A top 20 to argue about nicely

I suspect that Truss and az are just about the biggest Mayweather fans on the board and they have long maintained that Floyd doesn't receive anything like his due.

I thought that I might try to see where FMJ would fit in to my list of the top 20 boxers ever, bearing in mind that the bulk of his career is now done and not much, barring a Roy Jones-style meltdown, is likely to change his legacy significantly. It's in no way set in stone, this list, but I wanted to attempt some sort of collection of my thoughts right now and would welcome any sane comments that might help the process.

1) Robinson 2) Armstrong 3) Greb 4) Ali 5) Charles 6) Jofre 7) Fitzsimmons 8) Langford 9) Mayweather 10) Benny Leonard 11) Tunney 12) Ray Leonard 13) Whitaker 14) Arguello 15) Roy Jones 16) Duran 17) Monzon 18=) Saddler & Pep 20) Moore

Obviously, there are plenty of good candidates out there who don't appear here, but as I say, this is just an attempt to set Floyd in some sort of global and historic context.

I'd say that Floyd deserves to be on the cusp of a top ten, with anywhere between about ninth and twelfth being fair, so not much to argue with where you've placed him, captain. I don't think I could find it within myself to have him in front of Ray Leonard, and perhaps not Duran either, but after that he's right in the mix with Benny, Tunney and, much to Truss' dismay, Whitaker for me. As I said, in or around the ten-ish spot is ok with me.

And of the names you've got in front of him, the only one I'd really quibble would be Jofre, as I do feel that Mayweather has certainly done enough to outstrip the Golden Bantam now.

Why is Ray Leonard so low.

Ali at 5? Pernell above Jones?

azania wrote:Why is Ray Leonard so low.

Ali at 5? Pernell above Jones?

he has Ali at 4 Az, you really don't read other peoples posts do you? And as for Whittaker and Jones, he only has them a few apart- hardly a traversty for either, but given Whittaker not having a late career melt down, dominating two divisions, and having a respectable run in a third, plus standing an ATG in JCC on his head, why not?

RJJ dominated 3 divisions and won a hw strap. RJJ is top 10 and pernell top 30-40.

I think most people have that top 4, probably top 5, though the order might vary. After that, well its a mugs game. I agree with Chris that Jofre looks a little high. Think he was heavily championed on here and as a board we may have over compensated for him being overlooked by others.

Jones is really tough to place and arguello looks a little high and Duran a little low to me, but these lists make my head hurt.

As for floyd? I've no beef with him being that high, but likewise can see why some would have him a fair but lower.

Out of interest Captain, where would you have Pacman?

If Pacman had retired after the Mayweather fight didn't come off would he rank higher?

Probably wouldn't put Mayweather that high but only because I don't like him and he's American and every other argument that would be made for people who don't have him considerably higher than me

My list would be something like:

1. Rocky
2. Apollo Creed
3. Spider Rico
4. Union Cane
5. Clubber Lang
6. Ivan Drago
7. Mason "the Line" Dixon
8. Tommy Gunn
9. Thunderlips

Adam D wrote:My list would be something like:

1. Rocky
2. Apollo Creed
3. Spider Rico
4. Union Cane
5. Clubber Lang
6. Ivan Drago
7. Mason "the Line" Dixon
8. Tommy Gunn
9. Thunderlips

Apollo should be higher, was passed his best against Rocky and should have never had the comeback against Drago. Would have beaten them both in his prime, RIP.

Can't agree with top tens with Langford or Greb in it.

I know it is sad Sam never fought for the title and there is no footage of Greb but thats life we have to go by the rules im afraid captain.

Pacquiao almost next cab off the rank, huw. Could be higher, without doubt. Think Jofre probably does deserve to be lower, but if RJJ dominated three divisions, then so did Whitaker (think a couple of title fights in a division is pushing the definition of the word "dominated", myself) and Pea did at least give fighters of the calibre of DLH and Trinidad something to think about in his dotage, rather than being embarrassed by all and sundry.

Ray Leonard a marvellous fighter, but so were the guys above him in my list. They also get a bit of credit for the scale and duration of their CV, for all Ray's near peerless top 3 wins.

