Welterweight rankings Top 10 Head to Head with a time machine and Peak for Peak.

Heavyweights
https://www.606v2.com/t33978-solvedheavyweight-rankings-top-10-head-to-head-with-a-time-machine-and-peak-for-peak-edited

Ali predictably and almost unanimously stayed at the number 1 position but there was a lot of jostling about with the rest with the possible exception of Foreman who gathered a few votes in second.

Light Heavyweights

https://www.606v2.com/t34073-light-heavyweight-rankings-top-10-head-to-head-with-a-time-machine-and-peak-for-peak

Charles was unanimous number 1 from the few who did post their 10 but again no consensus on the rest

Middleweights

https://www.606v2.com/t34894-middleweight-rankings-top-10-head-to-head-with-a-time-machine-and-peak-for-peak

Monzon came out on top of this, with spatterings of support for Jones and Charles for top spot though both featured in all the listed top tens. The thread veered of into a (mostly) civlised debate about evolution of technique, of sportsmen in general and the suitability of ranking greb despite the lack of footage of his fights.

For those who missed the others - this is just a simple task of ranking your top 10/15 fighters of the WW division on a head to head basis - and he who wins the most heads to heads gets ranked highest - which is then ranked a top 10 after which if you are so inclined you compare them to your genuine top 10 and see how they compare.

Heres a randomly nicked list off another site to help you on your way

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Sugar Ray Leonard
3. Jose Napoles
4. Barney Ross
5. Thomas Hearns
6. Kid Gavilan
7. Carmen Basillio
8. Joe "Barbados" Walcott
9. Emille Griffith
10. Henry Armstrong
11. Ted "kid" Lewis
12. Mickey Walker
13. Jack Britton
14. Donald Curry
15. Wilfred Benitez
16. Marling Starling
17. Tito Trinidad
18. Oscar De La Hoya
19. Pernell Whitaker
20. Cocoa Kid

Curry beats everybody!!

I'd pick Hearns to beat everybody over twelve as long as he doesn't get caught..

Always said it..Hearns had everything but a chin......With his speed, height and power...Nobody could outbox him!!

Where is Burley on your list Shah, don't make me have to ban you. I'll go for Burley vs Curry in the final

*Holds Hands up* DONT SHOOT - its a random list nicked off the net (from esb if you must know). Make your own list though.

I'm shooting....

You wouldnt be american if you did otherwise

Ive always agreed that Hearns with a chin and perhaps a little more stamina would tear through the WW and probably the MW. But how do you see Hearns Robinson or Hearns Burley as it is?

I acknowledge Truss's point about Hearns, but the call here must be Robinson, who never lost to another welter in something like 90 tries.

He had it all, including the chin, and absolutely dominated his division for about six years. No ifs, buts or maybes, no close losses to Duran, unlucky losses to Backus, unexpected losses to Paret or strange losses to Zivic.

Others from this august list could give him problems, might outbox him at times or hurt him at others. Money down, though, it's always the original Sugar Man at 147 for me.

I agree with Captain that Robbo probably gets to Hearns and what a wonderful fighter he was..

Just don't see how he gets past the lightning lance of a jab made more effective by the height and reach advantages...

Leonard was outboxed..I believe anybody else would struggle too..

Not to say they don't win ugly like most great fighters have to do...sometimes..

Agree Robbo was the better fighter......but not Boxer!!

Fair question, Truss.

I think my answer would revolve around the one thing that I believe Tommy really lacked, one which would have placed him among the three or four true immortals - not a chin, not stamina, but a real boxing brain.

See, I think that everything came very easily to Tommy. He had those freakish physical gifts, a natural ability to hit hard and God-given boxing skills. I don't think that he ever really had to think that hard about what to do next. The problem only surfaced with those very few opponents who were able to meet him as an equal.

Robinson, on the other hand, was a superb strategist in the ring, brilliant at dragging opponents where they didn't want to be or forcing them to make mistakes that he would invariably punish. I could easily imagine him deciding very quickly that a fight from the outside, with Hearns potshotting him with that great jab and equally quick straight right, would not be a winnable one. I could see him forcing Tommy to advance and countering him with any of those marvellously varied punches. Remember that left hook against Fullmer (admittedly at middleweight, but the point stands).

I'm not sure that Tommy's brain or his ego permitted him to avoid these kinds of elephant traps. He often wanted to prove that he could beat his opponent at their own game, and I certainly don't think that he could do so with Robinson.

