Top 10 fighters of past 30 years from light to middle.

[cuchulain]

Post your list of the ten best boxers who had fights in the last thirty
years ** between lightwt (135 lb limit) and middlwt (160 lb limit).

Factors to considers:

Record
Quality of opponents
Domination
Titles in most weight classes
Longevity
etc.

State whether your list is based on achievement or head-to-head.


** If your pick had fights prior to 1977, (e.g. Duran) Count his entire career.

[TBooze]

Top 10; all making their pro debuts after 1975:



10 Felix Trinidad
9 Azumah Nelson
8 Floyd Mayweather Jr
7 Bernard Hopkins
6 Roy Jones
5 Thomas Hearns
4 Pernell Whitaker
3 Oscar de la Hoya
2 Julio Cesar Chavez
1 Ray Leonard

Mentions: Mike McCallum, Kostya Tszyu, Aaron Pryor and Ronald Wright

[Asterion]

1. Roberto Duran
2. Ray Leonard
3. Pernell Whitaker
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Julio Cesar Chavez
6. Roy Jones
7. Bernard Hopkins
8. Tommy Hearns
9. Floyd Mayweather
10. Oscar de la Hoya

[brooklyn1550]

Top 10
1. Roberto Duran
2. Sugar Ray Leonard
3. Pernell Whitaker
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Julio Cesar Chavez
6. Roy Jones, Jr.
7. Thomas Hearns
8. Bernard Hopkins
9. Alexis Arguello
10. Floyd Mayweather, Jr.

Honorable Mention
Aaron Pryor
Kostya Tszyu
Mike McCallum
Oscar De La Hoya
Wilfred Benitez
Winky Wright
Felix Trinidad
Shane Mosley

[Asterion]

No Arguello Asterion?

I think he would be my #11 and could even get to the 9th place any day.

[acb]

Top 10; all making their pro debuts after 1975:



10 Felix Trinidad
9 Azumah Nelson
8 Floyd Mayweather Jr
7 Bernard Hopkins
6 Roy Jones
5 Thomas Hearns
4 Pernell Whitaker
3 Oscar de la Hoya
2 Julio Cesar Chavez
1 Ray Leonard

Mentions: Mike McCallum, Kostya Tszyu, Aaron Pryor and Ronald Wright


Dude dont you think you have Oscar a little too high?

Above Bernard, Roy Jones Jr., Sweet Pea, Hearns... :nono :yikes

[acb]

Top 10
1. Roberto Duran
2. Sugar Ray Leonard
3. Pernell Whitaker
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Julio Cesar Chavez
6. Roy Jones, Jr.
7. Thomas Hearns
8. Bernard Hopkins
9. Alexis Arguello
10. Floyd Mayweather, Jr.



Great list, mine would be something like this but with SRL above Duran.

[acb]

Again, would Arguello be so low because you are discounting his work at 126 and 130 or because you rank him lower pound for pound than those guys?

P4P issue for me and in my personal rankings I weight that moreso than others perhaps.

[doublesuited]

10.) Danny Jacobs
9.) Curtis Stevens
8.) Joe Greene
7.) Shannon Briggs
6.) Junior Jones
5.) Mark Breland
4.) Juan La Porte
3.) Zab Judah
2.) Riddick Bowe
1.) Mike Tyson

BK BABY.

[GazOC]

Galaxy and Lopez and both worth at least 'honorable mentions'....

[acb]

Galaxy and Lopez and both worth at least 'honorable mentions'....

Lopez definently makes honorable mention.

[bigtime9]

1. Ray Leonard -5 titles in 5 weight classes
2. Roy Jones - first middle weight to win a heavytitle in 100 years
3. Floyd Mayweather Jr. - 5 title in 5 weight classes undefeated by 30
4. Marvin Hagler - most dominant middle in past 30 years
5. Bernard Hopkins- most dominant middle of the 90's
6. Thomas Hearns - 5 titles in 5 weight classes
7. Pernell Whitaker- 4 titles in 4 weight classes
8. Aaron Pryor - the most gifted and explosive fighter of our generation
9. James Toney - 3 titles in 3 weight classes-started middle fought hvy
10. Roberto Duran - 4 titles in 4 weight classes less talented but tough

[acb]

1. Ray Leonard -5 titles in 5 weight classes
2. Roy Jones - first middle weight to win a heavytitle in 100 years
3. Floyd Mayweather Jr. - 5 title in 5 weight classes undefeated by 30
4. Marvin Hagler - most dominant middle in past 30 years
5. Bernard Hopkins- most dominant middle of the 90's
6. Thomas Hearns - 5 titles in 5 weight classes
7. Pernell Whitaker- 4 titles in 4 weight classes
8. Aaron Pryor - the most gifted and explosive fighter of our generation
9. James Toney - 3 titles in 3 weight classes-started middle fought hvy
10. Roberto Duran - 4 titles in 4 weight classes less talented but tough

You had to do it, didnt you? :lol:

FMJ over Hagler, Hearns, Whitaker, Duran?

And Duran at the number 10 spot below Toney and Pryor?

[acb]

Die in a fire.

:yep :lol:

[Jack]

Dude dont you think you have Oscar a little too high?

Above Bernard, Roy Jones Jr., Sweet Pea, Hearns... :nono :yikes
De La Hoya should be ranked above Hopkins, definetly.

[acb]

De La Hoya should be ranked above Hopkins, definetly.

Your joking, right?

[GazOC]

Yeah, I know, especially seeing as he was so good between 135 and 160, Galaxy as well.

:lol: Sorry I should have read the title!!!!:patsch

[acb]

So you think his career from 126-140 and his titles and the names he beat and what he accomplished at those weights wasn't as good as someone like Hopkins or even Hearns or Jones? I have Jones slightly ahead due to head to head potential, but based on careers I would rate him ahead of all 3, though Hearns is close.

If you asked me before the Tarver and Wright fights, I may not have put Bernard above him, even though his run at middle was amazing. This may be an instance of being extremely impressed by what he has done lately.

I put RJJ above him based on head to head potential like you said, and I think that the resume of Hearns is right there with him and its hard to go against it being that he fought in a super era and you can expect losses as such.

You make compeling points though, maybe we are underating his accomplishments.

[acb]

:lol: Sorry I should have read the title!!!!:patsch

Add me to the list.

[acb]

Yeah, I know, especially seeing as he was so good between 135 and 160, Galaxy as well.

Smartass. :lol:

[bigtime9]

You had to do it, didnt you? :lol:

FMJ over Hagler, Hearns, Whitaker, Duran?

And Duran at the number 10 spot below Toney and Pryor?

duran is definitely below pryor and toney. I mean toney isn't losing to bum fighters like duran was:hey

and floyd definitely has had a better career then hearns, hagler, whitaker and duran. '

none of those fighters reigned as p4p champ longer then floyd (4years) and have been on the p4p list for 9 years.:deal

[doublesuited]

Sweet Pea gets owned in another argument.

Too funny!

[acb]

Sweet Pea gets owned in another argument.

Too funny!

How so? :huh

[doublesuited]

:lol: When did I get owned? Which argument? Point me to it please. God what a useless troll you are. :-(:patsch

Sweet Pea just can't get over the truth...

[bigtime9]

Die in a fire.

is that your argument for your garbage list:thumbsup yeah you get owned and rather easily.

[doublesuited]

is that your argument for your garbage list:thumbsup yeah you get owned and rather easily.:good

It's clear that Sweet Pea's knowledge of the sweet science is a farce.