Which rules are they, Onetwo?

azania wrote:RJJ dominated 3 divisions and won a hw strap. RJJ is top 10 and pernell top 30-40.

What three divisions did he dominate?

I personally have both Leonard's above Floyd, think Benny is the finest light weight of all time and a true quantam leap forwards stylistically in the history of the sport and think Ray showed the ambition in terms of matchmaking that many downgrade Floyd for.

As to the rest of the list, truly a thankless task trying to do this and I doff my cap to anyone willing to try but for me I would alway find room for Joe Gans. To be as good and as dominant as he was whilst enduring the handicaps that were par for the course for a black fighter in his era is nothing short of remarkable and marks him out as a true immortal. Gans is a top 15 guy for me.

Langford never won the heavyweight title - rule 1 states you MUST be a world champion to be in a top ten ATG list.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Langford never won the heavyweight title - rule 1 states you MUST be a world champion to be in a top ten ATG list.

Rule 2 states....never talk about Rule 1

How is Ezzard Charles before George Forman???

Can I ask you a question onetwo. Who do you have higher in your light heavyweight rankings Ezzard Charles or Enzo Maccarinelli?

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How is Ezzard Charles before George Forman???

chronological. alphabetical. better fighter.

I'm starting to have second thoughts about this idea. You did know that Ezz fought at weights besides heavy, didn't you, onetwo?

captain carrantuohil wrote:I'm starting to have second thoughts about this idea.

You've been on here long enough to have known better Capt.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How is Ezzard Charles before George Forman???

I think you may be giving Foreman too much credit for his grill and when you consider how close that came to being the Hulk Hogan grill I think we need to leave cooking utilities that are so good a boxer would put their name on it off the list of qualities we look for in an ATG.

1) Langford 2) Robinson 3) Greb 4) Armstrong 5) Charles 6) Fitzsimmons 7) Joe Gans 8)Muhammad Ali 9) Joe Louis 10) Roberto Duran/ Benny Leonard

This changes pretty regularly like mostly everyones I'd imagine, I'd need to have a little more time to do the next 10. Mayweather would probably be about 25t around that mark for me.

I think the biggest issue there is with Mayweather record is he doesn't have that signature win you can point too. I think he has a strong body of work, against decent level of fighters over a lengthy period of time and different weight classes, but there's nothing outstanding on there. It's a good record to show he has beat many different contenders, but without that top level win or two, it weakens his case.

The frustration is that the fight was out there, in Pacquaio and it wasn't made, and it does hurt his legacy for me. He needs to find that signature win before he retires, im not sure what it will be now. Canelo maybe, but I'm not sure he will do enough in his career going forward to get to that top level. Win the middleweight title perhaps, I think he could take Martinez and even if its a faded Martinez being the lineal middleweight title holder would be some achievement.

Cheers Rodders

Loving seeing Gans on the list Rodders, he is my new Burley. I will convince folk of his genius soon enough

Have you read the Aycock and Scott book on him Jeff ?

Cheers

Rodders

Yes Rodders got it for christmas, is absolutely outstanding. A definite favourite of mine and a timely reminder just how good he was.

Nice one mate it's superb, sitting on top the pile in probably the deepest pool of talent deserves high praise and that's why his a top 10 certainty for me now.

Cheers rodders

It's splitting Duran, Benny and Whitaker that does my head in, both at Lightweight and overall pound for pound. I'd love to include all three in my top ten but there's just a bit too much competition for that, so at least one of them tends to miss out by the smallest of margins. They're definitely the three medal winners for the Lightweight division for me, though (Gans? Who? Never heard of 'im!).

In terms of the competition they faced at 135 then you'd have to give an edge to Benny, really. It was a very, very handy era for the Lightweights and, with some top-notch Feathers and Welters either side of him, he was able to compile a 26-7-2 combined record against Britton, 'Kid' Lewis, Welsh, Tendler, Kilbane, Dundee, Kansas, Ritchie, White, Mitchell, Bartfield and Moran (that's including newspaper decisions, admittedly). Outstanding stuff, really, and you also have to consider that the losses to the likes of Welsh and Dundee were when he was a young pup and, in general, were put right in rematches. It's not as if Britton, a legitimately great Welterweight, could find an answer to the problems the smaller 'Ghetto Wizard' posed either, as it was only a lapse of discipline and / or concentration which prevented him being 0-3 against Benny rather than 1-2.

