The Gods of War

[Stonehands89]

In recent months I have posted a few threads about an upcoming series called "The Gods of War." This series will count down the top 10 p4p fighters since 1920 and will try to inject some objectivity and sense into not only "who" is great, but "what" is great.

I've been immersed up to my eyebrows in this for almost two months now. I've lost all my friends, I'm malnourished, and I talk to ghosts. I hope it's worth it.

There are a few of your fellow Classic posters who had an impact on this effort. One of them offered an argument that beat down mine and forced me to raise Henry Armstrong three places, so hats off to him.

For those interested in following this series, it begins here:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the threads that helped form this work.

[JohnThomas1]

Great stuff champ.

[WhataRock]

Looking forward to it Stoney..keep us posted.

[Flea Man]

Can't wait pal :good

[Chinxkid]

Congratulations on a great project, brother. I love your "voice". When I read something you've written, even when you're just banging away at the keys on ESB, "you" come through, and it's loud and clear.

Hope you have a warm Christmas.

[Stonehands89]

Congratulations on a great project, brother. I love your "voice". When I read something you've written, even when you're just banging away at the keys on ESB, "you" come through, and it's loud and clear.

Hope you have a warm Christmas.
Returned, times two. I also enjoyed your recent interactions with John Garfield, who's a legend in these parts. And like everyone else out here, I sense that your dad is very present on this forum.

For the curious... "The Tenth God of War" makes his appearance tomorrow on that site...

[Jaws]

Looking forward to it!

[thesham01]

intro is sweet, is the number 10 up yet? keep us posted when it goes up, looking forward to it very much....

[Stonehands89]

Will do.

The editor got the Tenth last night. When it's up, I'll let you know on this thread.

[McGrain]

Stonie, I emailed you that thing and it just sat in my drafts. I do apologise. Anyway, impressive stuff.

[prime]

Respect and good luck, old friend.

[Stonehands89]

Stonie, I emailed you that thing and it just sat in my drafts. I do apologise. Anyway, impressive stuff.
Don't worry about it. You're already credited for all the input you had in the threads...

[McGrain]

Don't worry about it. You're already credited for all the input you had in the threads...


That's gracious of you to say that, especially when i basically landed you with a broken promise.

[GPater11093]

Stoney great read that really like your writing, you sound like just an old timer boxing enthusiast i really like that, also you seem to have an open mind taht many of the older fans dont for example Mathematic rankings and ranking Pacquiao highly.

Looking forward to installment one

[Stonehands89]

The Tenth God of War has been announced...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[GPater11093]

excellant read SH really enjoyed it love the way you write things, can imagine sitting in the corner of a gym with some battle hardened trainer telling me about Charley Burley in a smoky New York gym

[McGrain]

That article is a dream come true for me. Thank you.

I like that you open with the Ray story. It's been questioned as to it's legitimacy, but as you point out it was widely witnessed. It also has good pedigree in journeying down to us. Your cornerstones are the right ones.

Perhaps a mention of the Sugar duck would have bene warranted? I know it's hard to pin down but the details are out there - I think it speaks volumes the type of sums Sugar knocked back to fight Burley compared to the type of figures he took matched fighters for in the following years. Also, I think a word on Marshall and Charles might have been wisdom? Obviously you are in trouble for space, but those losses are troubling. Not a fighter in history could have beaten Marshall one-handed, but I do think that is worth saying.

Probably my favourite article on the internet. Great job.

[Stonehands89]

That article is a dream come true for me. Thank you.

I like that you open with the Ray story. It's been questioned as to it's legitimacy, but as you point out it was widely witnessed. It also has good pedigree in journeying down to us. Your cornerstones are the right ones.

Perhaps a mention of the Sugar duck would have bene warranted? I know it's hard to pin down but the details are out there - I think it speaks volumes the type of sums Sugar knocked back to fight Burley compared to the type of figures he took matched fighters for in the following years. Also, I think a word on Marshall and Charles might have been wisdom? Obviously you are in trouble for space, but those losses are troubling. Not a fighter in history could have beaten Marshall one-handed, but I do think that is worth saying.

Probably my favourite article on the internet. Great job.
That's some high praise. If you stamp an article on Burley, it's a gold one, so thanks.

A word on your (fair) critiques. I did mention Robinson's allergy. I placed it after the statement about how he ran out on Cocoa Kid. I didn't get into the purses and all that but succinctly discussed something that I think is a bit more damning, actually.

As for mentioning the Marshall loss; well, Burley had worse losses than that one. He had a few off days.

Discussing these or even mentioning all of them would have detracted from the purpose and especially the flow of the article.

There are nine more of these things and I didn't want to make them a regurgitation of factoids. Those have been done. I appreciate the articles by Cox et. al, but I'm doing something different. What I'm trying to do is no less demanding in terms of research, but it is different. These things are crafted.