[bigtime9]

He trolls, does nothing but trolls, he is not to be taken seriously. Bigtime actually defends something, double-penetrated does nothing but post shit to piss people off. He also has a thing for me, he's an e-stalker or something.

talk about trolling, I post a list and your response is "die in a fire" your the fucking troll kid:deal get over the fact that your opinion is not the only one or man up and defend it.

[bigtime9]

It's clear that Sweet Pea's knowledge of the sweet science is a farce.

you hit the nail on the head. :good sweet pea is an idiot who can't defend his lame opinions. like how he rates duran over everyone who beat him.

[bigtime9]

I've defended it countless fucking times! I'm done arguing with you because whenever I do completely own you

you have never won any argument with me, and the reason being you don't have a case, just your nuthugging opinion :deal now kick rocks kid with that garbage list. duran #1 I don't think so.

[doublesuited]

you hit the nail on the head. :good sweet pea is an idiot who can't defend his lame opinions. like how he rates duran over everyone who beat him. You should hear him talk about Whitaker like he was his girlfriend or something. Sounds like high school all over again...

:hi:

[doublesuited]

After rereading the thread, I think it's clear that bigtime9 has better knowledge of boxing than Sweet Pea.

[bigtime9]

You should hear him talk about Whitaker like he was his girlfriend or something. Sounds like high school all over again...



I've heard his spiel before, that's why I own him when he starts trying to place duran and sweet pea ahead of leonard, hearns, and hagler, roy or floyd. all of which had better careers and accomplished more than his beloved sweet pea:lol:

[doublesuited]

I've heard his spiel before, that's why I own him when he starts trying to place duran and sweet pea ahead of leonard, hearns, and hagler, roy or floyd. all of which had better careers and accomplished more than his beloved sweet pea:lol:Exactly. And you can bet that Leonard, Hearns, Hagler, Jones, or Mayweather would never get stopped by a bum like Carlos Bojorquez.

[bigtime9]

Duran is arguably the best LW of all time. He was arguably the best LW of all time before he ever moved up in weight. He's already among the best ever.


the operative word is arguably which means it is not a fact:deal Duran's best body of work was done at 135. after that he won titles at 147, 154, and 160 but never had a successful defense of those titles. Duran only had 12 title defenses all of them coming at 135. Hardly the sign of an ATG legend.

Roy jones won titles in 4 weightclasses and defended his titles over 20 times, roy was never defeated in his prime, and reigned as p4p one of the best fighters for over 15 years. duran did not domiante lightweight like jones domianted light heavy weight:deal


He moves up in weight to 147 to challenge and beat the best 147 pounder in the world and 2nd best ever, and does things like continues fighting at weights up to 160, beating bigger guys that he wasn't supposed to be able to deal with like Barkley and Moore, and losing a close decision to Hagler, arguably the best MW of all time.


so by beating leoanard he becomes the best fighter since 1975:nut what happened in the 2 rematches:deal your nuthugging is pathetic:roll: and for your info duran was fighting for close to 5 years before he got that gift decision against barkely. hardly the sign of a dominant champ. and before you use the age excuse bernard hopkins is still going strong. and davy moore was like 12-0 when duran beat him. I mean have you went back and analyzed some of the guys duran was fighting, utter bums:deal

I rate him above Hagler because Hagler was arguably the best MW of all time, as Duran was arguably the best LW of all time, but DUran did a lot at higher weights, ehereas Hagler didn't. The fact that a LW could even hang with a MW says a lot.


once again duran beating 12-0 davy moore for the 154 title is not a bigger accomplishment then hagler beating hearns and being recognized as the best middleweight ever. duran beating barkley is not a bigger win then hagler over john the beat mugabi. duran after winning the 160 title
lost it in his next fight and continued to fight bums for another 9 years before getting another title shot, hardly the hallmark of a great champion:deal



I rate him above Hearns because Hearns's resume and losses simply weren't as good as Duran's, up until Duran was an old man anyways. Again, Duran was pehonomenal at LWm and did great things at higher weights as well. Hearns did a lot at higher weights as well, but was never as dominant as Duran and was never "the man" as Hagler, Duran, and SRl were.



duran lost to kirkland laing, patlawlor, robbie simms and vinnie pazienzia. you compare hearns defeats to durans and you look stupid, as usual.:roll:

what great things did duran do at the higher weights:lol: he beat 12-0 davy moore and got blasted out by hearns in his first title defense:deal he retired for 2 years after that and went on a bum of the month tour, before finally 5 years later getting a gift decision over barkely. after losing the 160 title (duran did not defend any title outside of 135 successfully) duran fought another 9 years never winning another title ( big geroge won the heavy title at the age of 50 so don't use his age as an excuse:deal

and hearns held both the 175 and the 160 wbc titles at the same time duran has never held titles in multiple weight classes simultaneoulsy like leonard, hearns, floyd, armstrong, robinson:deal

You could make a case for SRl being higher. I hope you're not insinuating that Benitez had a better career and ranks higher though.

benitez had a great career but he did not have a better career then durans, benitez was the better fighter and proved it.

[bigtime9]

Exactly. And you can bet that Leonard, Hearns, Hagler, Jones, or Mayweather would never get stopped by a bum like Carlos Bojorquez.

so true, and guys like pat lawlor, and robbie simms.:lol: you have way too many duran huggers who have never looked at his career in total only looking to capitalize off his big wins but forgetting everything in between.

[Jack]

It's cool to be in a lot of big fights, but if you lose most of them it doesn't mean much. People put too much emphasis on who he fought, rather than who he actually beat.
The fighters he did beat are worth more than the ones Hopkins beat. Hopkins best wins are over Johnson, who was never anything special at all, Tarver, yet again, a decent fighter, and Tito, who was above his weight class.

Whilst De La Hoya doesn't have a Grade A resume, he has wins bigger and better than those three.

Despite being old, Chavez was still elite. Top 10 P4P, surely? He beat the person who handed him his first loss, beat Taylor again, and then a couple of prosects too. Take away the draw to Whitaker, and he would have beaten everyone he had ever fought. He was still a force. More so than Johnson and Tarver were.

Whitaker should have come into the fight at 42-0-0. It's a disgrace he wasn't, to be honest. People like to talk about him being a drug addict and whatever, but that's nonsense. He was still ranked VERY highly.

Ike quartey was another really good win. He was ranked highly too. This kind of win is what sperate the best wins on DLH's and Hopkins' records. There can be absolutely no excuses with Quartey. With Hopkins' best opposition, can always add "But" after them, whereas with a guy like Quartey, the ground was even, both men were top class and at an even weight.

Those three wins from De La Hoya are better than the three best on Hopkins record. Without a doubt. I'm sure if you did a comparison of the places they were P4P, there would be a massive difference in where these 6 guys were all ranked.

[brooklyn1550]

Exactly. And you can bet that Leonard, Hearns, Hagler, Jones, or Mayweather would never get stopped by a bum like Carlos Bojorquez.

My god you are an idiot:lol:

[igotJUIC3]

Like who, may I ask?

Castillo or Corrales weren't p4p when Floyd beat them. And Castillo actually beat him.

DLH was not even top 20 p4p when he beat him.

You're not saying Gatti or Corley was p4p right? :patsch
keep slapping yourself because floyd is definitely in the top ten..accomplishments wise and even head to head....dont focus so much on your dislike for him....look at the facts.

also sayin Castillo actually beat him means nothing because it only shows up as a W as with many fighters who have close fights.

[bigtime9]

Like who, may I ask?


diego corrales was top 5 p4p in 2001 by ring magazine.

castillo was #1 ranked by ring @ 135

Genaro Hernandez was 130 ring champ and p4p #1 at 130

Castillo or Corrales weren't p4p when Floyd beat them. And Castillo actually beat him.