He lost a couple of decisions to naturally smaller men and a number of his title defences weren't observed under full championship conditions, but that doesn't dim his aura too much and he's got a fantastic claim to being the greatest Lightweight of the lot.

Duran didn't pick up as many defeats as Benny did in his days at 135, but to counter that his opposition was of a slightly lower rank in general. Buchanan and De Jesus wouldn't look out of place amongst Benny's best victims, for sure, but underneath that Duran's record doesn't quite have the same depth as Leonard's. They reigned as Lightweight champion for very similar amounts of time but there's perhaps a feeling that Duran did so with a bit more of an iron fist; almost all of his challengers in title fights were vanquished inside-schedule and the few who were alive in 1980 who had seen both Benny and Duran in the flesh were, maybe surprisingly, giving an edge to the Panamanian - including Ray Arcel, most tellingly.

In comparison, Pea's tenure as the king of the Lightweights was fleeting (although ten title fights isn't anything to be sniffed at) and his style didn't always give the impression of absolute dominance the way Duran's did. What he does have going for him, however, is an almost unequaled level of performance and margin of victory over his peers at the weight. Benny, albeit understandably given the company he was mixing it with, wasn't unbeatable at the weight and Duran was legitimately beaten by De Jesus first time out before having to go through absolute hell to beat him in their return. It wasn't until their third and final fight that Duran really established a clear superiority over the Puerto Rican.

On the other hand, ignoring the blatant stitch up of the first Ramirez 'decision', Whitaker was basically untroubled right throughout his days in the Lightweight championship class. Nobody really provided a blueprint of how to possibly topple Pea at 135, so I don't think it's that far-fetched to suggest that, if you squared him off directly against both Benny and Duran, it'd be Pernell coming out on top, head to head. What's more, while his opponents weren't as meritorious as Benny's, I think a case can be made that his victims at the weight are perhaps better than Duran's, or at the very least on the same kind of level.

The three of them never lost their 135 lb titles in the ring, only vacating them once the division had run out of legitimate challenges to give them and they had their eyes on either a) retirement, or b) more challenges at the higher weights.

So how the hell do you split those three at Lightweight, for starters?

I think the waters are still pretty murky when you try to rank their post-Lightweight careers, too (or in Benny's case, the fights he had at higher weights while he was still the top man at 135). The New Yorker only really dabbled in the Welterweight division, but even that was enough for him to prove that he clearly had the wood over Britton, who must be pushing for a place in the top ten Welters of all time as it is, and that he could also hold his own against Britton's premier rival in Lewis. There have been Welterweights considered 'great' within the confines of 147 who'd give an arm and leg to have a couple of names like that on their record!

The fact that Duran's post-Lightweight career contained just about as many disappointing lows as it did brilliant highs should, from the outset, knock him out of contention, but the fact that one of those highs - against Leonard in Montreal, of course - is arguably the greatest single win in boxing history means that he's still just about in the mix. At the age of forty-six, a quarter of a century after his first world title, he was was still able to pull out the surprisingly impressive win here and there (in this case, Castro). Compare that to both Benny and Pea who, for all intents and purposes, were out of the game by their mid-thirties.

Whitaker's the only one of this trio who managed to put together a worthwhile and lengthy reign as Welterweight champion, though, as well as picking up straps at 140 and 154 against live opponents; he was virtually a midget at Light-Middleweight, for instance, having never really had the frame to grow in to the higher divisions, but was still good enough to pick up a lopsided decision in that division against the likes of Vasquez, who was big at the weight, could bang, had only suffered one disqualification defeat in fifty-odd fights, had defended his WBA belt about ten times (and would regain it later on) and had just outscored a young and highly promising Winky Wright.

McGirt, Chavez and De la Hoya aside, his opponents as Welterweight champion weren't spectacular-looking, but then again fighters such as Rodriguez, Jacobs and Hurtado were certainly no worse than the likes of Sims and Batten, who Duran was either losing against or having to go through apalling struggles against at a similar age. Whitaker's performances against young, peak versions of De la Hoya (there are plenty who still feel that Whitaker deserved the nod there, for instance) and Trinidad, when notably past his best and outgunned in terms of strength and power, are massively more respectable than Duran's against fellas like Benitez and Hearns, too.

