Top 10 fighters of the last 30 years !! 82-2012

First topic message reminder :

1. Floyd Mayweather
2. Pernell Whittaker
3. Roy Jones
4. Manny Pacquai
5. Julio cesar Chavez
6. Bernard Hopkins
7. Tommy Hearns
8. Ricardo Lopez
9. Evander Holyfield
10. Oscar dela Hoya

I don't think Whitaker's style can take any heat or blame for what happened against Ramirez, really. There was no judging 'decision' involved in that one, for me - they were simply given orders by King and the WBC and Whitaker could have dominated even more (as if he didn't already dominate him enough already) and still wouldn't have got the nod. I simply can not believe that any judge, much less two of them on the same night, could be THAT incompetent and produce those kind of scores unless dark forces were at work.

Pea used the same style in the rematch, for instance, and it was good enough to earn a shutout across all three cards, more or less - as it should have been first time out!

Granted, he 'only' won 8, maybe 9 rounds against Julio rather than the 10 / 11 he won against Ramirez, and he wasn't able to totally clown him the way he was Ramirez, but that's to be expected considering who he was fighting. Perhaps not orders this time, but Whitaker and his team had made some big concessions to King and Chavez to make the fight happen - going to Chavez's home away from home, fighting on King's Showtime network rather than HBO where Whitaker and Main Events were, not even standing in the way of King's drive to get rid of the originally-appointed Jerry Roth as one of the judges (he'd had Taylor well ahead of Chavez after 11 rounds, if you're a man for conspiracy theories!) and so on.

I really don't think that anyone in Whitaker's position could have done a much better job on Chavez, really. He actually outpunched and outlanded Julio, and even pushed him back to the ropes and outmuscled him at times, too.

I think we need to remember that there were some fights, such as McGirt I and Rivera I, where the consensus was that Whitaker had won them, but only narrowly. In both cases, the judges agreed. If his style was such a problem, then you'd have to expect that at least one of those ones would have gone against him, if you see what I'm getting at. But they didn't, and it's worth noting that on those occasions, Mr. King was nowhere to be seen, and he wasn't fighting a bigger cash cow than himself.

I think it was a mixture of politics and pure bad luck which made Pea in to such a Harry Hard Luck story, rather than any problem with his style. I tend not to get too involved with this kind of conspiracy thinking, but there is a stench over those blemishes on his record.

1.RJJ
2.Mayweather/Pacquiao
4.Whitaker
5.Chavez
6.Hearns
7.Holyfield
8.Spinks
9.Hagler
10.Mosley
If we take it back to a couple more years SRL is the clear number 1 though.

Lance wrote:I don't consider his style ugly and having watched his whole career I can honestly say he has not been favoured by refs on the whole, and hes been particularly hard done by from judging and politics. also pascal, cloud, joppy, Johnson are all very good wins in my book. I think if you are just considering guys at their prime then he is definitely below jones. but I judge a career as a whole, nobody made jones carry on fighting. Hopkins and jones are actually 1-1. if jones wants to continue to picks up the cheques as a pro then this is his career

Hopkings and Jones are 1-1 if you wanted to totally undermine yourself, sir, then you've achieved it. And the Johnson's and Joppy's of this world are good but not great wins. I've never seen someone in the modern era get away with so much spoiling, if you don't think he's benefitted from generosity/favouritism then you can't have watched Dawson I. Never should've been changed to a NC, he should be 0-2.

1. RJJ
2. Mayweather
3. Whitaker
4. Chavez
5. Pac
6. Hearns
7. Lopez
8. JMM
9. Hoppo
10. ODLH

Happy with the top 5, bottom 5 open to some minor shuffling. Hearns is my favourite boxer so may have been a nudge generous.

hogey wrote:1.RJJ
2.Mayweather/Pacquiao
4.Whitaker
5.Chavez
6.Hearns
7.Holyfield
8.Spinks
9.Hagler
10.Mosley
If we take it back to a couple more years SRL is the clear number 1 though.

So Hagler beats...Hearns, Roldan, Mugabi, Hamsho and Obelmijas...........

and it's enough to put him above Hopkins who's been near or around the top for 15/20 years..

Give me strength...

Near or around and losing to most of the best fighters he's faced.

