Happy New year - 10 predictions for 2012!!!

Had a tiring end to 2011 but quite an enjoyable one.....Anyhoo here we go...

1. By the end of the year Degale will be viewed as a better prospect than Groves!!
2. Haye beats an old slow Vitali...
3. Kevin Mitchell and Kell Brook come of age...and bag World titles...
4. Amir Khan continues to irritate with his immature posturing and continues to fight in America...but stays undefeated..
5. Mayweather beats Manny in the summer to cement a top 10 p4p spot in the eyes of th World..
6. Froch gets beaten by Kessler...
7. The Klits both retire....as does Haye leaving a huge gape in the heavy scene..
8. Chisora loses to Price...
9. Fury stays undefeated but continues to look garbage...
10. Fighters start to realise ppv on a struggling Boxnation isn't helping their careers and Barry Hearn's stock rises big style...

I hope you all have a safe and profitable new year and wish you all the best.....cheers..

Same to yourslef Truss. Hope you have a good one.

I'd agree with all of your predictions apart from 1,2 and 9.
1. Probably has more to do with me being biased as I can't stand DeGale but I can't see him overtaking Groves unless Groves suffers a shock defeat.

2. Even though Vitali is getting on in years I still can't see Haye beating him. Haye's potshotting that he has been doing against the bigger heavies would have little effect on Vitali who even though he has slowed down, would still be able to walk Haye down and smother Haye's work. Could see a Vit ko in the later rounds.

9. I think Fury is an accident waiting to happen. If he wants to progress the way that he's talking then he's going to be KO very soon. A defeat could also be the best thng to happen to him as he'll realise you can't leave yourself as open as he does to punches constantly. And his chin isn't what he thinks it is!

Good predictions anyway mate!

Thank you...I'm not sure Fury will fight anybody of the calibre needed to bring him down..

He'll wait the quality heavies out I believe ..but you could be right..

Very happy new year to you as well, Truss.

Hope you all had a great time back in Boston and that the American side of your family had great fun with the new little 'un.

I agree with The Boss about Vitali still being too much for Haye, and I lean toward his thinking concerning DeGale and Groves, also. Doesn't really matter, though; yours are still interesting and very plausible predictions and it'll be interesting to see how many of them pan out.

Happy new year - hope you enjoyed your hol that goes to everyone else also. Must be off. Good day.

Good to see you back from your homeland Trussy! Hope you had a good break with the family!

As far as the predictions go:

1. I'll go with you on this. I rate DeGale - he's a talented kid who froze up a lot during the DeGale-Groves fight. Too busy trying not to be hit with far too low a punch output.
2. If it happens at all - I still don't see it I'm afraid. We'll see how much Vit has left against Chisora, but I suspect twill be too much for an inactive Haye.
3. Brook yes, Mitchell no. They're pitting him against Rios next and I can't see Mitchell having the ring smarts to keep Rios off him. This seems a bad matchup for Mitchell. He was able to evade the crude brawling style of the Khanqueror, Prescott - however - Rios is a bit slicker at cutting off the ring and attacking from angles. So with a big loss in march, I can't see how he'll be able to piece himself back together in time for a world title by the end of the year.
4. Maybe.
5. Mayweather doesn't make a top 10p4p even if he does beat Manny (for me). Talent wise, he's there, certainly. However, in my view his resume isn't top 10 material. If you're not letting Duran there, I can't see how Floydy gets in.
6. Could see it happening - however, in my view, its more likely Froch steps up for Pascal II or for Cleverly. Pascal would be keen, because otherwise he has to fight Syllakh and takes a walloping. Maybe Froch chases a fight at 175 with B-hop - that's my outside prediction for the year.
7. Could see this happening - although I reckon Wlad might see in 2013 - unless he gets bored.
8. Chisora loses to Price - we'll see what shape Chisora is in after Vit has finished with him - but its well possible.
9. Fury's going to have to improve to stay undefeated. He's well capable of doing it - however - I'm not sure he will. He's going to get his next fight stateside - but against who? The other up and comers like Mitchell are starting to step up their opponents and he's been overtaken in the exciting beginner stakes
10. I sure hope for this one! Of all your predictions, this is the one boxing needs most. Even more than Manny-Mayweather.