I've already shown you they were produce proof that they were not.

DLH was not even top 20 p4p when he beat him.

yes he was by boxingtalk:deal

[Sizzle]

1. Ray Leonard
2. Roberto Duran
3. Marvin Hagler
4. Pernell Whitaker
5. Bernard Hopkins
6. Floyd Mayweather Jnr.
7. Julio Cesar Chavez
8. Thomas Hearns
9. Alexis Arguello
10. Roy Jones Jnr

Mentions: Sugar Shane Mosley, Oscar De La Hoya, Aaron Pryor

[acb]

Let's use the Ring rankings.



Bigtime uses whichever rankings fit his arguement.

Boxingtalk is as notorious for hugging Floyds nuts as Maxboxing is for hating on him.

[acb]

Dominga whats the story behind your screen name?

Did domingo get banned or what?

[Toopretty]

And so did other current fighters beat champions of their weight classes. And in more dominant fashion. But that does not necessarily make them an ATG.

FYI:

Nine guys have already beaten Castillo.

Almost the same number with Coralles.

Almost the same number with DLH. Hell even the journeyman Sturm dominated him.
I dont think sturm was a journeyman...Ingrate....Castillo is and was the best at 135 pre floyd and post floyd Ingrate...Floyd beat an undeafeted Corrales..Ingrate ODH lost what 4 fights against probably the best opposition in boxing.....ingrate.

[Sizzle]

Dear Sweet Pea,

From an objective standpoint;
Firstly Hopkins,
Was a dominant middleweight champion for TEN YEARS - Whether you think his competition was up to scratch or not, he dominated all contenders available to him, beat pretty much all of them decisively, before losing two relatively indecisive decisions to Jermain Taylor at an advanced age.
He then jumped up two weight-classes to fight the linear light heavyweight champion, the man who has two decisive victories over Roy Jones Jnr, Antonio Tarver, and beat him in a very comfortable fashion. He then defended his title against Winky Wright, a top5 P4P fighter at the age of 42. I don't think the victory was incredibly decisive, but it was the majority opinion without a doubt.
To accomplish all this, especially at his advanced age, places him very highly on my list - And he's not yet finished either.
42 years old, never been stopped, never beat beaten decisively (Roy Jones was a clear loss, but not a throrough defeat in my eyes) and still fighting top tier competition. He is one hell of a fighter.
Actually, Roberto Duran constantly singles out Bernard Hopkins for praise in his interviews.

As for Floyd;
He beat the top-ranked fighter/s at 130, 135 and 147, making him the linear champ in these three weight classes. He was a titlist at 140, and 154, and his career is just beginning. He's achieved all this without barely receiving a scratch on his face, let alone a loss. It's not so much the fact that he's accomplished all this, but the manner in which he's done it. Relative ease. In my eyes he is a natural featherweight also, but due to his skillset he's not restricted to this weight-class. The way he handles bigger, stronger fighters is exemplory.

Like I said, my rankings are very objective - So if someone says "Oh, but that era was weak" I see it as a subjective criticism based on (often anyways) the fact someone doesn't like a particular fighter. I think Joe Louis' era was weak but I don't take it away from him, objectively his dominance is undeniable.

[acb]

Ingrate is making the world wait while getting millions of dollars then running for a whole 12 rounds from a balding fat businessman, without ever thinking of putting a show for the millions of paying audience all over the world.

Damm.

[acb]

What's wrong with 'dominga'? :?

Nothing. I was gone for a few days and thought your screen name had something to do with that idiot domingo, thats all.

[istmeno]

the operative word is arguably which means it is not a fact:deal Duran's best body of work was done at 135. after that he won titles at 147, 154, and 160 but never had a successful defense of those titles. Duran only had 12 title defenses all of them coming at 135. Hardly the sign of an ATG legend.

now that you have put you nuts in a vice spin why pbf is an atg seeing as how he has never defended the 140, 147, 154 titles.
you are truly a joke.

[brooklyn1550]

How are Hopkins and Floyd above Chavez, Arguello, Hearns, and RJJ?

I wouldn't have a problem with Hopkins being ahead of Arguello (which is what I have), but I wouldn't have a problem with it the other way around either.

[brooklyn1550]

I think Arguello is too underrated. I think people need to take a look at his resume and accomplishments. His resume is deeper and more consistent than Hop's. Hopkins reigned long at MW no doubt, but his defenses were against pretty pathetic comp, that can't be denied. Great fighter, maybe top 35, but I have Arguello top 25, I think he's too underrated.

Had this been from featherweight to middleweight, I would have Arguello above Hopkins. I feel he did his best work at 126 and 130. But from lightweight up, I tend to lean towards Hopkins.

And I agree with you that Arguello is underrated - he deserves more credit than he gets. I've seen people rank De La Hoya higher than Arguello which is absurd.

[bigtime9]

now that you have put you nuts in a vice spin why pbf is an atg seeing as how he has never defended the 140, 147, 154 titles.
you are truly a joke.

my nuts are just fine faggot:roll: floyd is defending his 147 title this decemeber:yep now how many times did duran defend his 147, 154, and 160 titles that he won.:deal and duran had over 120fights and only 12 title defenses in one weight class..get the fuck out of here stupid faggot.

[istmeno]

my nuts are just fine faggot:roll: floyd is defending his 147 title this decemeber:yep now how many times did duran defend his 147, 154, and 160 titles that he won.:deal and duran had over 120fights and only 12 title defenses in one weight class..get the fuck out of here stupid faggot.

dumb ass wasn't the second fight with leonard a title defense.

[bigtime9]

You didn't have to tell me what they've done, I have that down, I was asking how what they've done is better than the fighters I asked about.

its obvious he did have to tell you since you ranked floyd and hopkins below chavez:lol: what did chavez, duran, and sweet pea do that was more spectacular or more dominant then what floyd, roy, or hopkins did:deal

[brooklyn1550]

its obvious he did have to tell you since you ranked floyd and hopkins below chavez:lol: what did chavez, duran, and sweet pea do that was more spectacular or more dominant then what floyd, roy, or hopkins did:deal

Sweet Pea successfully defended his titles 15 times (8 at lightweight, 7 at welterweight). At lightweight, he won the WBC, WBA, and IBF belts...did Floyd unify any belts at lightweight or any weight for that matter?

[bigtime9]

dumb ass wasn't the second fight with leonard a title defense.

you sure are stupid:nut duran lost that fight remember no mas:hi:

duran beat 12-0 davey moore dor the wbc title and then got koed against hearns.

so the history was duran wins 147 title next defense he gets tkoed by ray leonard. four years later duran wins the 154 title and gets koed by duran. not once did duran distinguish himself as the best fighter past 135.

[brooklyn1550]

four years later duran wins the 154 title and gets koed by duran.

Since when did Duran KO himself?:huh

[brooklyn1550]

not once did duran distinguish himself as the best fighter past 135.

He did at 147 when he beat Sugar Ray Leonard. At that time, if I remember correctly, Tommy Hearns had yet to win a belt at 147.

[istmeno]

you sure are stupid:nut duran lost that fight remember no mas:hi:

duran beat 12-0 davey moore dor the wbc title and then got koed against hearns.

so the history was duran wins 147 title next defense he gets tkoed by ray leonard. four years later duran wins the 154 title and gets koed by duran. not once did duran distinguish himself as the best fighter past 135.

since it is clear that your knowledge of boxing is limited, let me explain. a title defense is walking into the ring as the champion. and atempting to defend said title. the outcome decides whether it was a successful or unsuccessful defense.

now tell us how many times has pbf walked into the ring as a champion to defend his belt at 140, 147, or 154.

