forget the resumes, records, and achievements. this is just purely based on skill alone. my list in order Ray Robinson Thomas Hearns Ray Leonard Lennox Lewis Muhammad Ali Evander Holyfield Carlos Monzon Floyd Mayweather Kid Gavilan Willy Pep
Good skills sets, but both also had plenty of weaknesses. Plenty of boxers who have beaten a wider verity of competition as well as higher level. Saying achievements and resumes are irrelevant destroys majority of the argument for any given fighter being ranked high h2h. And stop calling people "son" south you have already demonstrated being one of the least knowledgable posters on this site, so you should avoid talking down to people.
what are you talking about son? H2H has nothing to do with achievements or who they've beaten you clown... you can't speculate fighters by who they've beaten because some styles are made for others and some aren't... for example: A fighter beats B fighter but loses to C fighter who lost to B fighter.. you see how that works out? now get off of my threads you clown! :hi:
Evander Holyfield? He was great but too inconsistent to be rated that highly H2H. There are several heavyweights who would beat him.
you base this on skills and activity in the ring. it's hard for me to rank someone by who they've beaten because the ABC theory i mentioned earlier comes into play
Shut up you little **** bag. Your have rode Floyd's dick every chance you have gotten and flooded the classic with a bunch of bull****, son. Why don't you try watching a fight for once instead of spewing a bunch of horse****. How can a resume not mean anything when guys have proven to dominate multiple styles of world class fighters, yet guys like kid gavilan has losses to different types throughout his entire career. You don't know **** about boxing and you are a **** poster.
Is this a joke? Mayweather's not even close to being on this list. No Charles, Duran, Foreman, Jones and that's for starters..
ABC theory applies to resumes you idiot... how the hell do you base speculations on who a fighter has beaten when everyone's style, fundamentals, technique and tactics are completely different? it doesn't make any sense. for example: harry greb and sam langford have beaten more hall of famers than robby but robby is still ranked higher than them on every list.. and why is that? muhammad ali has a weaker resume than sam langford but he's ranked higher than him... and why is that? skill :bbb