We've said it many times - but ppv was made for fights like Ali-Frazier 3. Not for Khan-McCloskey. The way modern fighters abuse PPV is frankly a joke - and a career damaging one.

Price unlike the rest of the domestic heavyweights has something about him that vicious right hand combined with his sound technique he is the one to watch, put him in with Fury at any point and we'll see a very early knockout.

good positive predictions. really hope they all come off and degale goes to america for an undercard fight. be nice to see more british fighters exposed in america as prospects and contenders, rather than fodder for world champs that they aren't ready for.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Price unlike the rest of the domestic heavyweights has something about him that vicious right hand combined with his sound technique he is the one to watch, put him in with Fury at any point and we'll see a very early knockout.

Can't disagree.

I'd be intrigued as to the quality of Price's chin - however I don't see Fury testing it on the evidence of his career thus far.

A Steward-trained Fury might be different. Needs to ditch the pies and work on some technique.

1.) Degale to be seen as more than a prospect with a world belt (although paper one) whereas groves is only onto euro fighters

2.) Vitali to KO chisora and another opponent (hopefully haye) by 2/3 the way through the year but loses a points decision to a rejuvenated solis

3.) Kevin Mitchell to lose vs rios but gives good account of himself and beats burns in a title fight aat the end of the year. Brook to win world title

4.) Lamont has a repeat of his career, loses a UD to bradley in a rematch but beats khan by a SD

5.) Pacquiao to be beat PROPERLY by either Cotto or marquez

6.) Deontay Wilder to finish the year 25 (25 ko's)-0-0 but still not in anybodies top 20 heavyweights (boxrec, ring magazine etc) whereas Seth mitchell goes on to win a title fight vs povetkin to line up a title shot vs a K brother

7.)Saul Alvarez to end the year p4p #5 after beating kirkland, lara and cotto late 2012

8.) Price beats fury and chisora, chisora beats fury in a rematch

9.) Morales to fight JMM for a 5th division world title but loses in a foty between 2 legends

10.) Chavez Jr to lose by KO to either rubio or martinez, and then martinez will go up to 168 for a big money fight where he loses to bute

Happy New Year Turss,nice predicts too

Random thoughts....

Surely after 12 years at the top..Manny is enough to acquire top 10 status.....Disgrace if Mayweather isn't in there.

WHU...Chisora certainly has a busy year with your prediction...

JMM and Morales can't see happening..

Father time will come to Vitali sooner or later....

think Mitchell is underrated by quite a few on here....

Mayweather wouldn't be in the top ten because well there are at least 10 fighters more worthy of that accolade.

Can't imagine Marquez would fight Morales for his lighweight world title, if it were to happen and JMM has turned it down as an unworthy fight in the past it would surely be for Morales 140lb title.

If / when Mayweather beats Pacquiao, I'm not sure he'd be automatically top ten, but he'd be getting damn close. An additional win over someone like Alvarez at 154 lb would make it very difficult to leave him out, assuming he keeps that undefeated record intact.

To me, right now Mayweather would be more or less level pegging with Chavez, for instance. I'd have Chavez somewhere at the low end of a top twenty. Beating the other standout fighter of his era and perhaps adding a win or two over another hungry young titlist who'll go on to achieve a fair bit afterwards would give Mayweather one hell of a claim - a claim which I feel a few people (and, until lately, I) have been a little too quick to dismiss.

Going back to the chunk of the article, some I agree with, others not, naturally enough. I think Brook is a lock for a world title of some sort at 147 lb in the next twelve months. Mitchell, for a number of reasons, I'm less sold on. Have a feeling that Fury won't be matched as carefully as some others believe and will come a cropper sooner rather than later. I can definitely see Vitali exiting the stage but reckon Wladimir will want to carry on for a few more fights yet in an attempt to win his brother's old WBC belt and complete the cleanest of clean sweeps.

