Where do you put Joe Louis all time, p4p?

The simple answer is:

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

I find it boring if you go with the status quo; more fun when you play devil's advocate; and it often improves my knowledge if I have to defend something that I may not agree with myself.

 

So do I; but the difference between you and I is, I like to keep my own side defendable, or in other words, I can back up my opinion. Can you honestly say, with any genuine conviction, that Harry Greb deserves a place no higher than eighteen?

 

Yes, Greb did not have a full career, he did not get closure to define his greatness, thus his achievements must have a bias against them, if he is to be fairly rated with his peers.

 

That is a most ridiculous assertion if ever I saw one. Just because he died early. Doesn't matter that Carlos Monzon achieved next to nothing in comparison, then?

 

But Monzon had a full career and so does not have to suffer a bias there. Monzon also had different attributes and achievements had made him great. You are talking about fighters that were 40+ years apart, with different career developments.

The ridiculous assertion we who do this are all guilty of, is trying to rate 95lbs men of the 1910's against 250lbs men of the 2000's and everyone in between.

 

Were is Fitz?? What he did, should make him top 5 easy. I dont see why you rank one weight champs like Monzon, Joe Louis or even Ali over Fitz. Pound for pound speaking of couse.

 

He is in the next bracket of five. I see no reason to rate him higher.

 

Why?? First 3 weight champ at heavyweight, Lightheavyweight, and Middleweight. I think we had to wait until the 1920's for some one to repeat that with Jack Kid Berg. Which is a near 30 year gap for that. Also he was mostly a middlweight takeing on the heavyweights. Flatting Sharkey and Corbett. I say he was indeed a top 5 pound for pound guy. Only Armstrong or Ross or any other 3 weight champ could claim what Fitz did. And Fitz did it FIRST.

 

And that is significant. But his body of work outside of those accomplishments is not up to the standard of the other fighters on the list.

 

Greb's career lacked closure, there has to be bias against that to be fair to his peers.

It is unfair IMO that someone like Greb finished near his best by accident not choice, whilst others carried on past their peak and were punished for it.

 

So if someone goes totally rank for say 4 years, winning titles from Lightweight to Middleweight or better then retires at say 23 undefeated with multiple titles and wins over a couple of great fighters you rank them down. You're a fine man and have some nice insights, but you also have some of the wierdest criteria's i have ever seen.

 

Where do you have Marciano? He has stoppage wins over your #6 and #8 while they were a bit past their best and a bit outweighed. But i don't think there are many fighters who have stoppage wins over two guys in your (or any) top10.