Best Of The Last 50 Years - If Only Their Best Wins Count

Interestingly, both Trussman and Adam T - two of the most ardent "fans" I've come across have conceded that Manny Pacquiao has scored better quality wins than Floyd Mayweather in their respective careers.

If we only take wins into account - how would you rate fighters from the last 50 years? Who has the most great victories since 1965?

Ali? Leonard? Duran? Pacquiao?

Ali and Leonard are top 2 for sure. Yes overall I think Pacquiao edges Floyd on wins. Don't deny that. His losses are pure sh1t though.

Holyfield would have to factor into this one.

1. Ali
2. Leonard
3. Duran
4. Pacquiao

It gets tough after that. Jones, Holyfield and Frazier could feature. Barrera and Morales?

Yes Holyfield should feature. I would have Floyd above Erik and Marco.

Jones Jr for sure has a couple of major wins. Might as well stick Foreman and Lewis in this as well.

Depends how many best wins we are counting...........

I'd have Salvador Sanchez up there.............A legend in Gomez and a future legend in Nelson...and the respected little red....

Ali for me...............Probably Leonard second...........Leonard, Buchanan, Dejesus and Davey would put Duran in the top 10...................

I don't know about Manny..............Has some top wins...But Barrera had been found out, Morales 1-1, Oscar looked like a schindler's list extra and there were a fair few sloppy seconds..Also think JMM was ripped off...

Manny is in my top 20 alltime list though

AdamT wrote:Yes Holyfield should feature. I would have Floyd above Erik and Marco.

Jones Jr for sure has a couple of major wins. Might as well stick Foreman and Lewis in this as well.

Morales beat peak versions of Barrera and Pacquiao. Barrera beat Morales and Hamed. Who did Floyd beat better than that (you've already conceded that a faded Cotto is his best win since Castillo - and Castillo and Corrales can't match the wins listed above)?

So in essence it's a bash Floyd thread....

Sanchez is a good shout.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:So in essence it's a bash Floyd thread....

More a celebration of those that dared (and won Rodney)

De la hoya is a better win than Barrera or Morales in my view and certainly much better that Hamed. He fought De la Hoya at a higher weight and still won.

Alveraz was also a good win.

An undefeated Corrales was huge at the time as well.

Oh and just for the record, I think beating Pacquiao was a better win than Cotto (just not as exciting to watch, was my point). I never thought on including that. Also as you are throwing names out of your rear end and not considering weights, Floyd embarressed a certain Mexiacan, who I now rate higher than Morales and Barrera.

1. Ali
2. Leonard
3. Duran
4. Pacquiao
5. Jones
6. Morales
7. Sanchez
8.
9.
10.

Struggling...

Pryor? Holyfield? Harada? Benitez? Hagler?

AdamT wrote:De la hoya is a better win than Barrera or Morales in my view and certainly much better that Hamed. He fought De la Hoya at a higher weight and still won.

Alveraz was also a good win.

An undefeated Corrales was huge at the time as well.

Oh and just for the record, I think beating Pacquiao was a better win than Cotto (just not as exciting to watch, was my point). I never thought on including that. Also as you are throwing names out of your rear end and not considering weights, Floyd embarressed a certain Mexiacan, who I now rate higher than Morales and Barrera.

De la Hoya?  

Oscar was a part-time, faded force by the time Mayweather defeated him. That victory plainly can't compare to Barrera beating Morales, or Morales beating Pacquiao.

Alvarez hasn't proven himself to be anything other than a good young fighter. Mayweather made Canelo - who hasn't even made 154 in recent fights - fight at 152 lbs. A good win but nothing special.

I'll give you a bye here Adam considering you've admitted you haven't watched anything before 1995.

A great win should be a great fighter beating another great fighter at or around their best, at or around their optimum weight.

Hearns has Benitez and Duran.

Toney has McCallum, Nunn, Jirov (but was also a drugs cheat).

Mike Spinks: Holmes, Muhammad, Qawi.

chavez has lockridge, rosario, taylor and camacho

whittaker might be up there were it not for some dubious judging

Not many great fighters have beaten many other great fighters (since the black murderers row days), they tend to beat a lot of good ones... like arguello had olivares, castillo, boza, mancini, watt
.

Holmes an Qawi are a stretch....Holmes was past it..

Norris has to rate higher than Spinks...Mugabi..Leonard....Curry ...Brown and Taylor by that criteria

hazharrison wrote:

AdamT wrote:De la hoya is a better win than Barrera or Morales in my view and certainly much better that Hamed. He fought De la Hoya at a higher weight and still won.

Alveraz was also a good win.

An undefeated Corrales was huge at the time as well.

Oh and just for the record, I think beating Pacquiao was a better win than Cotto (just not as exciting to watch, was my point). I never thought on including that. Also as you are throwing names out of your rear end and not considering weights, Floyd embarressed a certain Mexiacan, who I now rate higher than Morales and Barrera.