Can't think of many fighters who have been an undefeated champ for nigh on 12 years..with quality fighters on his record...

Certainly four or five fighters apart there must be a lot of fighters I've never heard of who can surpass such a feat..

Certainly assume you're not talking about guys like Louis and Fitzsimmons..

1. DeGale will be seen as a better prospect and is the more talented of the two. But Groves is the better fighter as he is more intelligent. But that is all irrelevant as none of them will beat Ward.
2. Agreed. I said that a few weeks ago ad got roundly criticised for it. Many here still think that Vit is as goos as he was 10 years ago. He isn't and is ponderously slow. Ready made for Haye.
3. Brook yes. Mitchell I hope not.
4. Much of the criticism of Khan is extremely childish and is more appreciated in USA than here.
5. Floyd will beat Manny but is not good enough to be top 10. He has never been near the best ever at the weights he won world titles at. I'd pick Duran at LW over him. Benitez and Pryor at LWW and the two sugars and Hearns at WW over hi, Terry Norris at LMW would also beat him.
6. Agreed
7. Wlad to continue and clean up after Vit loses to Haye. Haye will retire with Wlad winning the vacant title and continue through 2013 undefeated. He will be recognised at a legit top 10 HW after he's gone (which he is).
8. Chosora will beat Price by KO. Price has a very dodgy chin and we dont know how he handles pressure which Chisora will give him.
9. Agreed
10. I certainly hope so.

I would have Fitzsimmons ahead of Mayweather Truss and by a safe distance too, based on talent alone he's already in my top 5 but what is talent without the wins to back it up. Ray Leonard for instance is on the fringes of my top ten and his set of four wins over Benitez, Duran, Hagler and Hearns will keep him ahead of Mayweather regardless of Pacquiao and Alvarez.

Why do people insist on saying Price has a dodgy chin, it's yet to be tested in the pro ranks, Tua and Bowe were stopped in the amateurs and the pair had cast iron chins.

Wlad an all time top ten heavyweight?

Really hope we get Fury v Price this year instead.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I would have Fitzsimmons ahead of Mayweather Truss and by a safe distance too, based on talent alone he's already in my top 5 but what is talent without the wins to back it up. Ray Leonard for instance is on the fringes of my top ten and his set of four wins over Benitez, Duran, Hagler and Hearns will keep him ahead of Mayweather regardless of Pacquiao and Alvarez.

Why do people insist on saying Price has a dodgy chin, it's yet to be tested in the pro ranks, Tua and Bowe were stopped in the amateurs and the pair had cast iron chins.

Wlad an all time top ten heavyweight?

How far down would you have SRL? I mean how many other top 10 ATG's have his record of beating other All Time Greats?

I personally would have Wlad ranked higher than Lewis in about a year's time. His dominance of the HW scene is similar to Lewis but he has not looked like losing a round let alone a fight.

I'd say Price has a dodgy chin seeing as he's been sparked during the amateurs. Maybe as a pro he's got more fitness and as such can take a better punch, but until he's clocked I'll reserve judgement on it. Good boxer with good fundermentals for a HW. Good power also. But let's see his chin get tested.

A stoppage in the amateurs isn't anything like a stoppage in the pro game though Az and from memory he was stopped on his feet by Camarelle (should have gone pro and made a big impression) so at the moment do give him the benefit of the doubt.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:A stoppage in the amateurs isn't anything like a stoppage in the pro game though Az and from memory he was stopped on his feet by Camarelle (should have gone pro and made a big impression) so at the moment do give him the benefit of the doubt.

I wont argue the point too much. Lets wait until he gets hit.

Didn't Camerelle decide to stay as a policeman or something?

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I would have Fitzsimmons ahead of Mayweather Truss and by a safe distance too, based on talent alone he's already in my top 5 but what is talent without the wins to back it up. Ray Leonard for instance is on the fringes of my top ten and his set of four wins over Benitez, Duran, Hagler and Hearns will keep him ahead of Mayweather regardless of Pacquiao and Alvarez.

