your criteria for ranking ATG's, in order of importance

why, because i give more premium on skills than resume? resume is a reflection of skills. yous a skilled boxer, you win big fights. dont tell me youd put a sloppy fighter who happens to win some seemingly big fights over a much skilled boxer who's done as much.. just didnt have that many fights. last is longevity, although its tight. but if you win on a consistent basis for a looonng time against quality opposition, then thats a big up to greatness

 

I rank on two criteria: achievements and resume. I use a grading sort of system and take an average to put guys into tiers and then I rank within the tier based on skill level/h2h. that's how I come up with my lists.

For resume I tend to look at the top 10 victories and any losses incurred during their prime.

Achievements are things like longevity, unifications, comebacks, reputation etc.

his resume is pretty much: Byrd (x2), Rahman, Haye, Peter (x2), Chagaev, Ibragimov, Chambers, Brewster, Brock, Mercer - Sanders (L), Brewster (L). Not the strongest by any stretch but he overturned a peak loss and has beaten a number if top 5 ranked opposition. Probably 15 or so have a superior resume.

he's spent 74 months as number 1 hw (by my reckoning only 4 men can beat that) and defended that claim against 10 noteworthy opponents. along the way he's unified 4 belts in what is one of the best turnarounds in hw history.

so he sits in the 8-13 tier and I place him 10 based on h2h within that tier.

 

Depth - fighting other Atg's and not cab drivers counts alot
Prime H2H - How well you do in real(non fantasy) matchups gives direct evidence of ranking order
Wins - All resumes put great emphasis on achievements, not attempts
Boxing Skill - Somewhat subjective, different people appreciate different skill sets.
Excitement - I can't judge someone fairy if they put me to sleep
Losses - depends on what point in there carreer
Longevity - doesn't rank high some people are just addicted to the game and stay too long

 

My criteria is:

- Resume
- Ability
- Achievements
- Intangibles

In that order. Resume the most important, for sure. You only prove to be great by beating top comp, otherwise it's just speculation.

 

skills can be proven by the manor in which someone beats a slightly lesser opponent. losses should also be significant.

 

1. Skin color
2. Depth of resume
3. Best wins
4. Skill
5. Losses
6. Excitement
7. H2H (no basis for that, completely irrelevant)

 

:good

 

1. Longevity
2. Depth of resume
3. H2H boxing skill, compared to historic boxers. Includes mental strength!
4. Intangible or mainstream appeal (excitement in and outside the ring)
5. Losses

 

Well I'd go with -

Boxing Skill
Longevity
Depth of Resume
Excitement
Best wins

 

Yea I know what you mean. I think it's a combination of the two. I wish there was an equation for it.

 

Resume is tops.

You can be the most skilled fighter in the world but if you have a weak resume it means ****.

 

I have a problem with people putting so much emphasis on "skills". How good you look and how good you really are, are two different things. Skills can only be measured by their application, and their application is going to be through the highest level of competition possible & a variety of styles.