All-time pound-for-pound who do you rank higher: Griffith or Arguello?

[Popkins]

Please vote and explain :good

[McGrain]

Griffith. Not that close. Not close at all in fact.

[Popkins]

Griffith. Not that close. Not close at all in fact.

Nice to see someone take a strong position right away! Can I ask you to elaborate please mate?

[anarci]

Griffith. Not that close. Not close at all in fact.
Yey its not close at all Arguello i put much higher!!!

[bodhi]

Griffith. Not that close. Not close at all in fact.

True, Emile is at the very least near the Top10 while Arguello isn´t Top20.

[Popkins]

Yey its not close at all Arguello i put much higher!!!

:lol: I'm glad this debate has kicked off in earnest, but merely saying a guy's name doesn't tell us anything, WHY do you have Arguello much higher??

[Popkins]

True, Emile is at the very least near the Top10 while Arguello isn´t Top20.

Why do you think so?

[bodhi]

Why do you think so?

He fought and beat better fighters over a longer period of time.

[McGrain]

Nice to see someone take a strong position right away! Can I ask you to elaborate please mate?

ATG top 6 at welter ATG top 20 at middle. More title fights than you can shake a stick at and I believe more title rounds than anyone ever. His class of competition is consistantly higher and if you take a look at the MW scalps he collected it's probably inarguable that his resume in his second best division is better than Arguello's in his best. Just a different class of fighter, albeit in rareified air meaning there's no shame in Arguello lagging a clear tier behind. Both great fighters but apples and oranges none the less.

[GDG]

Got to be Emile surely!!!!

I have them about 18 spaces apart P4P.

[GPater11093]

very close can hardly split them ill have to come back in a wee while once i think about it

im big fans of both guys

[anarci]

Arguellos record in Title figts top 5 at feather,arguably greatest jl,top 10 light.
19-3-0-17kos
worl champions he beat 12
Legra,Olivares,Escalara 2x,Limon,Chacon
Watt,Boza,Ramirez,Navarrate,Mancini
Noel,Costello Overall record 82-8-0-65 kos

Griffiths record in title fights top 10 welter, top 10 jm, top 20 middle
16-8-0-5 kos
World champions he beat 6
Moyer 3x,Rodriguez 2-1,Paret 2-1,Dupas2x
Tiger2x,Benvunuti 1-2, Overall record 85-24-2-23 kos

Griffith is obviously an atg,but I just have Arguello a little higher his resume is better to. Not to mention his Atg rankings in the divisions he competed in he also has 3 titles Griffiths 2. Arguello was also one of the greatest punchers in Boxing history

[turpinr]

i can't split them.so i won't

[anarci]

True, Emile is at the very least near the Top10 while Arguello isn´t Top20.
:nono:nono No way in hell is he top 10 pfp atg:patsch Man take a look again at a top 100 list any list! I wouldev put Napoloes around 20 to 25 and he owned Griffith in their fight. He went 1-2 vs Benvenuti. Id put Griffith around 40-45 Arguello around the late 20s

[robert ungurean]

Arguello because I believe he was the better fighter period.

[Raging B(_)LL]

I rate Arguello higher and consider him the better fighter as well. Alex left no room for doubt as to was the winner in most of his bouts, the same cannot be said for Emile who was the beneficiary of several rather questionable decisions during his career.

To name a few I recently rewatched his first two bouts vs Jorge Fernandez and felt the Argentinian won both fights clearly, the first one 8-2 in rounds with a big round 4 were he staggered Emile repeatedly and had him rubbery legged. The return bout I had 7-3 and he again outhustled him and stunned Emile a number of times throughout the bout.

Then of course you have the four bouts vs Luis Rodriguez which most of you know I had Luis winning, and then you have both Joey Archer fights that could easily gone Joeys way the first one especially. Emile fought the better competition overall, but Arguello did better against his top opponents than Emile did and was much more consistent throughout his career and that rates him higher in my eyes.

[Popkins]

Hmmm, two Classic heavyweights squaring off...

I rate Arguello higher and consider him the better fighter as well. Alex left no room for doubt as to was the winner in most of his bouts, the same cannot be said for Emile who was the beneficiary of several rather questionable decisions during his career.

To name a few I recently rewatched his first two bouts vs Jorge Fernandez and felt the Argentinian won both fights clearly, the first one 8-2 in rounds with a big round 4 were he staggered Emile repeatedly and had him rubbery legged. The return bout I had 7-3 and he again outhustled him and stunned Emile a number of times throughout the bout.