[kg0208]

since it is clear that your knowledge of boxing is limited, let me explain. a title defense is walking into the ring as the champion. and atempting to defend said title. the outcome decides whether it was a successful or unsuccessful defense.

now tell us how many times has pbf walked into the ring as a champion to defend his belt at 140, 147, or 154.

:lol::lol::lol:

Don't bother. He won't understand a word you just said. Then he will call you a name and claim he owns you.

[istmeno]

:lol::lol::lol:

Don't bother. He won't understand a word you just said. Then he will call you a name and claim he owns you.

i know, but i am bored, and just feel like seeing what new stupidity comes from his keyboard.

[bigtime9]

Better resumes. At LW Duran was better than Hopkins at MW was. He definitely accomplished more at higher and more weights as well.


hopkins had more title defenses then duran did at 135, so objectively duran did not have a better resume then hopkins based on defenses or victories over ATG fighters.

If you want to bring in dominance, don't even bring in Chavez, who was something like 88-0 at one point and was P4P king for around 3 straight years.


chavez was 88-0 because of the bums he fought in mexico. chavez was considered p4p for 3 years but was not in the toip ten for the first 9 years of his career. floyds reign as p4p champ has equaled chavez's and he has been considered a top ten p4p fighter for 9 years of his professional career. floyd won 5 titles chavez 3 against very suspect opposition and chavez never beat another ATG in his era:deal


Sweet Pea was 10X better than Floyd at 135, did just as much in one fight pretty much at 140 as Floyd did, maybe give Floyd the advantage at that weight because he fought thrice, but Whitaker was FAR better at 147, and also won the 154 belt, as Floyd did. He was certainly more dominant in his victories than Floyd has been recently as well.

sweet pea was not more domiant then floyd at 147 please list his ko's at that weight:lol: besides hurtado they were few and far between. right now I have sweet pea as being behind floyd in career accomplishments based on the simple fact that floyd did what pernell did while remaining undefeated. if sweet pea had moved to 160 and won that title then i could see your argument.

[bigtime9]

He did at 147 when he beat Sugar Ray Leonard. At that time, if I remember correctly, Tommy Hearns had yet to win a belt at 147.

wrong again, duran beat leonard and then lost:yep hardly a show of dominance at 147. duran once agan did not defend any title he won successfully past 135:deal

[bigtime9]

since it is clear that your knowledge of boxing is limited, let me explain. a title defense is walking into the ring as the champion. and atempting to defend said title. the outcome decides whether it was a successful or unsuccessful defense.


and once again fag boy how many successful title defenses did duran have after 135:deal

now tell us how many times has pbf walked into the ring as a champion to defend his belt at 140, 147, or 154.

after december 8th floyd will have matched all of duran's title defenses. so a guy who has had 12 title defenses in 39 fights compared to a guy who had 12 in over 120 fights and you can get the picture of who was fighting at a championship level throughout more of their career.

[brooklyn1550]

wrong again, duran beat leonard and then lost:yep hardly a show of dominance at 147. duran once agan did not defend any title he won successfully past 135:deal

I never said Duran dominated 147, I said he was recognized as "the man" at 147 after he beat Sugar Ray Leonard.

[brooklyn1550]

after december 8th floyd will have matched all of duran's title defenses. so a guy who has had 12 title defenses in 39 fights compared to a guy who had 12 in over 120 fights and you can get the picture of who was fighting at a championship level throughout more of their career.

But using that logic, you could claim Joe Calzaghe is the greater fighter than Mayweather by saying "after November 3rd, Calzaghe will have 21 title defenses (10 more than Floyd) in 44 fights. So a guy who has had 21 title defenses in 44 fights compared to a guy who has 11 title defenses in 38 fights, you can get the picture of who was fighting at a championship level throughout more of their career."

[brooklyn1550]

Sweet Pea successfully defended his titles 15 times (8 at lightweight, 7 at welterweight). At lightweight, he won the WBC, WBA, and IBF belts...did Floyd unify any belts at lightweight or any weight for that matter?

What's your response to this bigtime...other than calling me a name?

[TBooze]

Dude dont you think you have Oscar a little too high?

Above Bernard, Roy Jones Jr., Sweet Pea, Hearns... :nono :yikes

Oscar was a brilliant fighter in his pomp, his only two defeats in his prime were razor thin losses to prime Trinidad and Mosley. Nobody could touch de la Hoya at 135 or 140, and he did all this despite the pressure of being a media darling and a can't miss star from the moment he turned pro.

Tommy was great fun and my favourite fighter of the 80s, but unlike de la Hoya, The Motor City Cobra did choke a couple of times in big fights in his pomp.

Hopkins was blue collar Hagleresque star of the late 90s/early 2000s, but he lacked the true star quality of de la Hoya, although by being so solid he runs Oscar close.

Jones get stung for whatever reason missing out on potential career defining fights. I think in the years to come, Jones will regret wasting his pomp fighting the likes of Antonio Byrd.... Jones should be up there with Robinson, Armstrong and Duran, instead he struggles to prove he is a Great IMO.

Whitaker was another very solid name in the 90s, but his style although a purist's dream was never going top take him to the level of a de la Hoya. Also unlucky in that his pomp at 135 lacked a fight with a massive superstar, but unlike Jones that was not Whitaker's fault.

[TBooze]

How would you put somebody like Floyd Mayweather who hasn't beaten let alone dominated a p4p fighter in a top ten list for the past thirty years? :patsch

I think you forget Mayweather has been at the top of this sport for nine years now, he is the dominant fighter of this era. So to not rate the best fighter of the last nine years in the best fighters of the last 30 years, would not just be a slap in the face of the narcistic Lil Floyd, but this entire era with all its brilliant fighters.

[brooklyn1550]

Oscar was a brilliant fighter in his pomp, his only two defeats in his prime were razor thin losses to prime Trinidad and Mosley. Nobody could touch de la Hoya at 135 or 140, and he did all this despite the pressure of being a media darling and a can't miss star from the moment he turned pro.

De La Hoya's competition wasn't great at 135 or 140

Tommy was great fun and my favourite fighter of the 80s, but unlike de la Hoya, The Motor City Cobra did choke a couple of times in big fights in his pomp.

Take a look at De La Hoya's biggest fights vs. Trinidad, Mosley 1 and 2, Mayweather, and Hopkins. He is 0-5.

Hopkins was blue collar Hagleresque star of the late 90s/early 2000s, but he lacked the true star quality of de la Hoya, although by being so solid he runs Oscar close.

Star quality should not be factored in when determining a fighter's greatness.

Jones get stung for whatever reason missing out on potential career defining fights. I think in the years to come, Jones will regret wasting his pomp fighting the likes of Antonio Byrd.... Jones should be up there with Robinson, Armstrong and Duran, instead he struggles to prove he is a Great IMO.

Jones not only proved he was a great, but he proved he was an ATG. He defeated James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, Mike McCallum, Virgil Hill, John Ruiz, Antonio Tarver, etc. All in all, he has defeated more than 15 world champions and had 18 title defenses. People underrate Roy's competition.

Whitaker was another very solid name in the 90s, but his style although a purist's dream was never going top take him to the level of a de la Hoya. Also unlucky in that his pomp at 135 lacked a fight with a massive superstar, but unlike Jones that was not Whitaker's fault.

Whitaker was easilly greater than Oscar De La Hoya.

[TBooze]

De La Hoya's competition wasn't great at 135 or 140

Take a look at De La Hoya's biggest fights vs. Trinidad, Mosley 1 and 2, Mayweather, and Hopkins. He is 0-5.

Star quality should not be factored in when determining a fighter's greatness.