Why do people insist on saying Price has a dodgy chin, it's yet to be tested in the pro ranks, Tua and Bowe were stopped in the amateurs and the pair had cast iron chins.

Wlad an all time top ten heavyweight?

How far down would you have SRL? I mean how many other top 10 ATG's have his record of beating other All Time Greats?

I personally would have Wlad ranked higher than Lewis in about a year's time. His dominance of the HW scene is similar to Lewis but he has not looked like losing a round let alone a fight.

Have him around 8-12, should be higher but had far too much inactivity, an impressive set of wins admittedly but not enough to upsurp the likes of Tunney, Charles, Greb, Armstrong, Ali, Robinson who have the wins as well as greater longevity.

Apart from the 3 fights he has lost, his dominance is similar but in a far weaker division even ageing versions of Holyfield and Tyson are a step up from the current lot, bottom end of a 20 for me.

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:A stoppage in the amateurs isn't anything like a stoppage in the pro game though Az and from memory he was stopped on his feet by Camarelle (should have gone pro and made a big impression) so at the moment do give him the benefit of the doubt.

I wont argue the point too much. Lets wait until he gets hit.

Didn't Camerelle decide to stay as a policeman or something?

Something like that, was a very impressive amateur, one of the great what ifs.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I would have Fitzsimmons ahead of Mayweather Truss and by a safe distance too, based on talent alone he's already in my top 5 but what is talent without the wins to back it up. Ray Leonard for instance is on the fringes of my top ten and his set of four wins over Benitez, Duran, Hagler and Hearns will keep him ahead of Mayweather regardless of Pacquiao and Alvarez.

Why do people insist on saying Price has a dodgy chin, it's yet to be tested in the pro ranks, Tua and Bowe were stopped in the amateurs and the pair had cast iron chins.

Wlad an all time top ten heavyweight?

How far down would you have SRL? I mean how many other top 10 ATG's have his record of beating other All Time Greats?

I personally would have Wlad ranked higher than Lewis in about a year's time. His dominance of the HW scene is similar to Lewis but he has not looked like losing a round let alone a fight.

Have him around 8-12, should be higher but had far too much inactivity, an impressive set of wins admittedly but not enough to upsurp the likes of Tunney, Charles, Greb, Armstrong, Ali, Robinson who have the wins as well as greater longevity.

Apart from the 3 fights he has lost, his dominance is similar but in a far weaker division even ageing versions of Holyfield and Tyson are a step up from the current lot, bottom end of a 20 for me.

Personally it seems as though even if we get some sort of unbeatable boxer who devours everything in sight, he would never make the ATG top 5 because of one excuse or another. I'd have SRL in the top 5.

Wlad would have beaten the version of Holy and Tyson beat. Perhaps not by KO (Tyson) but he would have won nevertheless. He certainly would not have squeaked a decision in th emanner Lewis did against Holy in their rematch.

Thing is Tunney, Armstrong, Charles, Ali, Greb and Robinson all have wins that either equal or surpass those of Leonard as well as greater longevity, not as though his wins actually any better than theirs.

All well and good saying he beats them but he hasn't not that i'd pick him to beat Holyfield, he would be taken to the cleaners by Lewis and many others as well.

One has to look at quality of opposition also. Who else has defeated 4 ATGs?

Pick the version of Holy and Tyson that Lewis beat over Wlad?

Where to place Leonard really is down to a question of what you look for in rating an all time great and what criteria is most important to you. As a pure boxer, he's comparable to anybody, arguably the closest rival to Robinson - he had the lot. In terms of eye-catching wins (keeping in mind that Hearns, Benitez, Duran and Hagler were all world champions at the time when Leonard beat them and, with the exception of Hagler, pretty much at the peak of their powers) he has few equals, too.

Not sure how much the inactivity should hurt his ranking, if at all. I can see the argument for relegating him on that basis, mind you, but when he first quit in 1982 it's not as if he left any notable unfinished business at Welterweight, where he'd already carved out a fabulous legacy (how was he to know that the then untested Curry would flower in to such a superb 147 lb man, even if it was for a short while?).