These ten articles are attempts to make a case through a story or through taking one or a few fitting fights, researching them, and presenting them as examples of why this or that fighter was great. However, in the back of my head is a greater objective; and that is to invite non-boxing fans who appreciate stories/good writing, to use that appreciation as a bridge to appreciate the sweet science of bruising.

PS/
Someone left a comment at the bottom wondering if I "forgot" the Charles fights. Ezzard Charles was bigger than Burley, but was also without a doubt, the foil for Burley. No shame there... but wouldn't those bouts be better situated in an article about Ezzard Charles...? And that's precisely where they are.

[Sweet Pea]

Fantastic article, as always from ESB's best writer.

[aj415]

In recent months I have posted a few threads about an upcoming series called "The Gods of War." This series will count down the top 10 p4p fighters since 1920 and will try to inject some objectivity and sense into not only "who" is great, but "what" is great.

I've been immersed up to my eyebrows in this for almost two months now. I've lost all my friends, I'm malnourished, and I talk to ghosts. I hope it's worth it.

There are a few of your fellow Classic posters who had an impact on this effort. One of them offered an argument that beat down mine and forced me to raise Henry Armstrong three places, so hats off to him.

For those interested in following this series, it begins here:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the threads that helped form this work.

SH, that was an Informative and excellent read thank you very much for it.

In essence are you categories boiling down to essentially the following?

1. Who you fought
2. How you fought
3. How long you fought for
4. How much you won

Then

5. How well you could take a punch (?)
6. How you performed against bigger, larger foes
7. Who you defined yourself to be through your actions

Is that about the gist of it?

[Stonehands89]

SH, that was an Informative and excellent read thank you very much for it.

In essence are you categories boiling down to essentially the following?

1. Who you fought
2. How you fought
3. How long you fought for
4. How much you won

Then

5. How well you could take a punch (?)
6. How you performed against bigger, larger foes
7. Who you defined yourself to be through your actions

Is that about the gist of it?
You'll want to read the first article in the series for information on that. The criteria are fairly well-defined, although we could all go around forever on what the scores look like for a given fighter.

[john garfield]

Any guy that can multi-task like you, is an ATG for me, S.

[aj415]

You'll want to read the first article in the series for information on that. The criteria are fairly well-defined, although we could all go around forever on what the scores look like for a given fighter.

Yessir did so. Might have been just me.. just wasn't completely clear on them.

Wanted to follow through on the communication process, of making sure your message of the criteria was what I was getting. (Hence briefly summing up each one from the article's definition in my words)

[McGrain]

Someone left a comment at the bottom wondering if I "forgot" the Charles fights. Ezzard Charles was bigger than Burley, but was also without a doubt, the foil for Burley. No shame there... but wouldn't those bouts be better situated in an article about Ezzard Charles...? And that's precisely where they are.


Yeah, that's fair.

What was your scorecard for Holman Williams like?

[GPater11093]

SH did you actually see Burley fight?

[PetethePrince]

High Praise Stonehands. Can't wait to see the rest.

[brando18b4h]

I cant wait, thanks for your effort.

[Stonehands89]

Yessir did so. Might have been just me.. just wasn't completely clear on them.

Wanted to follow through on the communication process, of making sure your message of the criteria was what I was getting. (Hence briefly summing up each one from the article's definition in my words)
Okay, got it. Summing up the categories risks leaving out key qualities within them. I summed up the criteria about as much as they can be summed up without rendering them totally vacuous.

I have to admit that the definitions are a bit .... spongy. For example, Longevity isn't simply how long you fought for. It could also mean how often you fought in a given span of time... though anything less than 50 means and must mean a low score. Apologies to great fighters like Ray Leonard and Pernell Whitaker.

[Stonehands89]

SH did you actually see Burley fight?
Haha! I'm just an old soul, my man. Talk to the Wizard of Ouch -John Garfield... he probably had biscotti with him on 42nd street.

Charley retired when my mother was 3.

[Stonehands89]

Yeah, that's fair.

What was your scorecard for Holman Williams like?
-25 points-
Experience: 22

-15 points-
Ring Generalship: 14
Longevity: 13
Dominance: 8

-10 points-
Durability: 8
P/LO: 5
Intangibles: 9

TOTAL: 79 ................................ thereabouts....

[Sweet Pea]

If Williams gets a 22 for experience, who the hell gets a 24 or 25? How does Burley outrank him in that regard? I'd say he was just about as experienced against top flight opposition as any other fighter you could name.

[Stonehands89]

If Williams gets a 22 for experience, who the hell gets a 24 or 25? How does Burley outrank him in that regard? I'd say he was just about as experienced against top flight opposition as any other fighter you could name.
I'd give the edge to Burley. Look at their records...

