Was the ring mag annual 1999 P4P ratings the best top 10 P4P in the history of the sport

The P4P for 1897 would have been pretty stacked

Maybe something vaguely like:
Bob Fitzsimmons
Solly Smith
Kid McCoy
Tommy Ryan
Jimmy Barry
Kid Lavigne
Pedlar Palmer
George Dixon
Tommy West
Joe Walcott

 

Bonkers that Floyd was already considered P4P #2 in 1999, and he had 28 more wins after that!

 

I don't think was that high on the list yet. Maybe top 5. Shane Mosley was ranked #1 for a time. Trinidad was #2.

 

28*, he'd had way more than 12 fights by then.

 

D'oh! You're right. I can't count

Still very impressive though.

 

I think this list from 10 years earlier in the year end 1989 P4P list in Boxing Illustrated magazine beats it.

1. Mike Tyson
2. Julio Cesar Chavez
3. Pernell Whitaker
4. Michael Nunn
5. Meldrick Taylor
6. Evander Holyfield
7. Jeff Fenech
8. Sugar Ray Leonard
9. Azumah Nelson
10. Thomas Hearns

 

I would argue 99 is better. Jones and Mayweather were better than 89 Chavez and Tyson. Pernell was way ahead of Tito so 89 has that. Oscar probably deserved a better pfp spot than Nunn considering how he moved up in weight and put together a better resume. I'd put peak Mosely ahead of peak Meldrick.

As for the second half, Hearns and Leonard were past it whereas Stevie is the only weal link for 99. Corrales should've been at 10.

 

In 1946, the ten names floating about the top ten would be:

Sugar Ray Robinson
Ezzard Charles
Archie Moore
Willie Pep
Jake LaMotta
Ike Williams
Charley Burley
Holman Williams
Manuel Ortiz
Tony Zale

Joe Louis - even while past it - would still have been regarded as one of the best in the world as well. As well as plenty of others.

Most stacked era ever IMO.

 

A problem with guessing a past pfp list is that you can’t do the same for 99.

If you were gonna throw together a 99 pfp list today, we don’t know if you’d be leaving off Pac, Zoo, Corrales, Barrera, Lewis, etc.

Who in their right mind would rate Stevie ahead of Lewis? Somehow that happened though.

Edit: Hamed was around too.

 

I don't think Pacquiao who was coming off a three round KO loss and being essentially, an unknown foreign flyweight flash in the pan (as seen at the point, anyway) deserved to be on the list.

But I can see your point. It's much easier to make one up in hindsight. I don't think anybody will leave Fury/Joshua of a list of this eras best in years to come, but almost everybody does now. Even so, if you included those names, and I added amount needed to match it for the 40s, I'd still consider the 40s to be better.

 

Well yeah, that year was definitely stacked. But take Moore, for example; he had a loss and two draws in that year, which is pretty much grounds for pfp dismissal these days.

 

What was 1979 like? The light heavyweight division alone might win this argument.