Who Makes It Into Your Top Ten At Featherweight?

Yeah, most of lists can be a bit more in favour of older fighters but I'm not actively bias against modern fighters (eg, I've always been in favour of having Klitschko deep in the top ten). If anything, I think they can get really underrated on here. I've made top fifties for all eight original divisions, and contemporary fighters had their place in all of them. That being said, I do tend to think fighters in the older days had it easier to build great résumés, but much harder to actually be a fighter. Whereas today, it's much harder to achieve what somebody like say, Jack Britton did, simply because the vast majority of world level fighters don't exceed fifty fights, and those that do, normally don't have any amateur career and still have to contend with the lack of urgency to make big fights. On the flip side though, somebody like Terence Crawford who doesn't have a 100th of the résumé of Harry Greb, made more than Harry did in his whole career, in just one night. So... swings and roundabouts

Anyway, tangential rambling aside, I do find it a little strange how featherweight has been used to as a pitstop for the majority of fighters since the days of Sanchez and Pedroza. Morales, Barrera, Pacquiao, Fenech. Even a guy like Marquez only really fought his best opposition after moving up. They're have been exceptions, obviously. Hamed, John, Nelson, etc. Actually, I suppose Nelson is probably the only true, featherweight all-time great since the days of Pedroza and Sanchez. Others have fought there since, but none made a career there. At least, not IMO.

 

I wonder who this can be George.
His prose and **** opinions are awfully familiar.

 

You are the only joke, as you imagine to have deep knowledge about boxing and to be an expert, but you have not even watched the fights (John was robbed in the draw, it took place in Texas or Nevada). You bring up some obscure names, which are partly even in the wrong weight-class.

John accomplished more with his 17 title-defences. Nothingless you lie, I never had them ranked in any order and pointed this before! He achieved especially more than Nelson and Arguello in Featherweight, but you are mixing up divisions again.

By the way your claim that "can is also can not" and that because I have several candidates for the top 10, have to be likely neither in it, is the most ridiculous statement what I read in a long time!
I would reckomand to the owner here, to make a age-check during the registration and allow to attend here only for people up to 21 years (adult folks)...

As you pretend Hamed is not even top 20 in Featherweight; I bet with you, more than 90% on this board will place him in the inside it at least (if there lists are serious) and over 50% have him in the top 10.
These which have watched him when he was active know, that he was a superstar like Mayweather (more than Crawford or Ward).

 

Hamed had better opponents than Calzaghe in Super-Middleweight (and a lot superior than Ward).

How many had Saldivar or his wins or Kilbane? Maybe 3 or 5?
Eight is a pretty good number (although I think he had 9 - 10, if Barrera counts); particular as all of them were top 10 and at least half of these top 5.

By the way I have to correct you; he was for two years also IBF (unified) champion and few months WBC champion.

 

This may be one of the worst, least accurate and intellectually disingenuous posts I have ever read on this forum…you have set the bar incredibly low and perhaps ground level. Well done

 

Is that… Ra’s Al-Ghul? I believe it may be!

 

Got to be.

 

oh sweet jesus christ.........im out

 

Well I respond in a similar way I got offended (but smarter/ more thoughtful); though you made it for yourself very easy, to not effort of reading the contend, but just one part out of the context...

Otherwise you could have noticed, that this guy made some very provocative and dumb comments to discredit my list, which was pointed to be in no order, as there were no numbers on it.

Don't you think phrases as "can is also can" or "when 4 are possible for the top 10, is probably neither in it" are very stupid comments?
Do you agree with the kid, that Nassem Hamed is not even top 20, but Kilbane is top 10 (who accomplished likely more in other divisions)?

By the way it is a lot more accutate when the previous statements of this user, like "it is 1 - 1 between Chris John and Rocky Juarez". But you probably just wanted to provocate me, to get my out of my shell and being annoyed... as that what you guys do here is attempt of bullying.

 

I pointed a serious list, not one from oldtimers, like of 1897 created....but it is a very funny list, as Zarate lost his only fight in Featherweight, Morales achieved very little in Featherweight compard to Hamed and John (he even accomplished more in Supe-Bantamweight and Super-Featherweight): I actual think he collected here several weight-classes to one, to limited it to not more than 8 divisions.
If you want a narrowly credible view of the mainstream, then you ought to make a thread or survey in general section, there are many more users active when here, not mainly such which have watched Dixon live (at ringside)

It is important Tono, errhm McRainer, as Calzaghe is ranked in the top 5, mainly top 3 (if not as the best) in that weight-class, but he held only the WBO piece till 2006, what you moan about Hamed, who unified far earlier and was higher ranked pound for pound (later was Calzaghe top 3).

It is very easy for Saldivar to have only fought in world title bouts rated boxere, when he had a lot less of these than Hamed, but got some gifts, unlike "Prince Naseem" who's fights never ended confroversial, all wins were clear, mostly comfortable. Saldivar was rather protected and would have been likely never become champion without aid (of judges, promoters/ manager). I think not even Fleischer had him in the top 10 (and that over 50 years ago).
I never mentioned Hamed wins in Super-Bantamweight (where he was European champion, with several defences), you are actual the first one who did it here. But he won against Robinson (who defended the WBO title nine times) who was top 5, Tom Johnson (with at least 11 defences) was top 5, Wilfredo Vasquez (two time WBA champion there) was top 5 and got stripped for fighting for the WBO title (as it was not recognized by the WBC), Kevin Kelly (former WBC champion and WBU title holder) was top 5, Vuyanni Bungu was in Super-Bantamweight top 5 (probably #1), Soto was as reigning WBC champion top 5 (upset over long-time champion Espinoza), Paul Ingle (who held the European, Commonwealth and British title simultaneously) was at least top 10, who became IBF champion after that, Manuel Medina (5 time Featherweight world champion) was arguable top 5 when (so he surpassed here already Harrison who failed against a faded version), Wayne McCullough, the former two division champion was top 10 and got here his first clear defeat, then Barrera a two time long champion who was already 1994 pound for pound rated, the arguable best boxer i Super-Bantamweight ever. So the Prince had even more big/ decent names in his record as victims than Saldivar had (and finished the buisness with them in a much more dominant fashion, usually).

So that are 10 world champions he fought (dominated 9 of these), which collected together 16 different world championship reigns (won like 30 world title fights or more).

 

Well that is the best you can do, better than "can is equal to can not" or that Naseem Hamed should be not top 20...

By the way George Foreman predicted around the year 2000, that "Prince" Naseem Hamed will become one of the greatest boxer pound for pound ever. I think he had ranked him at that time already in his top 40 of all time, pound for pound .

 

Better so... As most people take the numbers of title-defences very important in the Heavyweight, like for Wladimir Klitschko, who had many weak challengers (Louis too) and a much worse record than his brother (some embarrassing loses).
So it seems hypocrite why this is for some boxers a criterium which counts for their (high) rating, but for others not (and Johnson had decent opponents as Medina).