Still a little sparse on fights in his second career, of course, but when you consider that he took on Hagler, a still dangerous Hearns and Norris in those last half dozen fights or so, those stats don't look quite as bad.

It's tricky with the second Sugar Ray, really is. Would probably agree with Ghosty that cusp of the top ten rather than top five or so is a fairer placing for him, but if others were inclined to agree with Azania on this one, I wouldn't argue too much.

88Chris05 wrote:Where to place Leonard really is down to a question of what you look for in rating an all time great and what criteria is most important to you. As a pure boxer, he's comparable to anybody, arguably the closest rival to Robinson - he had the lot. In terms of eye-catching wins (keeping in mind that Hearns, Benitez, Duran and Hagler were all world champions at the time when Leonard beat them and, with the exception of Hagler, pretty much at the peak of their powers) he has few equals, too.

Not sure how much the inactivity should hurt his ranking, if at all. I can see the argument for relegating him on that basis, mind you, but when he first quit in 1982 it's not as if he left any notable unfinished business at Welterweight, where he'd already carved out a fabulous legacy (how was he to know that the then untested Curry would flower in to such a superb 147 lb man, even if it was for a short while?).

Still a little sparse on fights in his second career, of course, but when you consider that he took on Hagler, a still dangerous Hearns and Norris in those last half dozen fights or so, those stats don't look quite as bad.

It's tricky with the second Sugar Ray, really is. Would probably agree with Ghosty that cusp of the top ten rather than top five or so is a fairer placing for him, but if others were inclined to agree with Azania on this one, I wouldn't argue too much.

I'd probably pass out.

I understand the argument of longevity, but that should be discounted in favour of his achievement. As you say, beating the best 2 WW whilst at their peak is quite an achievement. And then taking on a formidable Hagler who although past it somewhat, you have ot balance out that SRL was coming off a 5 year lay-off and arguably past his best also. Yet he still put on a performance (even though I gave i to Hagler) which will never bbe seen or never has been done in the history of boxing.

For me SRR, Ali, Armstrong and SRL are my top 4.

Where do I start

Armstrong- Ross, Arizmendi, Zivic, Ambers and Bass as well as borderline men like Garcia, Jenkins and Feldman

Tunney- Greb, Carpentier, Dempsey, Loughran, Gibbons and Levinsky as well as the very good Delaney

Charles- Moore, Burley, Louis, Marshall, Bivins, Walcott, Maxim, Lesnevich, Yarosz as well as Christoforidis and Overlin

Ali- Liston, Frazier, Foreman and Norton as well as Terrell, Patterson, Chuvalo, Young, Shavers, Quarry, Foster and Ellis

Greb- Tunney, Walker, Loughran, Rosenbloom, Flowers and Gibbons


Yes I would take that version of Holyfield to beat Wladimir.

I'd say another thing the second Sugar Ray has going in his favour is his loss list. There is a tendancy when we're evaluating certain old time fighters to only highlight their wins and then totally ignore their losses.

I'm sure we can all agree that the Camacho loss should be written off. Norris? Well, I don't think it's a defeat of absolutely no consequence, but the 1991 version of Leonard was certainly a few years removed from his best and Norris, for all his erratic behaviour, was riding the crest of a considerable wave at that point. Would add, too, that Leonard still performed with honour in defeat when well past his best, much like Whitaker against Trinidad a few years later.

So that leaves us with the loss against Duran, probably the only defeat of Leonard's with no extenuating circumstances - and a defeat he avenged, even if he did do it in an incredibly negative manner. No real shame in the Duran defeat in the first case, either; Duran had the best night of an unbelievable career and even then Leonard lost by a non-controversial but hardly wide margin.

