What boxers in these days, will they talk about in 40 years?

They had an excellent trilogy that may be remembered. But to suggest either was Great is to cheapen the word. Both were very good, maybe even excellent fighters, but both lack the brilliance to be considered as Great.

 

I would say for me an ATG is a boxer that is in the top 100 p4p, and I would have both in the top 100.

 

LOL, he will not be remembered by mainstream sports fans 40 years down the line.

He had a chance to be remembered but blew it.

First off, if your a big Heavyweight from Eastern Europe named Vlad, do not change your name to Wlad.

Make sure whenever you take the referee's instructions pre fight, you warn your opponent that you 'vill break them'.

And if you are losing a fight, make sure you grab and threaten an official in-between the rounds.

It was not hard for Wlad to make it as a worldwide superstar, the plan was written out a decade before he hit the scene, but he blew it, and sadly will probably be best remembered for them sick pseudo homoerotic/incest-rial pics of him and his brother.

 

How can 100 fighters be Great? The standards you are using are too low, or do you understand the meaning of Great. If the sport (under Queensberry Rules), has been around for 150 or so years, a Great fighter comes around perhaps twice a decade on average, so that makes roughly 30 Greats, in what I concede is an imperfect Mathematical formula for what is an opinion orientated context.

 

Maybe my standards are low for some, but if you put in the top ten from each weight, being 80 fighters, does not sound to low for me. There might be some great boxers that were born in the wrong era or did not get a chance to get some great scalps or were in a division were they had to many poor style match ups etc...

 

Hopkins,
Mayweather,
Roy Jones Jr.,
Pacman,
Joe Calzaghe,
Tito,
Chavez,
Tyson,
and possibly Holyfield

 

What would interest me more is what fighters will us boxing nerds speak about in the next 40 years. For example Curtis Cokes has had abit of love recently and he was regarded as a solid champion, what fighter from these days now might get abit of revival on them in 40 years and be thought of highly by us nerds?

 

juan manuel marquez

 

"They had an excellent trilogy that may be remembered. But to suggest either was Great is to cheapen the word. Both were very good, maybe even excellent fighters, but both lack the brilliance to be considered as Great."
Tbooze...Explain?
So who tops Barrera and Morales at those weights.. Feather to lightweigts allowed..both great fighters any era. Now great isn't all time great but thats pretty obvious
So those two are not great fighters...have a word with yourself!

 

Greatness is a rare quality of excellence that is not often seen and normally takes decades of debate to truly give to fighters.

Barrera and Morales were excellent fighters of their time, but during their period of excellence, there were fighters that surpassed them. (Jones, de la Hoya, Mayweather Jr, Nelson and Whitaker to name five).

If a Great fighter comes around once every five or so years, neither Barrera or Morales were such fighters.

 

i don't think odlh surpassed them

 

Enough of this cryptic pompous crap.

Calling a fighter great comes from an individual judgement, you can't put arbitrary numbers on it and expect that to mean anything for anyone other than yourself.

 

Well said. Especially when you say 'great fighters'. It encompasses more than just talent and achievements. Or maybe it doesnt to some, but it does to me, so once again well said.

 

I agree, but for the word to mean something, you do need to limit the numbers.

As stated in one of my previous posts, the formula I use is rough and crude, but at least it means I give added kudos to those who I consider worthy of greatness.

Too often the term Great is a throw away line, blase, or worse still, a con.

 

the word beautiful is as strong a word as great. Does their need to be a limit on beautiful to mean something? No, because its in the eye of the beholder

Of course the critics of the world have no souls and will find less things beautiful and less things great