Ring Mag's Doug Fischer's Greatest 20 Fighters Since WW II

First topic message reminder :

http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/355849-commentary-floyd-mayweather-jr-s-place-among-the-modern-greats

1.Sugar Ray Robinson
2.Henry Armstrong
3.Willie Pep
4.Ezzard Charles
5.Muhammad Ali
6.Archie Moore
7.Joe Louis
8.Roberto Duran
9.Billy Conn
10.Sugar Ray Leonard
11.Pernell Whitaker
12.Julio Cesar Chavez
13.Ike Williams
14.Emile Griffith
15.Carlos Ortiz
16.Sandy Saddler
17.Jimmy Bivins
18.Sammy Angott
19.Evander Holyfield
20.Bernard Hopkins

Forty honorable mention (in alphabetical order): Alexis Arguello, Marco Antonio Barrera, Carmen Basilio, Wilfred Benitez, Charley Burley, Joe Calzaghe, Miguel Canto, Marcel Cerdan, Oscar De La Hoya, George Foreman, Bob Foster, Joe Frazier, Kid Gavilan, Wilfredo Gomez, Marvin Hagler, Fighting Harada, Thomas Hearns, Larry Holmes, Eder Jofre, Harold Johnson, Roy Jones Jr., Jake LaMotta, Lennox Lewis, Ricardo Lopez, Rocky Marciano, Lloyd Marshall, Juan Manuel Marquez, Floyd Mayweather Jr., Erik Morales, Carlos Monzon, Jose Napoles, Ruben Olivares, Manuel Ortiz, Manny Pacquiao, Luis Rodriguez, Salvador Sanchez, Felix Trinidad, Holman Williams, Tony Zale and Carlos Zarate.

This guy and his glowing omissions reminds me of Nat Fleischer former editor....

You know Dempsey plays with Ali etc..

Like Grandad on the bus....Saying kids of today have no respect etc...

In a way it's sad...

For a lightweight Angott had long arms but having not seen him fight you wouldn't know that would you Haz.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:For a lightweight Angott had long arms but having not seen him fight you wouldn't know that would you Haz.

I've seen the Zivic and Robinson fights. He wasn't "rangy". He fought almost exclusively at close quarters.

I like the original thought, though. You'll be respected with a few more of those...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:This guy and his glowing omissions reminds me of Nat Fleischer former editor....

You know Dempsey plays with Ali etc..

Like Grandad on the bus....Saying kids of today have no respect etc...

In a way it's sad...

Fischer? He has a few modern guys in there.

88Chris05 wrote:Injustice against Marquez, Haz? Do you mean Morales (first fight)? Or are you talking about the blatant foul after the knockdown?

I think on reflection Berrera-McCallum is close enough to be argued either way, I'll concede that. But I'd stick with Nelson being ahead of Marco. Barrera probably a bit more technically gifted than Zoomy but the defeats to Jones (ok, he was in command in the first one before walking on to a Hail Mary punch, but he got outscored over twelve in a return) and Pacquiao, in or around his prime years, leave a slight sour taste. Nelson may have been a little outclassed against a prime Whitaker, but you can't fault him for effort. On the other hand, as amazing as Pacquiao was in that first Barrera fight, Marco did seem to mentally check out of the fight and just look to survive from the mid-rounds onwards.

Gomez in his back yard, an undefeated Fenech in his backyard in one of the best wins / performances by absolutely anyone in the nineties....Nelson's record is pretty stacked. Barrera, due to his status as a headliner (Nelson was often on the undercards of King's stacked shows), his nationality and his rivalry with Morales got more fanfare and attention than Nelson but I'd have to say the Ghanaian had the better career overall.

Close but I'd give it to Nelson.

Thought I'd replied to this (weird).

The injustice was the scoring, atrocious cards. Also Nady fluffing the knockdown call (that he didn't see).

Nelson was gifted a draw against Fenech first time around.

I admired Barrera's switch from threshing machine to master boxer. He was imperious until running into a Pacquiao that rampaged through the divisions (and I thought he kept Pac largely in his box in the rematch, despite being past his best).

You do like your technicians. You must be high on Mikey Garcia?

Nelson got a very fortunate draw against Fenech in their opener, Haz, no doubt about that. But Fenech as I've argued before was a far better fighter than people give him credit for - and Nelson absolutely hammered him in the return in a performance which can't be too far off Sanchez's famed showing against Gomez. Given the stunning nature of the performance, what had gone before in their first fight and the venue I’d say it’s a better win than Barrera’s over Hamed. Marco boxed very well, don’t get me wrong, but Hamed was pretty poor and there were some truly dour, turgid rounds in that one which the Prince just surrendered.