Then of course you have the four bouts vs Luis Rodriguez which most of you know I had Luis winning, and then you have both Joey Archer fights that could easily gone Joeys way the first one especially. Emile fought the better competition overall, but Arguello did better against his top opponents than Emile did and was much more consistent throughout his career and that rates him higher in my eyes.

ATG top 6 at welter ATG top 20 at middle. More title fights than you can shake a stick at and I believe more title rounds than anyone ever. His class of competition is consistantly higher and if you take a look at the MW scalps he collected it's probably inarguable that his resume in his second best division is better than Arguello's in his best. Just a different class of fighter, albeit in rareified air meaning there's no shame in Arguello lagging a clear tier behind. Both great fighters but apples and oranges none the less.


Who is making the more convincing case here? Either of you guys wish to respond to the other's post?

I myself find it very difficult to separate the two, I'm hoping this thread can sway me by bringing up a perspective I hadn't considered.

[Popkins]

Sweet Pea has voted Arguello, but no comment as yet. Hopefully this will be forthcoming....

[McGrain]

As much as I love RB, his post basically comes down to what he makes of close Griffith decisions. I agree with his general point. But the fact is no poster's positin on close decisions as called by pro judges should have that much impact upon a fighter's general ranking. Before every major fight, judges, employed by governing bodies are briefed on judging criteria. No posters are. Posters judge fights from 100 years of boxing based upon personal appreciation, in the end, meaningless.

Boxing has been scored very, very differently since 1890, dependant upon judges appreciation of a given fight. A 1950's judge would judge a 1990's fight differently than a 1990's judge. I think that has to be respected.

Yes, Griffith turned up some disputable decisions - but based upon the juding of his era. His wins, in close fights, should be respected as far as his ATG ranking is concerned.

[McGrain]

Dependent, of course. If a robbery has occured, then OK, subjective opinion takes on some meaning. RB has seen the Fernandez fights, and I haven't, so his opinion has to be respected.

[anarci]

Arguellos record in Title figts top 5 at feather,arguably greatest jl,top 10 light.
19-3-0-17kos
worl champions he beat 12
Legra,Olivares,Escalara 2x,Limon,Chacon
Watt,Boza,Ramirez,Navarrate,Mancini
Noel,Costello Overall record 82-8-0-65 kos

Griffiths record in title fights top 10 welter, top 10 jm, top 20 middle
16-8-0-5 kos
World champions he beat 6
Moyer 3x,Rodriguez 2-1,Paret 2-1,Dupas2x
Tiger2x,Benvunuti 1-2, Overall record 85-24-2-23 kos

Griffith is obviously an atg,but I just have Arguello a little higher his resume is better to. Not to mention his Atg rankings in the divisions he competed in he also has 3 titles Griffiths 2. Arguello was also one of the greatest punchers in Boxing history :deal:dealHey POPKINS!!!! THis says it all right here:deal What more do you need??? It shows that Arguello has the better resume,and better record on the championship level,not to mention his ability to end a Fight with one punch. He was much more consistant than Griffith,and beat more champs,won more titles. He was a top 5 feather of all time, probably the greatest Jl of all time. Also a top 10lightweight . Griffith best claim is maybe a top 10 welter,But not one of the greatest in his division as Arguello was in 2 of those.

[red cobra]

As much as I admire Alexis Arguello, I say Griffith...and for the reason that Emile was actually two seperate fighters in his career...the aggressive "killer instinct" Griffith, who's very killer instinct led him to his greatest notoriety and "fame"...and the revised, reinvented version, who learned skills as a patient, versatile ring mechanic who never thrilled the fans, wasn't always consistant and was for the most part, somewhat detached and fought according to his own logic and minus the passion that he once had...he was a master at navigating the 15 round distance and at responding to and adapting himself to a wide variety of opponents and styles...whereas Arguello fought in one mode usually... a wonderfully exciting mode, and a more ko friendly..thus fan friendly mode...but was not as versatile or as long lived as Griffith, or as skilled, IMO.

[redrooster]

Arguello was a much tougher nut to crack than Emile. His record speaks for itself. More dominant in his defenses and more of them and in the 70's, seemed to get better with age. IMO, he was the Ray Robinson of his time.

[GPater11093]

I think its what you like better. Griffiths better wins but inconsistancy over a long period or Arguellos consistant wins over a long period but not quite as long as Griffith was at the top.

Griffith has good wins over Moyer (in a close fight and split 2-1), Luis Manuel Rodgrigez (although these are very debateable), Ralph Dupas, Dick Tiger (2x but the 1st fight is the importnt one), Joey rcher (2x close again), Benvenuti (1-2)

But Griffiths wins are also very deep especially at Welterweight with wins over Paret, Ortega, Charnley, Stable, don Fullmer, Fernandez. I think Arguello dosent quite have the dpth of resume of Griffith but he had the greater consistancy and his wins were clearer.