Finding an order for those three really does pose me a shed load of problems, to say the least. All interchangeable at 135 and overall, I feel. Maybe I'd go with a 1-2-3 of Benny, Whitaker and Duran at Lightweight and then go Whitaker-Duran-Benny for their feats above 135, but I wouldn't do so with any real conviction and it still doesn't answer the question of where they belong pound for pound.

What Chris said.

huw wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How is Ezzard Charles before George Forman???

I think you may be giving Foreman too much credit for his grill and when you consider how close that came to being the Hulk Hogan grill I think we need to leave cooking utilities that are so good a boxer would put their name on it off the list of qualities we look for in an ATG.

Yeah your right huw I mean winning the heavweight title in 2 ERA's is not even worth mentioning is it?

huw wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How is Ezzard Charles before George Forman???

I think you may be giving Foreman too much credit for his grill and when you consider how close that came to being the Hulk Hogan grill I think we need to leave cooking utilities that are so good a boxer would put their name on it off the list of qualities we look for in an ATG.

Shhhh, that was Rule 3......

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

huw wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How is Ezzard Charles before George Forman???

I think you may be giving Foreman too much credit for his grill and when you consider how close that came to being the Hulk Hogan grill I think we need to leave cooking utilities that are so good a boxer would put their name on it off the list of qualities we look for in an ATG.

Yeah your right huw I mean winning the heavweight title in 2 ERA's is not even worth mentioning is it?

It is impressive but I don't feel it comes close to the career of Ezzard Charles.

Wins against Moore, Maxim, Burley, Walcott and Louis and campaigning very well at both middle and heavy.

For me in comparison Foreman just doesn't stack up and although his reign prior to Ali was very impressive (especially Frazier) his reign after he came back wasn't so impressive.

It's seems to me that P4P lists are so subjective it is impossible to reach any kind of consensus. Another problem is that there are very few posters that have really dug in and studied the Top 30 or 40 fighters of all time, less than a handful I reckon, I'm certainly not one of them. Without a baseline of knowledge the debate breaks down and just turns into soundbites and basically a pi55ing contest.

The other issue I have with these ratings is that every poster uses different criteria to form their list. Depending on how they weight, record, skills, heart etc etc greatly influences their lists. I personally don't place as much emphasis on paper records as some others. I find it annoying when talking about a great fighter and out comes the perenial line "yeah but he got slapped off of........".

Looking at the OP's list I can see it has the potential to create good debate as it's not quite the conventional Top 20 list and misses out on a couple of the usual names. I have no doubt captain carrantohil is ready to defend his choices if the questions are asked.


My highly personal Top 10 is:

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. Greb
4. Ali
5. Langford
6. Fitzsimmons
7. Charles
8. B.Leonard
8. Louis
9. Duran
10. Gans


I lean towards fighters who jumped weight divisions and beat naturally bigger opponents.

No ray Leonard?

Louis? Oh yes. The bestest combination puncher ever.

azania wrote:No ray Leonard?

Louis? Oh yes. The bestest combination puncher ever.

Put up your Top 10..................put up or shut up,

Az, genuine question. Are you retarded? Strongy clearly mentions that these lists are, by their very nature, subjective and even states that it's his "highly personal" list and you start having a pop about who should or shouldn't be in it. The only fighters that should be in it are those that Strongy chooses for inclusion.

Fine to debate the relative merits of different fighters but what's the point at simply having a pop at what appears to be a subjective but well thought out list?

A top 10 list without SRL is ridiculous especially if Duran is included.

I realise it is a personal list. So now personal lists aren't supposed to be debated.

My top 10 and in no order.

Ali
SRL
SRR
RJJ
Armstrong
Floyd
B. Leonard
Saddler
Ez Charles
Holmes

Have to agree with superfly's remarks about style of debate. I'm not convinced that anyone's mastery of boxing history on this board is sufficiently compendious to allow them to scoff at the sincerely held beliefs of others. That most definitely includes az, I'm afraid, who is commendably long on opinions and immovable shibboleths, but somewhat less well-armed with the requisite knowledge to support them at times.