De la Hoya?  

Oscar was a part-time, faded force by the time Mayweather defeated him. That victory plainly can't compare to Barrera beating Morales, or Morales beating Pacquiao.

Alvarez hasn't proven himself to be anything other than a good young fighter. Mayweather made Canelo - who hasn't even made 154 in recent fights - fight at 152 lbs. A good win but nothing special.

I'll give you a bye here Adam considering you've admitted you haven't watched anything before 1995.

A great win should be a great fighter beating another great fighter at or around their best, at or around their optimum weight.

To be fair I have watched old fights on youtube but I am only 31, so don't pretend to be some historian. I am not blind with hatred to rate great fighters like Floyd behind fighters like Johnson, because some article states it. My opinions are definitely my own.

Bit of a silly idea but its fun none the less.

Calzaghe has Hopkins, Jones, Kessler and Eubank

Lewis has Holy, Tyson, Vitali, Tua and Ruddock

Lance wrote:Bit of a silly idea but its fun none the less.

Calzaghe has Hopkins, Jones, Kessler and Eubank

It was started as a bash of Floyd but hopefully it can turn into a decent thread. I only watched boxing since 1995, so can't comment on anything before that. As far as I have read guys like Joe Louis and Jack Johnson are titans, that could rattle the whole MGM with one punch.

I am going to spend the next 3 years on reading wiki and boxrec to get up to speed. Why comment on actual fighters that are relevant. Lets talk about dinosaurs!!

If we are chucking Tyson in for Lewis...

Holmes.......Ali..Shavers..Witherspoon..Norton

KHan has Barrera

milkyboy wrote:chavez has lockridge, rosario, taylor and camacho

whittaker might be up there were it not for some dubious judging

Not many great fighters have beaten many other great fighters (since the black murderers row days), they tend to beat a lot of good ones... like arguello had olivares, castillo, boza, mancini, watt
.

Yeah, it's tough to name more than two legit great wins from anyone.

Lance wrote:Bit of a silly idea but its fun none the less.

Calzaghe has Hopkins, Jones, Kessler and Eubank

Hopkins and Kessler the best of those. Jones and Eubank had had it.

It gets tough after that. Jones

Give. Me. Strength.

Thank god it's time to nob off home, not sure I can re-type the same vitriolic view on how he has 1.5 good wins and the rest against guys who you could pick more holes in than a bloody something-or-other that I can't currently think of.

Lance wrote:Lewis has Holy, Tyson, Vitali, Tua and Ruddock

Holyfield and Klitschko were good wins. Tyson and Ruddock were past it.

Coxy001 wrote:

It gets tough after that. Jones

Give. Me. Strength.

Thank god it's time to nob off home, not sure I can re-type the same vitriolic view on how he has 1.5 good wins and the rest against guys who you could pick more holes in than a bloody something-or-other that I can't currently think of.

Hopkins and Toney were top wins - that's all we're looking at here. Forget the rubbish he fought.

Lance wrote:KHan has Barrera

LOL

AdamT wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

AdamT wrote:De la hoya is a better win than Barrera or Morales in my view and certainly much better that Hamed. He fought De la Hoya at a higher weight and still won.

Alveraz was also a good win.

An undefeated Corrales was huge at the time as well.

Oh and just for the record, I think beating Pacquiao was a better win than Cotto (just not as exciting to watch, was my point). I never thought on including that. Also as you are throwing names out of your rear end and not considering weights, Floyd embarressed a certain Mexiacan, who I now rate higher than Morales and Barrera.

De la Hoya?  

Oscar was a part-time, faded force by the time Mayweather defeated him. That victory plainly can't compare to Barrera beating Morales, or Morales beating Pacquiao.

Alvarez hasn't proven himself to be anything other than a good young fighter. Mayweather made Canelo - who hasn't even made 154 in recent fights - fight at 152 lbs. A good win but nothing special.

I'll give you a bye here Adam considering you've admitted you haven't watched anything before 1995.

A great win should be a great fighter beating another great fighter at or around their best, at or around their optimum weight.

To be fair I have watched old fights on youtube but I am only 31, so don't pretend to be some historian. I am not blind with hatred to rate  great fighters like Floyd behind fighters like Johnson, because some article states it. My opinions are definitely my own.

So you rate him over Johnson because you've never seen anything pre-1995? Canny.

Foreman has Frazier, Norton (and Lyle). He looks a sure thing. Hearns, too.

AdamT wrote:
I am going to spend the next 3 years on reading wiki and boxrec to get up to speed. Why comment on actual fighters that are relevant. Lets talk about dinosaurs!!

 
Perish the thought anyone would want to learn about the history of the sport they love. If you don't care to learn about the history of the sport that is your choice, but not sure those that do deserve to be mocked for it.