Top four is a bit generous to him I feel when you take absolutely everything in to consideration, but if you were to say you have him sixth / seventh, I wouldn't protest all that much, even though like Ghosty I'd regard him more of a cusp of the top ten man.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Where do I start

Armstrong- Ross, Arizmendi, Zivic, Ambers and Bass as well as borderline men like Garcia, Jenkins and Feldman

Tunney- Greb, Carpentier, Dempsey, Loughran, Gibbons and Levinsky as well as the very good Delaney

Charles- Moore, Burley, Louis, Marshall, Bivins, Walcott, Maxim, Lesnevich, Yarosz as well as Christoforidis and Overlin

Ali- Liston, Frazier, Foreman and Norton as well as Terrell, Patterson, Chuvalo, Young, Shavers, Quarry, Foster and Ellis

Greb- Tunney, Walker, Loughran, Rosenbloom, Flowers and Gibbons


Yes I would take that version of Holyfield to beat Wladimir.

Duran, Hearns, Benitez, Hagler. Sorry but that list trumps the others in my opinion.

Not a fan of Wlad obviously.

Thing is those wins don't come close to trumping Charles for example by a long long way, his sheer dominance of an era that contained so many great fighters that great light heavyweights as good as Maxim and Lesnevich get relegated to second rate.

Think there is a slight tendency to rate Benitez a bit too high, was fantastic beating Cervantes and Palomino but his career nose dived in a hurry.

Greb for instance beat six light heavyweights whom the IBRO deem good enough to be rated in their top 20, the most talent stacked division by far and this wasn't even his famed division. Relatively speaking a win over Loughran at light heavyweight is better than a win over Duran or Benitez at Welterweight.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Thing is those wins don't come close to trumping Charles for example by a long long way, his sheer dominance of an era that contained so many great fighters that great light heavyweights as good as Maxim and Lesnevich get relegated to second rate.

Think there is a slight tendency to rate Benitez a bit too high, was fantastic beating Cervantes and Palomino but his career nose dived in a hurry.

Greb for instance beat six light heavyweights whom the IBRO deem good enough to be rated in their top 20, the most talent stacked division by far and this wasn't even his famed division. Relatively speaking a win over Loughran at light heavyweight is better than a win over Duran or Benitez at Welterweight.

Its irrelevant that Benitez's career nosedived. Boxers have a certain shelf life and Benitez ended when he was 24 for many reasons. Fighting at such a high level and at such a tender age is probably one factor. But after SRL beat him, he went on to beat Duran and won the LMW title. Lost a narrow decision to Hearns. So lets not play down the SRL win by slightly reinventing things.

Those LHWs may be in their top 20 at LHW. But SRL's wins were against ATG at all weights. Duran is considered top 5-7 ATG. Haglr is arguably top3 MW. Hearns could beat anyone from WW to MW at any given day and would certainly give all ATG a serious argument and share wins with all of them. Lets give SRL the credit and not play the game of putting down his opponents.

Relatively speaking a win over Hearns, Duran, Benitez and Hagler is better than a win over Loughran any day in my opinion. And that isn't putting old timers down.

You've spent almost all your time on here dismissing Marcianos wins at heavyweight because they were against light heavyweights so why should it be any different when we're talking about Welterweight.

Duran, Benitez and Hearns for instance did there best work outside of the division so things have to be seen for what they are. If we do based solely on pound for pound then Greb trumps him again with his wins over Tunney and Walker. Duran was a world class Welterweight but his ability at the weight was lesser than Loughrans at Light Heavyweight much like Moore and Charles are pound for pound better than anyone Ali (Moore aside) ever fought but lesser heavyweights than Foreman, Liston and Frazier so you judge it by that.

Now you're making things up. Deliberately putting down SRL's opponents in order to boost your favourite fighters. Its something I'll not get involve in as its pretty pontless and tedious.

The bottom line is that all 4 ATG lost to SRL when they were legit world champions. Hafler was undisputed MW world champ. Wilfred was a legit WW champ. Ditto Hearns. Why was Hearns better above WW yet Wilfred better at LWW? That is patently untrue.

This is going to get silly. When you feel your sacred cows are threatened, you start criticising boxers who could udurp their standing in the ATG list. Sure those guys are legit top 10 ATG. No argument from me whatsoever. My point is that SRL is a top 5 ATG. Agree or disagree on that is up to you. But lets not go down the road of peddling outright untruths and falsehoods in order to keep the ranking the way you want them.