Jones not only proved he was a great, but he proved he was an ATG. He defeated James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, Mike McCallum, Virgil Hill, John Ruiz, Antonio Tarver, etc. All in all, he has defeated more than 15 world champions and had 18 title defenses. People underrate Roy's competition.

Whitaker was easilly greater than Oscar De La Hoya.

de la Hoya dominated at 135 and 140 and fought everyone could and he beat them well.

IMO star quality needs to be taken into account when factoring greatness. Without star quality there would not be a full time heavyweight in the top 100. de la Hoya was for or better or worse the icon of his era and one of the few worldwide stars in boxing in that time period.

If you want to put Tommy above Oscar I have no problem with that, I really liked Hearns in the 80s, but as much as I dislike de la Hoya I do recognize that was greater than Hearns.

Jones blew it, he avoided for whatever reason the likes of Benn, Eubank, Collins and Michalczweski. Like I stated I think 50 years down the road, history will look at Jones' career and shake its head. Jones had it all, but dropped the ball somewhere along the way. How can someone so good not even win a World Championship in a non racist era?:huh

Whitaker was a fine technican and a phenom of his era, but he lacked the qualities to become a superstar and spent his career post 93 in de la Hoya's shadow to the mainstream fans.

Yes we as hardcore can rant and rave about him, he was amazing, but if a casual fan has of heard of him, I suspect sadly it maybe for his out of ring problerms.

[Mind Reader]

:good

It's clear that Sweet Pea's knowledge of the sweet science is a farce.

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Why so??? Do you agree with bigtime's list???

[kg0208]

de la Hoya dominated at 135 and 140 and fought everyone could and he beat them well.

IMO star quality needs to be taken into account when factoring greatness. Without star quality there would not be a full time heavyweight in the top 100. de la Hoya was for or better or worse the icon of his era and one of the few worldwide stars in boxing in that time period.

If you want to put Tommy above Oscar I have no problem with that, I really liked Hearns in the 80s, but as much as I dislike de la Hoya I do recognize that was greater than Hearns.

Jones blew it, he avoided for whatever reason the likes of Benn, Eubank, Collins and Michalczweski. Like I stated I think 50 years down the road, history will look at Jones' career and shake its head. Jones had it all, but dropped the ball somewhere along the way. How can someone so good not even win a World Championship in a non racist era?:huh

Whitaker was a fine technican and a phenom of his era, but he lacked the qualities to become a superstar and spent his career post 93 in de la Hoya's shadow to the mainstream fans.

Yes we as hardcore can rant and rave about him, he was amazing, but if a casual fan has of heard of him, I suspect sadly it maybe for his out of ring problerms.

You are far too subjective. It's your list, but you certainly add in qualities that you can give and take away anytime you choose. You talk about fighters losing their big matches, but don't count that against DLH. You count the fighters Jones didn't fight (and not the ones he did) but not the ones DLH didn't fight. Realize that Jones has beaten just as many ATG as DLH did and more impressively. Jones certainly didn't drop the ball, he just didn't carry it as far as he could have considering his talent.

We are talking about the best fighters, not the best entertainers. Whitaker is a far better fighter than DLH as shown by their match with a prime DLH and past it Whitaker.

[brooklyn1550]

If you want to put Tommy above Oscar I have no problem with that, I really liked Hearns in the 80s, but as much as I dislike de la Hoya I do recognize that was greater than Hearns.

You have said that you hold Hearns losses in big fights against him, but how about De La Hoya? The man has gone 0-5 in his 5 biggest fights. Hearns easilly beat a past-his-prime Roberto Duran while De La Hoya easilly beat a past-his-prime Julio Cesar Chavez. Hearns defeated defensive master Wilfred Benitez more convincingly than De La Hoya's win over Pernell Whitaker.

Is there any denying that Thomas Hearns would have beaten Oscar De La Hoya at 147?

[TBooze]

You are far too subjective. It's your list, but you certainly add in qualities that you can give and take away anytime you choose. You talk about fighters losing their big matches, but don't count that against DLH. You count the fighters Jones didn't fight (and not the ones he did) but not the ones DLH didn't fight. Realize that Jones has beaten just as many ATG as DLH did and more impressively. Jones certainly didn't drop the ball, he just didn't carry it as far as he could have considering his talent.

We are talking about the best fighters, not the best entertainers. Whitaker is a far better fighter than DLH as shown by their match with a prime DLH and past it Whitaker.

I pointed out de la Hoya lost two very close fights in his pomp.

de la Hoya met everyone he could that was worth fighting, Jones did not.

Jones has never beaten an all time great IMO, de la Hoya has beaten Chavez (twice) and Whitaker.

Whitaker was amazing, I pointed that out; but if even some hardcore fans had little time for him, it is no wonder he never reached the superstar status of de la Hoya, hence de la Hoya gets the edge.

I can understand people being idealistic, de la Hoya was certainly in part a media creation and that annoys people and they want to destroy that creation. I do not much like myself, I think de la Hoya is very arrogant, but I can see that he has some charm and that will attract casual fans, and not being the ugliest boxer of all-time I guess also helped him attract another market.

For the record I have de la Hoya as my #22 best of all-time, Whitaker #23, so basically very even.

[TBooze]

Did TBooze just say he disliked De La Hoya in the post you responded to? :rofl Nice cover up TBooze. :good

;)

Just done an even better job!:hey

[kg0208]

I pointed out de la Hoya lost two very close fights in his pomp.

de la Hoya met everyone he could that was worth fighting, Jones did not.

Jones has never beaten all time great IMO, de la Hoya has beaten Chavez (twice) and Whitaker.

Whitaker was amazing, I pointed that out; but if even some hardcore fans had little time for him, it is no wonder he never reach the superstar status of de la Hoya, hence de la Hoya gets the edge...

For the record I have de la Hoya as my #22 best of all-time, Whitaker #23, so basically very even.
So to you, James Toney and Hopkins are not ATG? And I suppose that McCallum isn't either?

No, DLH didn't meet everyone he could that was worth fighting. See, there you go trying to be subjective and leaving things to a very wide interpretation. I don't recall his fight with KT at 140. I don't recall him unifying a single division, meaning he skipped champions in nearly every weight class.

Superstar status means nothing. It has little to do with how good a fighter you are.

DLH is not even top 50 all time on most lists.

It's your list. All I am saying is you are not consistant. Jones lost NO fights in his prime in the ring. Whitaker fought great competition and is a far better fighter, if not entertainer. Nearly every reputable list has him ahead of DLH.

You say you don't like DLH....but you seem to give him the benefit of the doubt in every way possible, while downgrading other fighters for things you don't acknowledge as weaknesses of DLH.

[brooklyn1550]

Jones has never beaten an all time great IMO, de la Hoya has beaten Chavez (twice) and Whitaker.


James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, and Mike McCallum are all All Time Greats

[TBooze]

So to you, James Toney and Hopkins are not ATG? And I suppose that McCallum isn't either?


We are using the word Great, that is a very special word IMO, and I only rate 35 fighters as great. Hopkins may one day get there, McCallum was excellent, but is a level below great.

Toney has tainted his reputation with his drug abuses, I want a clean sport, so I ignore proven drug cheats. I did have a lot of time for Toney, I do for Holyfield and Jones, I hope I do not have to go down the same path with them in due course.:-(

[TBooze]

James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, and Mike McCallum are all All Time Greats

In your opinion, not mine.;)

[brooklyn1550]

and I only rate 35 fighters as great.

Who are those 35 fighters?

[kg0208]

We are using the word Great, that is a very special word IMO, and I only rate 35 fighters as great. Hopkins may one day get there, McCallum was excellent, but is a level below great.