Hagler's win over Hearns if comfortably better than anything on Hoppo's CV.

One win!!!

Let's put Bowe above him too...For Holy..

#justsayin'......

I forgive you...

How anyone can have a list without Lewis is beyond me.

Oh well.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lance wrote:I don't consider his style ugly and having watched his whole career I can honestly say he has not been favoured by refs on the whole, and hes been particularly hard done by from judging and politics. also pascal, cloud, joppy, Johnson are all very good wins in my book. I think if you are just considering guys at their prime then he is definitely below jones. but I judge a career as a whole, nobody made jones carry on fighting. Hopkins and jones are actually 1-1. if jones wants to continue to picks up the cheques as a pro then this is his career

Hopkings and Jones are 1-1 :roll:if you wanted to totally undermine yourself, sir, then you've achieved it.  And the Johnson's and Joppy's of this world are good but not great wins.  I've never seen someone in the modern era get away with so much spoiling, if you don't think he's benefitted from generosity/favouritism then you can't have watched Dawson I.  Never should've been changed to a NC, he should be 0-2.

he was injured from a foul. as clear of a no contest as you are likely to see. you have proven your agenda on this one. Im not suggesting Hopkins win over jones enhances his legacy, but losses to Hopkins, green and calzaghe are tarnishing jones career for me.

A bit like holding Berbick, Spinks and Holmes against Ali

Lance wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lance wrote:I don't consider his style ugly and having watched his whole career I can honestly say he has not been favoured by refs on the whole, and hes been particularly hard done by from judging and politics. also pascal, cloud, joppy, Johnson are all very good wins in my book. I think if you are just considering guys at their prime then he is definitely below jones. but I judge a career as a whole, nobody made jones carry on fighting. Hopkins and jones are actually 1-1. if jones wants to continue to picks up the cheques as a pro then this is his career

Hopkings and Jones are 1-1 :roll:if you wanted to totally undermine yourself, sir, then you've achieved it.  And the Johnson's and Joppy's of this world are good but not great wins.  I've never seen someone in the modern era get away with so much spoiling, if you don't think he's benefitted from generosity/favouritism then you can't have watched Dawson I.  Never should've been changed to a NC, he should be 0-2.

he was injured from a foul. as clear of a no contest as you are likely to see. you have proven your agenda on this one. Im not suggesting Hopkins win over jones enhances his legacy, but losses to Hopkins, green and calzaghe are tarnishing jones career for me.

Who is your all time number one then Lance?

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:

Lance wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lance wrote:I don't consider his style ugly and having watched his whole career I can honestly say he has not been favoured by refs on the whole, and hes been particularly hard done by from judging and politics. also pascal, cloud, joppy, Johnson are all very good wins in my book. I think if you are just considering guys at their prime then he is definitely below jones. but I judge a career as a whole, nobody made jones carry on fighting. Hopkins and jones are actually 1-1. if jones wants to continue to picks up the cheques as a pro then this is his career

Hopkings and Jones are 1-1 :roll:if you wanted to totally undermine yourself, sir, then you've achieved it.  And the Johnson's and Joppy's of this world are good but not great wins.  I've never seen someone in the modern era get away with so much spoiling, if you don't think he's benefitted from generosity/favouritism then you can't have watched Dawson I.  Never should've been changed to a NC, he should be 0-2.

he was injured from a foul. as clear of a no contest as you are likely to see. you have proven your agenda on this one. Im not suggesting Hopkins win over jones enhances his legacy, but losses to Hopkins, green and calzaghe are tarnishing jones career for me.

Who is your all time number one then Lance?

my knowledge pre 80s is a bit limited and largely built around the heavies only. besides in all sports, I find it a slightly futile exercise. the game has changed over the years

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:A bit like holding Berbick, Spinks and Holmes against Ali

to be fair to Ali those guys are a lot better than Danny Green. and none of them finished him inside a round. anyway in a few years when jones has retired it will be easier to reflect on the great part of his career. but for me if we are talking a specific timespan, as in up until 2013 then we should include everything that happened in that time. if we want to just argue who has the better career over that fought in this era then we can include leonard and have hagler higher. also  then its easier to ignore certain aspects of jones and holys downslide. but as ive said before I would still place Hopkins over jones.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

hogey wrote:1.RJJ
2.Mayweather/Pacquiao
4.Whitaker
5.Chavez
6.Hearns
7.Holyfield
8.Spinks
9.Hagler
10.Mosley
If we take it back to a couple more years SRL is the clear number 1 though.