I#m done with this. Knock yourself out.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Duran, Benitez and Hearns for instance did there best work outside of the division so things have to be seen for what they are.

While I agree wholeheartedly that Greb deserves to be higher than Leonard in the all-time scheme of things, I think I'd have to slightly disagree with this to an extent. Duran, granted, was a better (and more consistent) Lightweight than he was a Welterweight, but his greatest moment was still a Welterweight fight at the end of the day. His stock had never been higher than it was going in to the second bout with Leonard, and certainly never got anywhere near as high again. I'm willing to let that example slip overall, as the general point is true, but it still needs to be taken as a great win for Leonard.

On the other hand, I'd say there's a case to be argued that Welterweight was in fact Benitez's best weight, and in Hearns' case I'd say that he definitely performed better at 147 lb than any other weight class. Benitez's performance against Palomino was at least comparable to his performance against Cervantes, and his performance against Leonard would have been enough to beat many other Welterweight champions. Hearns, at Welterweight, came closer to proving that he was the man than he did at any other weight, given the absolutely fabulous shift he put in against Sugar Ray before being stopped and his total demolition of Cuevas. I think a Welterweight version of Hearns puts many great 147 lb champions from yesteryear to sleep - not sure I'd say the same about the Middleweight or Light-Heavyweight version, and the failure to square off against McCallum (not his fault, but still a relevant point) at Light-Middleweight puts that to bed, too.

There are holes to pick in Leonard's record overall, but as a Welterweight - where he did the large majority of his best work - he's a tiptop all-time great and his list of wins stands up to anyone's.

Do carry on changing the goalposts.

Can I ask how is me rating a win over Loughran higher than a win over Benitez a) speaking an untruth b) criticizing Leonard or c) boosting Greb?

Chris

Wins over Duran, Benitez and Hearns are great no doubt but would you consider Calzaghe a better light heavyweight than he was super middleweight based solely on the Hopkins fight? Don't think there's a great deal of difference between Benitez at Light Welterweight or Welterweight likewise Hearns at Light Middleweight and Welterweight but albeit slightly misleading they were rated higher outside of the division but it's very marginal.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Do carry on changing the goalposts.

Can I ask how is me rating a win over Loughran higher than a win over Benitez a) speaking an untruth b) criticizing Leonard or c) boosting Greb?

What is untrue is claiming that Benitez and Hearns were better at other weights. That is not only an untruth, but a flat out lie. Sorry to be blunt but that is what it is. It is specifically designed to cast doubt on SRL whilst at the same time boosting Greb. Those guys do not need boosting in any way. Hearns, Benitez do not need such lies thrown at them. You often accuse me of being insulting to old timers. Well you are flat out lying about Hearns and Wilfred which is insulting.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Chris

Wins over Duran, Benitez and Hearns are great no doubt but would you consider Calzaghe a better light heavyweight than he was super middleweight based solely on the Hopkins fight? Don't think there's a great deal of difference between Benitez at Light Welterweight or Welterweight likewise Hearns at Light Middleweight and Welterweight but albeit slightly misleading they were rated higher outside of the division but it's very marginal.

Utter nonsense and quite laughable.

It's not a lie at all, I think Hearns is marginally a better light middleweight than he was Welterweight, the two best fighters he beat were at 154lbs, he beats them both at 147lbs too but he's the number 1/2 at 154lbs compared to a solid top ten man at Welterweight. The thing with Benitez is he knew how good he was something he never overcame, tended to cruise in fights and fight at the level of his opponent somewhat. Still unsure how considering Hearns a better light middleweight is insulting anyone.

2012 must bring huge fights!!!!!!

Imperial Ghosty wrote:It's not a lie at all, I think Hearns is marginally a better light middleweight than he was Welterweight, the two best fighters he beat were at 154lbs, he beats them both at 147lbs too but he's the number 1/2 at 154lbs compared to a solid top ten man at Welterweight. The thing with Benitez is he knew how good he was something he never overcame, tended to cruise in fights and fight at the level of his opponent somewhat. Still unsure how considering Hearns a better light middleweight is insulting anyone.