Toney has tainted his reputation with his drug abuses, I want a clean sport, so I ignore proven drug cheats. I did have a lot of time for Toney, I do for Holyfield and Jones, I hope I do not have to go down the same path with them in due course.:-(

You only count 35 fighters as great? So what happens when a fighter comes along that is better than #35 on your list? He is no longer great even though he is retired and hasn't done anything? That simply means you change your criteria for greatness whenever you choose.

Hopkins is greater than DLH.

He beat DLH, Trinidad, and Wright. He defended his MW title more times than any other man and more times than DLH has had title defenses in 6 weight classes. He has simply accomplished more than DLH.

McCallum is arguably the greatest LMW of all time, with only Hearns challenging him for that spot. DLH cannot say that in any weight class.

[acb]

We are using the word Great, that is a very special word IMO, and I only rate 35 fighters as great. Hopkins may one day get there, McCallum was excellent, but is a level below great.

Toney has tainted his reputation with his drug abuses, I want a clean sport, so I ignore proven drug cheats. I did have a lot of time for Toney, I do for Holyfield and Jones, I hope I do not have to go down the same path with them in due course.:-(

Only 35 fighters as great?

What seperates your 35th and 36th fighters on a top 100 list?

[TBooze]

Who are those 35 fighters?

35 Roy Jones
34 George Foreman
33 Joe Gans
32 Ruben Olivares
31 Thomas Hearns
30 Marvin Hagler
29 Joe Louis
28 Gene Tunney
27 George Dixon
26 Eder Jofre
25 Carlos Zarate
24 Alexis Arguello
23 Pernell Whitaker
22 Oscar de la Hoya
21 Pancho Villa
20 Bob Fitzsimmons
19 Stanley Ketchel
18 Harry Grebb
17 Ezzard Charles
16 Benny Leonard
15 Julio Cesar Chavez
14 Mickey Walker
13 Ray Leonard
12 Carlos Monzon
11 Muhammad Ali
10 Charley Burley
9 Sammy Langford
8 Archie Moore
7 Jimmy Wilde
6 Willie Pep
5 Sandy Sadler
4 Georges Carpentier
3 Roberto Duran
2 Henry Armstrong
1 Ray Robinson

[kg0208]

In your opinion, not mine.;)

Well thats the point isn't it.

You are entitled to your opinion. I won't even call it flawed.

I will call it inconsistant. Your criteria keeps changing to include fighters you seem to like and ignore their shortcomings in the same areas you downgrade other fighters in.

[brooklyn1550]

Joe Louis behind Oscar De La Hoya? Why is Georges Carpentier so high?

I don't see how Harry Greb is lower than Carlos Monzon, Julio Cesar Chavez, Charley Burley, or any one other than maybe 4 or 5. He has arguably the greatest resume in boxing history.


But anyways, despite some disagreements with your list, thanks for posting it:good . A lot of people say "I rank ________ at #__" then you ask to see the list and they never give one.

[kg0208]

I'd prefer to see the criteria rather than the list.

[TBooze]

Well thats the point isn't it.

You are entitled to your opinion. I won't even call it flawed.

I will call it inconsistant. Your criteria keeps changing to include fighters you seem to like and ignore their shortcomings in the same areas you downgrade other fighters in.

There has to bias put into ranking fighters, everybody has different criteria's and things they consider more important when they rate fighters. If they did not then we would all have the same ratings and thoughts, and that would not be no fun!

[acb]

35 Roy Jones
34 George Foreman
33 Joe Gans
32 Ruben Olivares
31 Thomas Hearns
30 Marvin Hagler
29 Joe Louis
28 Gene Tunney
27 George Dixon
26 Eder Jofre
25 Carlos Zarate
24 Alexis Arguello
23 Pernell Whitaker
22 Oscar de la Hoya
21 Pancho Villa
20 Bob Fitzsimmons
19 Stanley Ketchel
18 Harry Grebb
17 Ezzard Charles
16 Benny Leonard
15 Julio Cesar Chavez
14 Mickey Walker
13 Ray Leonard
12 Carlos Monzon
11 Muhammad Ali
10 Charley Burley
9 Sammy Langford
8 Archie Moore
7 Jimmy Wilde
6 Willie Pep
5 Sandy Sadler
4 Georges Carpentier
3 Roberto Duran
2 Henry Armstrong
1 Ray Robinson

Who are your 36-40?

[TBooze]

Joe Louis behind Oscar De La Hoya? Why is Georges Carpentier so high?

I don't see how Harry Greb is lower than Carlos Monzon, Julio Cesar Chavez, Charley Burley, or any one other than maybe 4 or 5. He has arguably the greatest resume in boxing history.


But anyways, despite my disagreements with your list, thanks for posting it:good . A lot of people say "I rank ________ at #__" then you ask to see the list and they never give one.

Louis fought in relatively weak era compared to de la Hoya; as a rule the Heavyweights as a division have always sucked apart from a golden era in the 70s proving the rule.

Greb gets punished for not finishing his career, he died too early, and must have a bias against him because of that.

Carpentier is was an amazing poineer of European boxing, allegedly claimed a national championship in each of the classic eight, claimed European titles from Lightweight to Heavyweight and World titles from Middleweight to Heavyweight. The finest fighter Britain and Europe has produced IMO. And if Wilde is top 10, then Carpentier has to be top 10 as well for my opinion to work.

[acb]

But anyways, despite some disagreements with your list, thanks for posting it:good . A lot of people say "I rank ________ at #__" then you ask to see the list and they never give one.

True, I appreciate that he gave a list. I just dont know what seperates the top 35 from, say the next 20 fighters on his list, in terms of greatness.

[brooklyn1550]

Greb gets punished for not finishing his career, he died too early, and must have a bias against him because of that.

Yes, Greb did die at a young age, but his career was long and unbelievably successful. He defeated 10 hall of famers and piled up 259 wins. His resume is simply the best I have ever seen.

[brooklyn1550]

True, I appreciate that he gave a list. I just dont know what seperates the top 35 from, say the next 20 fighters on his list, in terms of greatness.

Or as you said, what separates 36 from 35 and what prevents number 36 from being recognized as "great."

[TBooze]

Who are your 36-40?

I did a top 100 once but lost it, I believe the likes of Ricardo Lopez, Bernard Hopkins, Young Griffo and Kid Gavilan were knocking on the door.

I did that top 35 list a couple years back, I need to re-write it. It will be intresting for me to see if there are any major changes, I know a lot more about a few fighters in that list of 35, some good, some bad, and there are few other fighters who I think may now get in that top 35.

[kg0208]

I do want my question answered if at all possible.

You have a criteria that determines greatness. You rate fighters with it, and determine that they are or are not worthy of ATG status. You only rate 35 fighters as great.

What happens if another fighter becomes better than #35. Is #35 no longer great, even though he still fits all the criteria? He has done nothing since retirement. How does that work?

BTW....you still need to be consistant in your biases. Otherwise you make little sense. Greb died at the same age that Armstrong retired. And with more fights I believe. How is his career incomplete, and Armstrong's complete. If anything, if his career was incomplete, shouldn't he be given MORE credit for accomplishing what he did in an incomplete career?

I would love to see you criteria if at all possible. It's not the criteria that I concerned with.....it's if you use that criteria consistantly for every fighter, or if you use bias within the criteria itself.

[TBooze]

Or as you said, what separates 36 from 35 and what prevents number 36 from being recognized as "great."