A good way to do this, is to find a gold standard and measure everyone else by that. Archie Moore. He'd get a 25. Williams isn't near Moore in terms of experience.

[Sweet Pea]

I'd give the edge to Burley. Look at their records...

A good way to do this, is to find a gold standard and measure everyone else by that. Archie Moore. He'd get a 25. Williams isn't near Moore in terms of experience.I have to disagree. Williams's record is actually a good deal more stacked than Burley's, and on par with Moore's as well. Not to mention Burley and Williams's series was dead even and he and Moore split their two fights together. He defeated the entire Murderer's Row multiple times. His resume is absolutely stacked.

[Stonehands89]

I have to disagree. Williams's record is actually a good deal more stacked than Burley's, and on par with Moore's as well. Not to mention Burley and Williams's series was dead even and he and Moore split their two fights together. He defeated the entire Murderer's Row multiple times. His resume is absolutely stacked.

Williams went 13-14-4-1 against Lytell, Booker, Burley, Marshall, Chase, Wade, and Lytell. Burley went 10-5-1-1. That includes Cocoa Kid... his record against Cocoa Kid was 3-8-2.

Against Burley, he went 3-3-1, but Burley holds the a TKO over him. No one holds a TKO against Burley. Williams fought no one who dramatically outsized him. He was dead even with Eddie Booker.

He's got...
Murderers' Row
LaMotta
Steve Belloise
Jose Basora
Moore
Cerdan

Burley...
Murderer's Row (except Booker)
Charles
Zivic
Soose
Abrams
Moore
both Hogue Brothers
Bivins
Nate Bolden

Archie Moore?
Murderers' Row
Bivins
Charles
Maxim
both Hogue bros.
Harold Johnson
Nino Valdes
Marciano
Floyd Patterson
Pastrano
Ali

...Moore also holds more knockouts than even Burley against those major figures of Murderers' Row. He's got four... no one else has more than 1. Moore's record against them is 10-5-3.

Moore blows both of them away. Burley is in my opinion more stacked, though it is more arguable. It isn't arguable between Moore and Williams, though.

[Sweet Pea]

If you're including guys like Soose, Bolden, and Big Boy Hogue, you'd have to include guys like Satterfield, Tunero, Burke, Jannazzo, etc. for Williams.

The only member he held a losing record against among the Row was Cocoa Kid. Excluding him, the numbers are a lot better in his favor. He was 13-7-2-1 against the crew you mentioned outside of Kid (2 of those coming to Lytell when past his prime). He also beat another Row member in Joe Carter at least 4 times.

[john garfield]

Haha! I'm just an old soul, my man. Talk to the Wizard of Ouch -John Garfield... he probably had biscotti with him on 42nd street.

Charley retired when my mother was 3.

NO WAY! He didn't go for spit -- never picked up a check.

[GPater11093]

Haha! I'm just an old soul, my man. Talk to the Wizard of Ouch -John Garfield... he probably had biscotti with him on 42nd street.

Charley retired when my mother was 3.

sorry, what threw me was McGrain asking for a scorecard for Williams and me being half asleep at the time thought he meant Burley vs Williams :patsch:patsch

[Stonehands89]

If you're including guys like Soose, Bolden, and Big Boy Hogue, you'd have to include guys like Satterfield, Tunero, Burke, Jannazzo, etc. for Williams.

The only member he held a losing record against among the Row was Cocoa Kid. Excluding him, the numbers are a lot better in his favor. He was 13-7-2-1 against the crew you mentioned outside of Kid (2 of those coming to Lytell when past his prime). He also beat another Row member in Joe Carter at least 4 times.
The ranks of Murderers Row are malleable... but irregardless, we agree that Holman was great. I'd edge Burley slightly in terms of resume, but Moore is off the charts.

[Stonehands89]

NO WAY! He didn't go for spit -- never picked up a check.
How could he? Weren't you baby-sitting him? Wasn't it sometime in the 20s when you were 41 or so?

[john garfield]

how could he? Weren't you baby-sitting him? Wasn't it sometime in the 20s when you were 41 or so?

malicious rumor spread by fitzsimmons...couldna been more than 37.

[Stonehands89]

malicious rumor spread by fitzsimmons...couldna been more than 37.
Ha. Beautiful.

[McGrain]

01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10 - Charley Burley

I mean any list that you kick off with Burley is going to be very interesting. I think that aside from you i'm the only guy on the forum that's consistantly had Burley in the twenty, but he's never clambered into my ten. Will be interesting to see who ends up where. This ranking means all bets are off as far as this list goes.