As I said in the preamble, for this thread at least, I'd be awfully grateful if we could dispense with the imbecilic 'face over the hand' icons or childish repetition of the same point, even if it is about a boxer as great as Ray Leonard. I'm rather more interested in the exchange of opinion here than the antics of the playground.

My personal list is:

Robinson
SRL
Ali
Armstrong
Charles
Fitz
Mayweather
Haggler
Duran
Langford (although only seen about 20 black and white fights!)

azania wrote:A top 10 list without SRL is ridiculous especially if Duran is included.

I realise it is a personal list. So now personal lists aren't supposed to be debated.

My top 10 and in no order.

Ali
SRL
SRR
RJJ
Armstrong
Floyd
B. Leonard
Saddler
Ez Charles
Holmes

Sorry Capt

Interestingly, a certain amount of consensus appears to be developing here. Robinson, Armstrong Ali and Charles are in just about everyone's list, with Mayweather and Greb in the great majority. Langford, Fitz and Benny Leonard are also well-represented, while the number ten berth is something of a toss-up, with a number of fighters gaining a vote here and there.

We may all disagree in style and degree at times, but the truth is that we're not that far apart.

Az I'm assuming that 10th place is Larry and not Lindell!

As we know subjective lists and that but what criteria have you set as a benchmark where Larry Holmes would make a top 10 list ?

Cheers Rodders

Ha. Nice one Rodders. Care to elaborate? Politely of course.

Larry Holmes.

Rodney wrote:Az I'm assuming that 10th place is Larry and not Lindell!

As we know subjective lists and that but what criteria have you set as a benchmark where Larry Holmes would make a top 10 list ?

Cheers Rodders

He was a terrific boxer and in my opinion the second best hw ever. Certainly better than Louis.

Here is my top 3 captain.

The other 7 positions are up for debate

1) Henry Armstrong
2) Willie Pep
3) Sugar Ray Robinson

Seem i'm the last Duran is top 5 man left on the board and Mayweather in the top 10 when Ray Leonard and Roberto are not is one I wholeheartedly disagree with.

I can understand Ali at 4 as he's a heavy and like Roelwy there has to be a space for gans in the top 15. Jofre is absolutely marvelous to watch but is he that high due to your assesment of his record or assessment of his ability?

Mine would probably go thus:

Armstrong
Robinson
Ali
Charles
Duran
Leonard
Greb
Gans
B Leonard
Whitaker
Langford
Tunney
RJJ
Moore
Mayweather
Pep
Jofre
Fitzsimmons
Louis
Lopez

azania wrote:

Rodney wrote:Az I'm assuming that 10th place is Larry and not Lindell!

As we know subjective lists and that but what criteria have you set as a benchmark where Larry Holmes would make a top 10 list ?

Cheers Rodders

He was a terrific boxer and in my opinion the second best hw ever. Certainly better than Louis.

That he was Az but I'll politely disagree regards the Louis comment, but would be a fascinating H2H matchup.

Is he in the top ten based on his talent then ? Over the past few weeks and this isn't pointed at you alone, many have bandied about the soft touches Louis had and only had longevity on his side, surely if that's a matter of opinion then fair enough, but Holmes surely must be bashed with the same stick and a lot more harsher one for me.

Cheers Rodders

ShahenshahG wrote:Seem i'm the last Duran is top 5 man left on the board and Mayweather in the top 10 when Ray Leonard and Roberto are not is one I wholeheartedly disagree with.

I can understand Ali at 4 as he's a heavy and like Roelwy there has to be a space for gans in the top 15. Jofre is absolutely marvelous to watch but is he that high due to your assesment of his record or assessment of his ability?

Mine would probably go thus:

Armstrong
Robinson
Ali
Charles
Duran
Leonard
Greb
Gans
B Leonard
Whitaker
Langford
Tunney
RJJ
Moore
Mayweather
Pep
Jofre
Fitzsimmons
Louis
Lopez

Incredibly flawed list there shah.

7 years on top and beating some very good fighters. Fighters who in most eras would be champions themselves.

Quite welcome to your opinion onetwo