Time... If Queensberry Rules started in 1867 properly and the last time I placed someone as great was in 2005, that means I roughly create a great fighter every four years... (140 years divided by 35 fighters), so around 2010 #36 will be great;)

[TBooze]

BTW....you still need to be consistant in your biases. Otherwise you make little sense. Greb died at the same age that Armstrong retired. And with more fights I believe. How is his career incomplete, and Armstrong's complete.

I have explained this, Armstrong choose to retire, thus his career was complete, Greb if he had not died would of carried on, thus his career was not complete, so there needs to be a bias against that.

These lists are not going to be scientific, at the end of the day I am rating a 95lb man from 1910 (Wilde) against a 250lb man from 2003 (Lewis), and everyone who has ever boxed inbetween...

It is when put like that a complete folly, but because it is fun I still do it.

Personal opinion is always going to be my biggest bias.

But I do like redemption and I do like pioneers, thus fighters with them qualities IMO are going to have a bias towards them in my rankings.

I am going to be biased by fighters that I have read about (some good/some bad), and by no means least I am going to be biased by friends opinions and indeed you lot on this forum.

[TBooze]

And TBooze thinks everyone likes him simply because we feel sorry for him that he died young. :rofl

Actually I said, it is a (generally good) human quality to have a positive bias towards icons who died too young; Greb is an example, as is Sanchez. By giving Greb a negative bias for dying too young, I am correcting it, thus Greb is rated more fairly IMO.

[MJRJJ23]

1. Ray leonard
2. Roberto Duran
3. RJJ (lil biased maybe) :yep
4. sweet Pea
5. Hagler
6. JCC
7. Alexis Arguello
8. Hearns
9. B Hop
10. Floyd Mayweather Jr

[kg0208]

Actually I said, it is a (generally good) human quality to have a positive bias towards icons who died too young; Greb is an example, as is Sanchez. By giving Greb a negative bias for dying too young, I am correcting it, thus Greb is rated more fairly IMO.

You are only correcting it if it averages out, or if you can prove a bias that is there based on his death. Very few mention Grebs death....they mention his resume. Your bias is simply an extreme to counter another extreme, which may or may not exist.

[kg0208]

I have explained this, Armstrong choose to retire, thus his career was complete, Greb if he had not died would of carried on, thus his career was not complete, so there needs to be a bias against that.

These lists are not going to be scientific, at the end of the day I am rating a 95lb man from 1910 (Wilde) against a 250lb man from 2003 (Lewis), and everyone who has ever boxed inbetween...

It is when put like that a complete folly, but because it is fun I still do it.

Personal opinion is always going to be my biggest bias.

But I do like redemption and I do like pioneers, thus fighters with them qualities IMO are going to have a bias towards them in my rankings.

I am going to be biased by fighters that I have read about (some good/some bad), and by no means least I am going to be biased by friends opinions and indeed you lot on this forum.

I don't care about your bias. I care that you bias remains consistant. You shouldn't make criteria, full of bias, then add more bias to sway your criteria which is already biased towards another fighter.

[TBooze]

I don't care about your bias. I care that you bias remains consistant. You shouldn't make criteria, full of bias, then add more bias to sway your criteria which is already biased towards another fighter.

Like I stated, I simply cannot make this scientific, it is near impossible. I know more about some fighters than I do others, thus there is bias straight away.

Then with the information I do have I have to bias again, because it is the sort of information that cannot be put into a formula that I know of.

If there was such a formula, there would no need for debate, because you could just put any fighter into the formula find out his place in boxings history...

[Mind Reader]

1. Ray Leonard
2. Roberto Duran
3. Marvin Hagler
4. Pernell Whitaker
5. Bernard Hopkins
6. Floyd Mayweather Jnr.
7. Julio Cesar Chavez
8. Thomas Hearns
9. Alexis Arguello
10. Roy Jones Jnr

Mentions: Sugar Shane Mosley, Oscar De La Hoya, Aaron Pryor

Not as bad as Bigtime's but pretty bad. Mayweather is too high, along with Hopkins... Explain how they are over RJJ, much less JCC.:patsch

[dave82]

1. Sugar Ray Leonard
2. Pernell Whitaker
3. Roberto Duran
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Roy Jones Jr
6. Julio Cesar Chavez
7. Thomas Hearns
8. Alexis Arguello
9. Ricardo Lopez
10. Bernard Hopkins

[dave82]

Ricardo Lopez didn't fight from Light to Middle, and he was most certainly not better than Hopkins pound for pound anyway.

Ahh fucker...didnt read the subject properly

[Carlos Primera]

1.duran
2.srl
3.hagler
4/5.arguello (interchangeable with whitaker)
4/5.whitaker (interchangeable with arguello)
6.hopkins
7.rjj
8.jcc
9.hearns
10.pbf

honorable mention:
benitez, de la hoya, trinidad, shane, tszyu etc.

[TBooze]

Alcoholism is a sad fate. You need to get off the bottle and get yourself to a 12 step program, and get on anabuse. Only a fucking wino would dare put Oscar number 3, over Bernard and especially Tito, two men who exposed his heart.

Guess you can call me a drunk then. I think I would need to be drunk to understand how Trinidad and Hopkins exposed de la Hoya's lack of heart.:good

[TBooze]

Trinidad made OScar run like a sick dog, and Hopkins made him shit like one. :good

any other questions, there Alchoholio?

I guess the beer is kicking in, because I certainly did not see the bit where de la Hoya defecates in the Hopkins fight... but whatever turns you on my friend:good

[Minotauro]

1. Roberto Duran
2. Sugar Ray Leonard
3. Julio Cesar Chavez
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Pernell Whittaker
6. Thomas Hearns
7. Alexis Arguello
8. Salvador Sanchez
9. Roy Jones Jr
10. Wilfred Benitez

Honorable mention: Bernard Hopkins, Shane Mosley, Kostya Tszyu, Oscar De La Hoya, Tito Trinidad, Wilfredo Gomez, Floyd Mayweather, James Toney, Nigel Benn and Aaron Pryor.

[cuchulain]

I have tabulated the results so far. Thanks to the fourteen posters here and on Classic, who provided their lists. (Two different weighting methods of tabulation yielded the same results in terms of rank order).


Of the eighteen boxers on the various lists, only two, Roy Jones and Pernell Whittaker, appeared on everyone's list.

The aggregate of all your lists yields the following list of eighteen:


TOP Ten:

1 Ray Leonard
2 Roberto Duran
3 Pernell Whitaker
4 Marvin Hagler
5 Roy Jones
6 Julio Cesar Chavez
7 Thomas Hearns
8 Alexix Arguello
9 Bernard Hopkins
10 Floyd Mayweather


The remaining eight (in order) were:

11 Oscar de la Hoya
12 JamesToney
13 Aaron Pryor
14 Hector Camacho
15 Azumah Nelson
16 Felix Trinidad
17 Wilfred Benitez
18 Terry Norris

[Minotauro]

Chavez over Whitaker and even Hagler is a bit hard to put my finger on. As is Sal Sanchez being in there considering he never fought between 135-160.

My bad I wondered why nobody had mentioned Sanchez or Gomez. The reason I put Chavez over Whittaker is he was regarded as the p4p best for longer and had a larger winning streak although its tough to seperate the top guys.

[kg0208]

I have tabulated the results so far. Thanks to the fourteen posters here and on Classic, who provided their lists. (Two different weighting methods of tabulation yielded the same results in terms of rank order).


Of the eighteen boxers on the various lists, only two, Roy Jones and Pernell Whittaker, appeared on everyone's list.

