Name some fighters who were as good as you can get without being great. Some that come to my mind: Norton Norris Eubank sr Cotto McClellan Taylor Pintor Haye Mercer ......
I think Pintor is. And although Norton does not have a humungous list of ATGs he beat, his style has made him a great imo.
I'm not doing heavyweights. I refuse. Actually, I'm just doing light-heavyweights. Why? Coz I said so. Eddie Gregory James Scott Yaqui Lopez Marvin Johnson John Conteh Mike Rossman Jesse Burnett Virgil Hill Charles Williams Henry Maske Dariusz Michalczewski Antonio Tarver Chad Dawson
Nearly every 80s heavy: Weaver Dokes Berbick Coetzee Tillis Thomas Page Snipes Tubbs Tucker Douglas Smith Bruno All good, some bordering on ATG-ness. Holmes, Tyson, and Spoon are the only real ATG 80s heavies.
Khaosai Galaxy Esteban De Jesus Shane Mosley Ike Quartey Terry Norris Hell, there’s quite a lot of them.
I always feel a bit dirty when I suggest DeJesus gets entirely too much historical mileage out of that one win. Good win though.
Well, you have a good point throwing Young into the mix, but I think that all of the fighters on any list of the greatest of all time, pound-for-pound, flyweight, welterweight, heavyweight, or whatever-that a fighter's greatness is not based soley on his resume, unless the list is specified to that subject.
I would also like to ask your opinion of this list, by boxrec: https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Division-By-Division_-_The_Greatest_Fighters_of_All-Time Do you feel that it is wrong to rank Norton #22? Where do you draw the line in the list on which are ATGs and which are not. Of course, there might be guys below Norton you feel are ATGs, and guys above Norton you think are not, but I would like to know what you think.