat DLH, Trinidad, and Wright. He defended his MW title more times than any other man and more times than DLH has had title defenses in 6 weight classes. He has simply accomplished more than DLH.

McCallum is arguably the greatest LMW of all time, with only Hearns challenging him for that spot. DLH cannot say that in any weight class.

 

Only 35 fighters as great?

What seperates your 35th and 36th fighters on a top 100 list?

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Well thats the point isn't it.

You are entitled to your opinion. I won't even call it flawed.

I will call it inconsistant. Your criteria keeps changing to include fighters you seem to like and ignore their shortcomings in the same areas you downgrade other fighters in.

 

Joe Louis behind Oscar De La Hoya? Why is Georges Carpentier so high?

I don't see how Harry Greb is lower than Carlos Monzon, Julio Cesar Chavez, Charley Burley, or any one other than maybe 4 or 5. He has arguably the greatest resume in boxing history.


But anyways, despite some disagreements with your list, thanks for posting it:good . A lot of people say "I rank ________ at #__" then you ask to see the list and they never give one.

 

I'd prefer to see the criteria rather than the list.

 

There has to bias put into ranking fighters, everybody has different criteria's and things they consider more important when they rate fighters. If they did not then we would all have the same ratings and thoughts, and that would not be no fun!

 

Who are your 36-40?

 

Louis fought in relatively weak era compared to de la Hoya; as a rule the Heavyweights as a division have always sucked apart from a golden era in the 70s proving the rule.

Greb gets punished for not finishing his career, he died too early, and must have a bias against him because of that.

Carpentier is was an amazing poineer of European boxing, allegedly claimed a national championship in each of the classic eight, claimed European titles from Lightweight to Heavyweight and World titles from Middleweight to Heavyweight. The finest fighter Britain and Europe has produced IMO. And if Wilde is top 10, then Carpentier has to be top 10 as well for my opinion to work.

 

True, I appreciate that he gave a list. I just dont know what seperates the top 35 from, say the next 20 fighters on his list, in terms of greatness.

 

Yes, Greb did die at a young age, but his career was long and unbelievably successful. He defeated 10 hall of famers and piled up 259 wins. His resume is simply the best I have ever seen.