So Hagler beats...Hearns, Roldan, Mugabi, Hamsho and Obelmijas...........

and it's enough to put him above Hopkins who's been near or around the top for 15/20 years..

Give me strength...

I thought it was supposed to be my list not yours mate, Hagler was the dominant man in boxing for a good few years and i think you are over harsh on him. Hopkins is a great fighter but i think Hagler would have beat him fairly comfortably at Middleweight and the names you mention who Hagler beat are as pretty much good as anything Hopkins has beaten and Hearns is miles above Hopkins best wins which were against smaller men like Trinidad, ODH and a past his best Winky. His record against better fighters like RJJ, JC was gave it a go but fell short and losses to Taylor and Dawson would not have happened to a fighter of Haglers calibre. As i often say its all about opinions i dont think you are right having Hopkins or ODH who lost his biggest fights on your lists but fair play its your list. Mosley having beaten ODH twice and his destruction on Margarito get my nod above Oscar every day of the week.

If you're going to get upset when someone argues over a pick on your list...

then maybe 606 isn't for you..

To be honest I'd have Curry above Hagler............

Starling twice, Jones, mcrory, Aquino, and Rosi who went on to become 168 champ...... unification.......and wbc jr midd title........

Hagler from 1975 though.......which doesn't apply..

I am not upset you big drama queen, but if you think that anyone with a different opinion as you is always wrong then an internet discussion forum is not for you.
Either way i am not going start having a soppy row with you as for a Yank you seem alright to me and i like reading most of your stuff and agree with plenty of it as well.

hogey wrote:I am not upset you big drama queen, but if you think that anyone with a different opinion as you is always wrong then an internet discussion forum is not for you..

Fight my corner..........that's all...................But Hagler is a poor choice...........Curry should come higher and he's nowhere near my top 10.

If Hagler why not Holmes................Witherspoon, Berbick and Smith all went on to become world champions..........Williams was respected also..

I'm in the minority but i'd have Hopkins above Hagler overall regardless of timespan and think as a thinking fighter he'd have won in a head to head.

So would I mate....shhh no one tell Haz..

I think based on styles Hopkins is about evens to beat Hagler, personally. I'd maybe even tip my hat in his favour. I agree that Hopkins' career outdoes Hagler's, too.

If we're talking purely about who the greater Middleweight was, though, it's still Marvin as far as I'm concerned.

It's a lot closer either way than many suggest, behind Monzon and Greb I think their both deserving of being 3 or 4 ahead of Robinson at 5.

To me I think Hagler would do his usual thing of trying to be too clever against a thinking fighter and that will be his downfall, i've never been convinced by his ability against fighters he can't hurt or are defensively sound.

That's all i do as well fella and as i say i think ODH is a poor choice on your list and to me far less deserving than one of the greatest middleweights of all time, but such is life i try to be respectful of your and others opinions as classless dismissal of other peoples views is not my game and never will be.
In fairness to you i completely forgot Larry Holmes and he may well have sneaked into my top 10 as well.

hogey wrote:That's all i do as well fella and as i say i think ODH is a poor choice on your list and to me far less deserving than one of the greatest middleweights of all time, but such is life i try to be respectful of your and others opinions as classless dismissal of other peoples views is not my game and never will be.
In fairness to you i completely forgot Larry Holmes and he may well have sneaked into my top 10 as well.

Not disputing he wasn't a great middle...........Between 82-87 he only had Hearns who was moving up in weight of value and he lost to a three year out-welterweight..

Oscar did more in the time zone as did Hoppo....as did Curry

JabMachineMK2 wrote:How anyone can have a list without Lewis is beyond me.

Oh well.

Not enough big wins, his era of dominance came after all the big name fights had departed.

Probs gets into the top15 for me.