As you say, Robinson was the better FIGHTER. In addition, though, while he couldn't emulate Tommy's ability to be tall and throw these fabulous straight punches at range, his own pure boxing skills were a marvel. So quick, so smooth and so deadly. I'm not sure that I've ever subscribed to the idea that Tommy was chinny - a bit gangly and awkward at times, perhaps. I do firmly believe, however, that he was not half as ring savvy as men like Robinson and Leonard. All other things being equal, it's up top where the great fights are won and lost.

Its a pretty impossible ask to pick ten I think. Way too many combinations to try and consider. But I would go:

1. Robinson
2. Hearns
3. Leonard

as my top thee picks.

Thou hast done well Sir Manos - For Tsaritsa and country

Why is Mayweather not on the list he is one of the best of all time?

Mayweather wouldn't be in my top ten Welterweights but there are only a select few i'd make a favourite over him at the weight so would feature around the 9/10 mark. Will post a full top ten some point later today having given it a bit more thought.

1. Robinson
2. Leonard
3. Gavilan
4= Hearns
4= Ross
6. Armstrong
7. Burley
8. Napoles
9. Mayweather
10. Griffiths

Of all the Welterweights aside from Robinson and Leonard the only Welterweights I see being capable of withstanding Hearns are the iron chins of Ross and Gavilan. Both highly intelligent fighters capable of plan bs in fights with enough pop in there punches to make Hearns respect them, they would have to come through some hairy early moments but neither tired down the stretch where the fight would be won. Outside of those 5 it's very hard to seperate them but Napoles is a clear distance ahead of Griffith based on their actual fights but see his tendency to cut hindering him against the relentless pressure of Armstrong and the stinging counter punching of Burley.

I like the look of Manos' top three and would go with that. Hearns is a waking nightmare for anyone in the division and make him favourite over 12 against all but Robinson. Beyond that it gets bloody difficult and I'll need some time. Mayweather has to feature somewhere, along with Whitaker and Napoles.

1) Robinson
2) Leonard
3) Hearns
4) Armstrong
5) Napoles
6) Ross
7) Mayweather
8) Gavilan
9) Griffith
10) Whitaker

Virtually impossible to submit a list for the Welters without being unhappy with it in some way. When you can't include the likes of Walcott, Lewis, Trinidad, Basilio, McLarnin, Curry etc in this kind of list, you know you're talking about one ridiculously strong weight class.

Robinson at the top requires little explanation. From the outset, Armstrong might seem in a spot of bother against some of the fellas here, given his small stature and the fact that he regularly defended his title as little more than a Lightweight, but the nineteen successful title defences and the names he accounted for mean that he has to be top five.

If I've got Ross in at number six, you might question how McLarnin can be left out completely, given that he could easily have been 2-1 up against Barney. I guess I can only justify that by the fact that McLarnin was a touch smaller than most of the above naturally, dropped the odd decision here and there while not motivated or whatnot, and retired at a time when he was still fairly close to his prime years, missing out on the chance to enhance his reputation even further.

Griffith has the names on his record to perhaps be higher than ninth, but there remains a whiff of fortune about a couple of the Rodriguez decisions, and then of course the fact that Napoles had the wood on him. Whitaker, despite being a better Lightweight, is still a remarkably underrated Welter; eight successful defences of the lineal title hasn't been matched by too many, and his performances against the excellent McGirt (as well as Chavez) were exemplary. Decent value for that last spot, I think.

But I have no doubts that, if you asked me tomorrow, I'd end up posting something different! What a division.

Leonard
Robinson
Hearns

Top 2 are interchangeable. I reckon SRL would still have got to Hearns had it been a 12 round fight.

Mayweather against Sugar Ray Robinson and Sugar Ray Leonard would be great fights they are the most skilled boxers of all time imo they should be top 3. Mayweather woud school most of the boxers on that list so why is he not there and who could put de la Hoya above Mayweather??

azania wrote:Leonard
Robinson
Hearns

Top 2 are interchangeable. I reckon SRL would still have got to Hearns had it been a 12 round fight.

I doubt it Az. Remember Dundee shouting at Leonard between rounds "You're blowing it son, blowing it."

Possibly. But probably SRL would have upped the intensity of his attacks in the 10th as opposed to 12/13th. Hearns would have been a handful for any WW-SMW in history. Just think the 2 sugars were a tad ahead due to chin issues tommy had, and the occassional lapses in concentration which allowed him to get caught.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Curry beats everybody!!

I'd pick Hearns to beat everybody over twelve as long as he doesn't get caught..

Always said it..Hearns had everything but a chin......With his speed, height and power...Nobody could outbox him!!

You mean Amir Khan?