The aggregate of all your lists yields the following list of eighteen:


TOP Ten:

1 Ray Leonard
2 Roberto Duran
3 Pernell Whitaker
4 Marvin Hagler
5 Roy Jones
6 Julio Cesar Chavez
7 Thomas Hearns
8 Alexix Arguello
9 Bernard Hopkins
10 Floyd Mayweather


The remaining eight (in order) were:

11 Oscar de la Hoya
12 JamesToney
13 Aaron Pryor
14 Hector Camacho
15 Azumah Nelson
16 Felix Trinidad
17 Wilfred Benitez
18 Terry Norris

Wow....Leonard, Duran, and Chavez weren't on every list?

[Guru_Too_You]

Wow....Leonard, Duran, and Chavez weren't on every list?
That tells the whole story about ESB polls.

Here's my list.

1. Duran
2. Whitaker
3. Leonard
4. Chavez
5. Jones Jr.
6. Arguello
7. Hagler
8. Hopkins
9. Mayweather
10. Hearns

[Dorfmeister]

1 - Julio Cesar Chavez
2 - Thomas Hearns
3 - Roberto Duran
4 - Sugar Ray Leonard
5 - Marvin Hagler
6 - Roy Jones Jr
7 - Bernard Hopkins
8 - Pernell Whitaker
9 - James Toney
10 - Floyd Mayweather Jr

[TBooze]

Wow....Leonard, Duran, and Chavez weren't on every list?

Well the criteria is vague, I only rated fighters who turned pro post 75, thus Duran and The Marvelous One were not on my list.

[TBooze]

Wow, terribly inconsistent and ridiculous.

Well all our lists are ridiculous, in that we are trying to rate pro fighters who weighed 100lbs in 1977 against pro fighters who weigh 300+lbs in 2007, with everything in between....

The can be virtually no consistency in that, because it is so ridiculous. So IMO, everybodies opinion is as worthy as the next.

[cuchulain]

That tells the whole story about ESB polls.

Here's my list.

1. Duran
2. Whitaker
3. Leonard
4. Chavez
5. Jones Jr.
6. Arguello
7. Hagler
8. Hopkins
9. Mayweather
10. Hearns

" That tells the whole story about ESB polls. "

Not really. Duran was on every list save TBooze. Leonard was on every list save RedRooster and Chavez was on every list but Bigtime9. Jones and Whitaker were on every list. Those are my personal top five and that's almost the way the final aggregate came in. (Hagler was insertrd into the mix)

Your own list matches the aggregate list exactly in members, and closely in the order.

So, all in all, the aggregate list is a pretty fair representation of the past 30 years.

[cuchulain]

Well the criteria is vague, I only rated fighters who turned pro post 75, thus Duran and The Marvelous One were not on my list.

The criteria regarding who qualified were pretty clear (see threadstarter post)

If your pick had fights prior to 1977, (e.g. Duran) Count his entire career.

In fact, Duran was used as the example of when a fighter's career straddled the 30 year mark.

[TBooze]

The criteria regarding who qualified were pretty clear (see threadstarter post)


Post your list of the ten best boxers who had fights in the last thirty
years ** between lightwt (135 lb limit) and middlwt (160 lb limit).

Factors to considers:

Record
Quality of opponents
Domination
Titles in most weight classes
Longevity
etc.

State whether your list is based on achievement or head-to-head.

** If your pick had fights prior to 1977, (e.g. Duran) Count his entire career.

You are asking people to write either greatness or best lists, you are also creating a bias to any fighter who turned pro before 1977 with your criterion....

But hey, it is an intresting debate, all I am suggesting is with things like this there are no definitive right or wrong answers.

[Dorfmeister]

Wow, terribly inconsistent and ridiculous.

Someone known by the nickname Sweet Pea had to find "terrible... ridiculous" one Top 10 list wherein Pernell is rated numba 8 and JCC first - I am not about to make it personal but if the original post mentioned longevity, record, domination, quality of opponents of the last 30 years, why shouldn't I have JC Chavez at the top - ( 115 fights, 107 wins, 86 by kayo), 6 world titles in 3 different divisions, 89 bouts undefeated, beat Ramirez, Lockridge, Taylor, Mayweather, Fuentes, Camacho, Haugen, Laporte, Lopez and Randall amongst others... Then Sweet Pea definitely didn't beat Chavez that night in San Antonio in my view... Consistency (terribly inconsistent)? - That's my number two Thomas Hearns - 1st man to win 4 world titles at 4 different weight classes - 147 to 154 to 175 to 160, Duran comes next ( 1967 pro debut, 12 successful lw title defenses with 11 kayos until 1979, former welter, junior-middle, middle champ - 5 world title belts, 69 wins by knockout)... Leonard comes after Duran ( 2-1 to Leonard doesn't make it inconsistent, it's a different criteria) and Hagler after Leonard ( yeah, cause Leonard beat Hagler in the fight which had Marvin out of boxing), still rate MMH above RJJ for his 7 years reign as mw champ ( 1980 Minter -1987 Leonard), RJJ undefeated from 1989 to 2004 ( except bs disq against Griffin which was emphatically avenged) with mw, smw, 3 times lhwt, hwt championships... Bernard with 20 mw title defenses, 10 years and 8 months holding on to the undisputed unified mw W comes over Pernell and Sweet Pea over James Toney, Lights Out is a former mw, smw, cruiser world champion and a hwt top contender & WBA, WBC titles challenger so why should I consider him below PBF ( 5 division world champ)? I still give credit to Floyd in these weight classes - 130 to 154 pounds - over ODLH, SSM, MAB, Buddy McGirt, Arguello, Benitez and Azumah, so WTH r you braggin about??? I don't even believe in P4P ratings so if u want me 2 say Sweet Pe(e)(a) is the best P4P of the last 30, I'll concede just as long as you don't reply to my posts with words such as ridiculous, inconsistent and terrible cause that is clearly picking up with me and I never claimed boxing genius, Peace!

[Holmes' Jab]

Hmm, here goes:

1. SRL
2. Marvin Hagler
3. Pernell Whitaker
4. Roberto Duran
5. Roy Jones Jr.
6. Thomas Hearns
7. Bernard Hopkins
8. Julio Cesar Chavez
9. Alexis Arguello
10. Mike McCallum

[Dorfmeister]

Well all our lists are ridiculous, in that we are trying to rate pro fighters who weighed 100lbs in 1977 against pro fighters who weigh 300+lbs in 2007, with everything in between....

The can be virtually no consistency in that, because it is so ridiculous. So IMO, everybodies opinion is as worthy as the next.

Thnx, TBooze, I know there r people who see themselves in the boxers they highly rate and defend... I don't feel any passion or love affair with boxers such as JCC, SRL, RJJ, PBF, Duran, Sweet Pea or any other BUT BOXING=LIFE 4 ME still... Sweet Pea was robbed against Chavez? Beats me but if he was, I still don't give a s*** about it! Floyd fans feel bad about me rating him at number 10? Couldn't feel less bothered about it! Holyfield gonna be a 5 time world hwt champion? Don't give a Damn if he is... Cotto beating Shane or the other way around, Floyd retiring undefeated and with a lopsided decision against Ricky or Hatton affecting PBF's legacy forever more, it's the same to me. I am willing to respect fighters and fans, ESB members but only just.

[Lupe]

Not only is Duran the best fighter in the past 30 years, he's also one of the best fighters P4P who ever lived.

I know this forum is full of Hopkins nuthuggers, but X has done NOTHING to deserve a top 10 ranking of the best fighters in the past 30 years, period.

In no particular order and from 135-160:

Leonard, Duran, Hagler, Chavez, Whittaker, Hearns, Jones, Benitez, McCullum, Toney.

Outside of the top 10 - in the order: Trinidad, Pryor, Oscar, Camacho, Hopkins

[sdsfinest22]

Bump this...what ya'll think now on this subject