Lance wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lance wrote:I don't consider his style ugly and having watched his whole career I can honestly say he has not been favoured by refs on the whole, and hes been particularly hard done by from judging and politics. also pascal, cloud, joppy, Johnson are all very good wins in my book. I think if you are just considering guys at their prime then he is definitely below jones. but I judge a career as a whole, nobody made jones carry on fighting. Hopkins and jones are actually 1-1. if jones wants to continue to picks up the cheques as a pro then this is his career

Hopkings and Jones are 1-1 :roll:if you wanted to totally undermine yourself, sir, then you've achieved it.  And the Johnson's and Joppy's of this world are good but not great wins.  I've never seen someone in the modern era get away with so much spoiling, if you don't think he's benefitted from generosity/favouritism then you can't have watched Dawson I.  Never should've been changed to a NC, he should be 0-2.

he was injured from a foul. as clear of a no contest as you are likely to see. you have proven your agenda on this one. Im not suggesting Hopkins win over jones enhances his legacy, but losses to Hopkins, green and calzaghe are tarnishing jones career for me.

So are you taking Hopkins debut loss into account? Because that's about as relevant as RJJ's losses to Hoppo and Green.

And re Dawson I, Hoppo wasn't in the fight so was doing his usual dirty spoiling, climbing all over Dawson and should've had a point deducted. As the ref did nothing, as always, he was shrugged off - resulting in a minor injury, all of his own making, not a NC in my book. Just looked like he was looking for a way out, frankly, bit like he did against JC at one point from memory.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lance wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Lance wrote:I don't consider his style ugly and having watched his whole career I can honestly say he has not been favoured by refs on the whole, and hes been particularly hard done by from judging and politics. also pascal, cloud, joppy, Johnson are all very good wins in my book. I think if you are just considering guys at their prime then he is definitely below jones. but I judge a career as a whole, nobody made jones carry on fighting. Hopkins and jones are actually 1-1. if jones wants to continue to picks up the cheques as a pro then this is his career

Hopkings and Jones are 1-1 :roll:if you wanted to totally undermine yourself, sir, then you've achieved it.  And the Johnson's and Joppy's of this world are good but not great wins.  I've never seen someone in the modern era get away with so much spoiling, if you don't think he's benefitted from generosity/favouritism then you can't have watched Dawson I.  Never should've been changed to a NC, he should be 0-2.

he was injured from a foul. as clear of a no contest as you are likely to see. you have proven your agenda on this one. Im not suggesting Hopkins win over jones enhances his legacy, but losses to Hopkins, green and calzaghe are tarnishing jones career for me.

So are you taking Hopkins debut loss into account? Because that's about as relevant as RJJ's losses to Hoppo and Green.

And re Dawson I, Hoppo wasn't in the fight so was doing his usual dirty spoiling, climbing all over Dawson and should've had a point deducted.  As the ref did nothing, as always, he was shrugged off - resulting in a minor injury, all of his own making, not a NC in my book.  Just looked like he was looking for a way out, frankly, bit like he did against JC at one point from memory.

if he wanted a way out there would have been no rematch. total nonesense

There was a rematch because of the controversy, one led into the other. If the match had continued and Dawson walked away a comfy 117-111 winner there'd have been no rematch.

The only nonesense round here is you ranking a guy 9 places ahead of someone he was so comprehensively beaten by and ahead of a multi-weight world champ with no losses compared to Hoppos 6. Now THAT'S nonesense!

if Hopkins knew his tactics weren't working, why after a fake injury, getting a NC, and keeping his title would he agree to a rematch. a rematch for a fight he knew after 2 rounds he couldn't win? controversy? don't think that's ever bothered Hopkins. at his ages nobody is gonna worry too much if he didn't rematch dawson. dawson was particularly unpleasant after the first fight, and it never sold well. so theres two easy excuses to avoid a rematch. not to mention it was a bad fight from the start for either of them to sell or look good in.

im surprised you have DLH top 10 judging by the things you have marked Hopkins down on. also have you ever watched the Hopkins jones fight? most people have never bothered, and those who have rarely call it comprehensive

Dawson was his #1 challenger at the time and the biggest fight out there for him and who everyone was clamouring for. If he hadn't rematched everyone would've known/called him a ducker. So he went for a second time hoping for a better result and/or with different tactics.

It was a stinky fight because of Hopkins, are his fights stink (at least for the last 5 years or so).

Hoppo-Jones I RJJ beat him with one hand pretty much, that's pretty comprehensive.