Barrera churned out some very good performances while past his prime as you’ve touched on, like the second Pacquiao fight, the Marquez war and even Juarez, but Nelson had some pretty great moments in his dotage n’all. What he was able to do to Ruelas and Leija in their rematches after nineteen months out the ring and aged 37 / 38 was pretty spectacular and are two of my favourite performances from a golden oldie.

It’s a close call, but to me Zoomy is a top ten Featherweight of all time and a top five Super-Feather to boot. Not sure Barrera ever really put his mark on a division in a way that Nelson did at 126 and 130…..But it’s fine margins. Maybe I’m biased against Marco as I’m a bit more of a Morales man!

I was always a Barrera man (which is odd as he was supposed to be the middle class guy).

What a wonderful all-rounder he was.

Nelson's biggest loss was....Cruz W15 McGuigan....

I don't think its really that close between zoomy and Barrera, Chris. Pretty clear that nelson should be rated higher to me. Lost to an ATG through exhaustion more than anything when he was green as could be. Lost to another ATG above his best weight. That's it in his prime, and you could argue Whittaker and fenech were towards the end of that prime.

Marquez, Barrera, morales... All in the very very good category, nelson makes it to great in my view. But like I said, I'm biased!

Ssshhh, I was just saying it was close to make Haz feel better!

Not sure if you're bothered about bios, but are you planning on getting that new Nelson biography that's just come out, milky? What with you being a big Zoomy fan and all. I've not started it yet as I'm still finishing up on Alex's book that he posted his thread about on here, but as soon as I've done that the Nelson one is next in line. Has had pretty good reviews, I think.

Just checking you weren't waive ring under pressure!

I'm not normally a bios man Chris, but could be tempted by that one. Always got the impression he had a high opinion of himself and a host of excuses for his poorer performances. Malaria for fenech 1, I think... Though Probably a reasonable excuse if any truth in it!

Be interesting to read a broader view of him.

Barrera was a great fighter rather than very good. I thought he beat Marquez; the first Morales decision looked dodgy also.

They tend to interchange on expert listings and so there's defo an argument there to be had but the wars with Morales edge it for me. The first fight was the greatest since Hagler-Hearns (Corrales-Castillo is in with a shout also).

milkyboy wrote:I don't think its really that close between zoomy and Barrera, Chris. Pretty clear that nelson should be rated higher to me. Lost to an ATG through exhaustion more than anything when he was green as could be. Lost to another ATG above his best weight. That's it in his prime, and you could argue Whittaker and fenech were towards the end of that prime.

Marquez, Barrera, morales... All in the very very good category, nelson makes it to great in my view. But like I said, I'm biased!

Seemed to me Sanchez took a little while to figure Nelson out (probably underestimated him) and then once he did, he took care of business.

Bit of a simplified version for me, Haz. Sanchez made some adjustements, but was still only 2, maybe 3 rounds ahead going in to the fifteenth on my card and Nelson was still hurting him as late as the thirteenth. Kind of hard to argue that Nelson having never gone further than ten rounds at Commonwealth level before didn't at least play some part, considering that Sanchez's freakish stamina over the fifteen rounds course was one of his greatest strengths.

Nelson threw a lot in to the early rounds against Sal, whereas later in his career he became a bit more of a slow burner. I used to be in the 'Sanchez was just complacent and he'd have always beaten Nelson' camp, but to be honest a rematch further down the line (maybe at Super-Feather where Sanchez was headed) would probably have been a pick 'em.

I'd need to watch the fight again Chris -- been a long while (come to think of it, since Twitter/The Net came along, I rarely revisit classic fights like I used to -- that's not a good thing!).

Sanchez nelson is an old chestnut. I've ploughed a fairly lone furrow on it in my time against the 'Sanchez fighting down to his opponents' brigade. He may have underestimated him, he won't have seen him, he did take control later in the fight... But it was a 12 fight novice taking the fight at less than two weeks notice. Nelson learnt to pace himself and tightened himself up post Sanchez, and he proved he learnt more than most in rematches.

A lot of people whose opinion I normally value think Sanchez has it easier in a rematch, but they're all wrong! It would have been a hell of a fight.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I should instead be more like you Steffan and use V2 as a tool to run down anything and everything to do with England

Says the guy who was cheering on Andorra against Wales in the football. I mean cheering against little old Wales who are not even on Englands radar in football. How petty