On film i personally think Arguello is better but it is very close as Griffith is also very very good.

[McGrain]

On film i personally think Arguello is better but it is very close as Griffith is also very very good.


Really? He's definitely more pleasing, but better? I think that's a pretty big shout. You think that Griffith would do less well head to head agains the very best than Arguello would?

[turpinr]

Really? He's definitely more pleasing, but better? I think that's a pretty big shout. You think that Griffith would do less well head to head agains the very best than Arguello would?which is why i stayed on the fence and didn't vote.i can't split them.they're both ATG's:good

[he grant]

I like Alexis ... I feel he lost some prestige due to the Pryor losses but at 126 and 130 he was more dominate than Emile ever was at 147.

[Marnoff]

Arguello.

[Marnoff]

Boxing has been scored very, very differently since 1890, dependant upon judges appreciation of a given fight. A 1950's judge would judge a 1990's fight differently than a 1990's judge. I think that has to be respected.

I think this is a great point that we often tend to forget when judging past fights.

[GPater11093]

Really? He's definitely more pleasing, but better? I think that's a pretty big shout. You think that Griffith would do less well head to head agains the very best than Arguello would?

I think Griffith is competitive with evey ATG and loses closely to afew.

I think Arguello beat more of the greats but he losses worse or more widely in the fights he loses where Griffith would lose closely. But by that token i think Arguello wins more fights clearer aswell

At Featherweight and Super Feather Arguello is a beast at Lightweight he dosent do too well though.

[red cobra]

Griffith, because of his tendency to fight "boring" fights, and because of his inconsistancy, is often underestimated and penalized when he is assessed in the big scheme of things. The fact is that aside from the Rubin Carter fight, no one ever blew Griffith away, not even Carlos Monzon in that first fight, rather that 14th round tko was the result of a VERY PATIENT, methodical beat down...my brother in law, who I was watching the fight with, when it was stopped said "what took him so long?" Being a more savvy fight fan than he, I had to explain that Griffith was a very good fighter, and wasn't getting blown away by anyone. I have always thought that the Carter fight was a bit of a fluke, and if rematched, especially after Griffith's ascension to middleweight, that he would have beaten Carter by a decision. The middleweight Griffith may have been decked by Carter, but would have gotten up and ridden it out and recovered from it like he did on other occasions, to go to the inevitable final bell to either win or lose a decision. Griffith's gifts weren't as spectacular as Arguello's and he was never a crowd pleaser, but the old master mechanic should never be lowrated because of that.

[anarci]

I like Alexis ... I feel he lost some prestige due to the Pryor losses but at 126 and 130 he was more dominate than Emile ever was at 147.:deal To me thats what puts over Griffith, He was dominant at those weights and probably the greatest at 130 and top 5 126. Griffith cant say the same thing in any of the divisions he fought in.

[anarci]

:bbb

[salsanchezfan]

Arguello - As mentioned, Griffith was never really dominant, whereas Alexis cut a swath through three weight classes.

[WhataRock]

From memory I think I have them close enough that they are interchangeable and over the years I believe I have done that.

Last time I cared to think about I believe I had Argulleo 3 or 4 spots above Emile...not much but enough to make a distinction.

Im not so sure however Alexis would have been anymore dominant than Griffith was against the crop of fighter Emile fought...He would have knocked out more guys and had more decisive victories but I think he would have been walking the tightrope fighting guys like Logart, Dupas, Archer, Rodriguez, Gypsy Joe Harris etc...stylists that would have troubled Alexis greatly, especially if he fought them in non-title bouts over the shorter distance...He could have very well had just as a patchy record.

I think Emile would have beaten just about everyone Alexis fought, except he to would have come unstuck against a middleweight Aaron Pryor Id imagine.

[anarci]

From memory I think I have them close enough that they are interchangeable and over the years I believe I have done that.

Last time I cared to think about I believe I had Argulleo 3 or 4 spots above Emile...not much but enough to make a distinction.

Im not so sure however Alexis would have been anymore dominant than Griffith was against the crop of fighter Emile fought...He would have knocked out more guys and had more decisive victories but I think he would have been walking the tightrope fighting guys like Logart, Dupas, Archer, Rodriguez, Gypsy Joe Harris etc...stylists that would have troubled Alexis greatly, especially if he fought them in non-title bouts over the shorter distance...He could have very well had just as a patchy record.