1. Ali
2. Leonard
3. Duran
4. Pacquiao
5. Hearns
6. Jones
7. Morales
8. Sanchez
9. Foreman
10. Barrera

Holyfield, Pryor, Hagler, Harada. Others?

Chill Rowley, I do read sometimes. Was always fascinated about the heavyweight history.

Hopkins - Trinidad, ODLH, Tarver, Johnson, Wright, Pavlik, Pascal.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Hopkins - Trinidad, ODLH, Tarver, Johnson, Wright, Pavlik, Pascal.

All good wins. Trinidad his best but was Felix a middle? Oscar wasn't - Sturm deserved the nod over him at 160.

Add in Jones for Hopkins.

Only kidding

Since Gatti has anyone who mayweather faced gone on to set the world alight? No not really, simply boxrec the fighters he's faced and see what they've went on to achieve. Most were on the slide, some were on the way to retiring, others didn't win another meaningful fight. Cotto and Alvarez aside, of course. However those two wins come with caveats.

Has he ever fought a boxer who was on the way up, serious question.

(Apart from a drained Alvarez, which was a good win regardless)

Pacquaio is too high I reckon. I'd have him neck and neck with Holyfield. I feel their best wins match up quite evenly when taking into account Holys cruiser exploits also.
Pacquaio beating Barerra the first time when Marco was on top of the world matches up well to Holys Tyson one where Holy shocked everyone. Obviously Mike wasn't the same fighter by this point but he was still the favourite due to Holys heart and Bowe and Moorer struggles not too far behind.

Let's look at their two best wins:

1. Ali - Foreman, Frazier
2. Leonard - Hearns, Benitez
3. Duran - Leonard, DeJesus/Barkley
4. Pacquiao - Barrera/Cotto, Marquez
5. Hearns - Benitez, Duran
6. Jones - Toney, Hopkins
7. Morales - Barrera, Pacquiao
8. Sanchez - Gomez, Nelson
9. Foreman - Frazier, Norton
10. Barrera - Morales, Hamed

Holyfield - Bowe, Tyson
Pryor - Arguello x 2
Hagler - Hearns, Duran
Harada - Jofre x 2

Maybe Hearns needs shifting up? There must be some missing?

Trinidad - De la Hoya, Vargas
Chavez - Taylor, Camacho/Rosario
Gomez - Zarate, Pintor/La Porta
Toney - McCallum, Nunn
Frazier - Ali, Ellis/Quarry
Hopkins - Trinidad, Tarver
Marquez - Pacquiao, Casamayor
Bowe - Holyfield x 2
Monzon - Valdez, Benvenuti

Haz you are plain and simple a hater. it is a pity because you are a very knowledgeable poster.

AdamT wrote:Haz you are plain and simple a hater. it is a pity because you are a very knowledgeable poster.

A hater of what exactly?

Doesn't matter.

It's just a list of names that disregards form, weight and age, for instance beating Duran at light Middleweight is not a great win nor is beating that version of him to start with. When you are relentlessly leaving out one name over and over again it makes the whole exercise redundant and very transparent.

In fairness it's not as transparent as....

"37yr old Mayweather's win over Maidana proves he's not top 10 " or...

10/1 "Murray is a great win" "3/1 Manny isn't worth watching !!

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's just a list of names that disregards form, weight and age, for instance beating Duran at light Middleweight is not a great win nor is beating that version of him to start with. When you are relentlessly leaving out one name over and over again it makes the whole exercise redundant and very transparent.

Why isn't beating Duran at 154 a great win? Duran went on to fight a peak Marvin Hagler tooth and nail at 160 and record two of his finest victories over Davey Moore and Iran Barkley at 154 and 160 respectively.

If you're referring to Floyd then make a case. I've also omitted Whitaker, Lewis and countless others. What were their great wins over great fighters at or close to their best (at or close to a weight they still had form)?

Do you not think Hagler is a bit overrated?? Like come on. Duran was hardly peak and still pushed him.

If Duran was a natural at that weight, he would beat Hagler Easily. Duran, Leonard and Hearns are much better boxers than Marvin Hagler. They are just lighter guys.

AdamT wrote:Do you not think Hagler is a bit overrated?? Like come on. Duran was hardly peak and still pushed him.

If Duran was a natural at that weight, he would beat Hagler Easily. Duran, Leonard and Hearns are much better boxers than Marvin Hagler. They are just lighter guys.

Hagler was one of the greatest middleweights who ever lived. Duran was one of the greatest fighters who ever lived.

Haz I knew I would get a response. Just put that out for the craic. For ONCE I do agree. Duran is a fooking legend and he beats Floyd.

AdamT wrote:Haz I knew I would get a response. Just put that out for the craic. For ONCE I do agree. Duran is a fooking legend and he beats Floyd.

Possibly. Mayweather was unreal at super feather - depends which weight it took place.