Hearns is a higher ranked light middleweight in all time divisional stakes than he is a welterweight. This is according to several bodies, I haven't just made this up.

And Greb's opposition and resume is superior to Sugar Ray's. There are plenty of people who will put Greb at number 1 p4p all time. There's hardly anyone who gives that to Sugar Ray Leonard. I know you won't take anything from that az, but you should.

Not going to lie Oxy but i'm unsure as to what was controversial about what I wrote, will have to hold my judgement on it until it's completed but going by our hall of fame votings not sure you can say Benitez is a nailed on ATG either. Leonards win over him was a great one no doubting that but his stock does seem to be inflated slightly when Leonard is mentioned.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Not going to lie Oxy but i'm unsure as to what was controversial about what I wrote, will have to hold my judgement on it until it's completed but going by our hall of fame votings not sure you can say Benitez is a nailed on ATG either. Leonards win over him was a great one no doubting that but his stock does seem to be inflated slightly when Leonard is mentioned.

Yeah, I hadn't disagreed with anything you wrote either. Suspect its to do with people always rating those we saw in our youths higher than they deserve. I've seen SRL's career in retrospect, rather than live - and so therefore - I don't rate him with dewy-eyed nostalgia.

Just find it strange that Leonards wins are considered untouchable.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:It's not a lie at all, I think Hearns is marginally a better light middleweight than he was Welterweight, the two best fighters he beat were at 154lbs, he beats them both at 147lbs too but he's the number 1/2 at 154lbs compared to a solid top ten man at Welterweight. The thing with Benitez is he knew how good he was something he never overcame, tended to cruise in fights and fight at the level of his opponent somewhat. Still unsure how considering Hearns a better light middleweight is insulting anyone.

Hearns may be ranked higher at LMW thtan he was at WW is primarliy because traditionally the junior divicions have been weaker. Its not part of the traditional 8 weights and as such the oldies didn't compete in it. Had they been Henry Armstrong would have been a 6-7 weight world champion. Moreover the only great LMW have been McCallum and Hearns.

Yoou are deliberately putting Hearns and Benitez down at the weights SRL beat them in order to cast doubt on his greatness and put the imaginery asterix nest to his name. Interestingly you get all uppity when I state that the ATG;s Rocky beat were washed up old men yet you do similar to the ATG 4 who SRL beat.

A tad hypocritical. SRL beat Hearns and Benitez at their best weights when they were at their absolute best. Out of the 5 boxers in that era, SRL was the one I wanted all of them to beat. I have no nostalgia when it comes to him but appreciate greatness when I see it.

Genuinely have no idea what you're going on about, you appear to be riled by me calling Hearns a better light middleweight than welterweight.

oxring wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:It's not a lie at all, I think Hearns is marginally a better light middleweight than he was Welterweight, the two best fighters he beat were at 154lbs, he beats them both at 147lbs too but he's the number 1/2 at 154lbs compared to a solid top ten man at Welterweight. The thing with Benitez is he knew how good he was something he never overcame, tended to cruise in fights and fight at the level of his opponent somewhat. Still unsure how considering Hearns a better light middleweight is insulting anyone.

Hearns is a higher ranked light middleweight in all time divisional stakes than he is a welterweight. This is according to several bodies, I haven't just made this up.

And Greb's opposition and resume is superior to Sugar Ray's. There are plenty of people who will put Greb at number 1 p4p all time. There's hardly anyone who gives that to Sugar Ray Leonard. I know you won't take anything from that az, but you should.

Of course he would be ranked lower at LMW than at WW. LMW is a weaker division historically. Often bypassed by WW who went straight to MW. Imagine if SRR was around and he competed at LMW.

I'm not going down the route of discussing Greb's opponents or where he's ranked. I haven't ranked SRL at No 1 or whatever. My gripe is when certain posters cast aside objectivity and start making rubbish up by claiming that Hearns was not best at WW simply to boost the standings of their nostalgia clouded favourites.