I think Emile would have beaten just about everyone Alexis fought, except he to would have come unstuck against a middleweight Aaron Pryor Id imagine.
You made some good points however i just think Arguello is higher ranked in the divisions he competed. He was more dominant. Arguello probably would have a tough time with those cuties in a pfp sense but there are also some guys that Griffith lost to that Arguello wouldnt have lost too. Paret,Carter,Benvenuti etc etc.

[WhataRock]

You made some good points however i just think Arguello is higher ranked in the divisions he competed. He was more dominant. Arguello probably would have a tough time with those cuties in a pfp sense but there are also some guys that Griffith lost to that Arguello wouldnt have lost too. Paret,Carter,Benvenuti etc etc.


Flip it around though..you reckon Griffith would lose to a fighter like Fernandez? Keeping in mind Emile did handle cuties fairly well.

Griffith had a long and punishing career...a lot of his greatness has to do with how he was able to hang with the best fighters around at the time seemingly when well past it and written off. Im not to concerned that he wasnt as dominant, because I think he in general fought a higher calibre of opponent, gave up size more than Alexis did and fought more past his used by date.

I just dont see Alexis faring any better in the welter-middleweight division of that time..it was unbelievably strong. No fighter really came out of the 60's in those two division unscathed, I dont think Alexis would either.

If Alexis to go up in weight to face guys like Carter and Benvenuti like Emile did, I think has a pretty tough time. He is a much better fighter p4p but if he was not having the physical advantages he is used to, I dont think he tears them a new one either.
A bloke like Rubin probably brings as much as a guy like Ramirez did, perhaps not the chin or power but better skill level.

[sweet_scientist]

I have Arguello a bit higher because of his dominance but WAR makes a good point about Arguello and how he'd fair in non-title bouts with competent technicians over the short course. His record would patch up quite quickly...

I still think Arguello would fair a little better than Griffith though just because he had that equaliser.

[booradley]

Arguellos record in Title figts top 5 at feather,arguably greatest jl,top 10 light.
19-3-0-17kos
worl champions he beat 12
Legra,Olivares,Escalara 2x,Limon,Chacon
Watt,Boza,Ramirez,Navarrate,Mancini
Noel,Costello Overall record 82-8-0-65 kos

Griffiths record in title fights top 10 welter, top 10 jm, top 20 middle
16-8-0-5 kos
World champions he beat 6
Moyer 3x,Rodriguez 2-1,Paret 2-1,Dupas2x
Tiger2x,Benvunuti 1-2, Overall record 85-24-2-23 kos

Griffith is obviously an atg,but I just have Arguello a little higher his resume is better to. Not to mention his Atg rankings in the divisions he competed in he also has 3 titles Griffiths 2. Arguello was also one of the greatest punchers in Boxing history

Nope -- Griffith lost one of the Moyer fights.

[El Bujia]

ATG top 6 at welter ATG top 20 at middle. More title fights than you can shake a stick at and I believe more title rounds than anyone ever. His class of competition is consistantly higher and if you take a look at the MW scalps he collected it's probably inarguable that his resume in his second best division is better than Arguello's in his best. Just a different class of fighter, albeit in rareified air meaning there's no shame in Arguello lagging a clear tier behind. Both great fighters but apples and oranges none the less.I disagree vehemently. Griffith never proved himself the best fighter in any weight class he fought at, and was often times a bit lucky to get the verdict, (particularly in the matchups at the Garden) or if not was run very close during a whole lot of those fights. Arguello proved himself the best in 2 or 3 weight classes and usually did so a lot more convincingly than Griffith.

And I disagree that Griffith had a better record at Middleweight than Arguello at Super Feather. Let's compare:

Arguello beat: Navarette by KO, Castillo by KO, Chacon by KO, Limon by KO, Escalera twice by KO, etc. He KO'd pretty much every top fighter in the class, all without a loss, and his only loss around this time being in a non-title 10 rounder at 135.

Griffith beat: Lopez and Briscoe both by very close Decisions in 10 rounders, Tiger (first fight very disputed), Bogs, Archer (both fights very disputed), Benvenuti (all fights very close, lost the series), etc.

I don't get where you're coming from. On paper Griffith has a deeper record, in reality I don't think he was the greater fighter, or even really top 40 material in a pound for pound sense.

[El Bujia]

Really? He's definitely more pleasing, but better? I think that's a pretty big shout. You think that Griffith would do less well head to head agains the very best than Arguello would?Definitely. I can see Arguello faring well with, and beating most any fighter from Featherweight to Lightweight. Griffith I see losing to most of the top Welters and Middles. I think he'd lose to a guy like McCallum, to be honest. Perhaps Curry as well.

[booradley]

Edit: Should think before i type!