[Stonehands89]

01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10 - Charley Burley

I mean any list that you kick off with Burley is going to be very interesting. I think that aside from you i'm the only guy on the forum that's consistantly had Burley in the twenty, but he's never clambered into my ten. Will be interesting to see who ends up where. This ranking means all bets are off as far as this list goes.
Burley's making it into the top ten surprised me. Especially considering who he bumped to #11. When I did the article, I thought it would be important to pay tribute to other members of that feared group. Burley is the only one without a crown.

[McGrain]

When is the next installment?

[Stonehands89]

When is the next installment?
They're all done. Now it's just a matter of timing them right. I'm thinking Christmas Eve.

I am considering Monday and Thursday to march them in, but if there are alot of comments, it may be wiser to stall them. I'll probably play it by ear.

[McGrain]

Okie dokie, be sure and drop the link in the thread when you rack it up.

[john garfield]

They're all done. Now it's just a matter of timing them right. I'm thinking Christmas Eve.

I am considering Monday and Thursday to march them in, but if there are alot of comments, it may be wiser to stall them. I'll probably play it by ear.

How do you define 'I'll probably play it by ear' S?

[dpw417]

They're all done. Now it's just a matter of timing them right. I'm thinking Christmas Eve.

I am considering Monday and Thursday to march them in, but if there are alot of comments, it may be wiser to stall them. I'll probably play it by ear.
Spread 'em out a little...No need to rush it. Enjoy the ride some more. The first installment was quality!

[Stonehands89]

How do you define 'I'll probably play it by ear' S?
To improvise, do it as it comes, without planning ahead. I think the phrase originated with musicians who verged from sheet music.

[Stonehands89]

Spread 'em out a little...No need to rush it. Enjoy the ride some more. The first installment was quality!
A good friend of mine and boxing trainer out of Brockton, told me today that I should spread them out, because these things are his "Sopranos".

I appreciate the nod about the Burley one.

[thesham01]

you really are a great writer, interesting choice in top ten to be fair, and can't wait for the rest :good

[Chaney]

Although not nearly as knowledgeable as you regulars on the classic forum, I know good writing when I see it!

I have to join with all the others and compliment you on your work here, Stonehands.

The writing is beautiful; crackling with energy, rich with colour...

More than anything, your love of the subject comes through with every line. That passion simply cannot be faked.

I look forward to reading the rest of the series.:good

[natonic]

Beautiful article on Burley Stonehands. I can't wait for the next installment.

[Stonehands89]

Although not nearly as knowledgeable as you regulars on the classic forum, I know good writing when I see it!

I have to join with all the others and compliment you on your work here, Stonehands.

The writing is beautiful; crackling with energy, rich with colour...

More than anything, your love of the subject comes through with every line. That passion simply cannot be faked.

I look forward to reading the rest of the series.:good
Thanks Chaney, that enthusiasm you sense is common out here in these parts. This joint has been my neighborhood for years now. There's a lot of inspiration and knowledge here that just isn't found anywhere else. ESB Classic is Stillman's gym in spirit. And we like to duke things out here too.

[Stonehands89]

you really are a great writer, interesting choice in top ten to be fair, and can't wait for the rest :good
Burley was a surprise for me too. You'd never believe who he bumped into #11.

I'm not looking for pats on the back, to be honest. I'm just a bum from the neighborhood trying to put the spotlight on a legion of long-dead fighters who should not be forgotten by anyone, not just fight fans. By my calculations, these 10 belong where they are. So this ain't about me and I really hope that I'm not coming off like a dink. That being said, I hope that this series gets read... alot, because it is a rebuke to so many top tens that are, I find, not only common, but lazy.

It's gonna cause some hell, I hope, but much of its principles are held on ESB by more than just me. Hell, some of you who I've been going round-and-round with for years will see old arguments laced in these articles. Some of you may even see where you freakin' changed my mind.

Anyway, it's about damn time that this little oasis of ours got some damn press.

[young griffo]

Thanks Chaney, that enthusiasm you sense is common out here in these parts. This joint has been my neighborhood for years now. There's a lot of inspiration and knowledge here that just isn't found anywhere else. ESB Classic is Stillman's gym in spirit. And we like to duke things out here too.
Some of the poster's on here are harsher and tougher than Lou Stillman ever was and this forum is all the better for it.

Where else do legends like Burley,Holman Williams,Lloyd Marshall and Cocoa Kid,who were ignored in their time and are largely forgotten now,get the respect and praise that history has denied them?

For someone who can't devote as much time or money (average income,young family) into pursuing their love of this sport,this site is a godsend,and posters/writers like yourself who keep producing work of this quality make it what it is.

Fantastic and I can't wait to read who comes in at 9.:thumbsup

[bodhi]

Burley was a surprise for me too. You'd never believe who he bumped into #11.

I'm not looking for pats on the back, to be honest. I'm just a bum from the neighborhood trying to put the spotlight on a legion of long-dead fighters who should not be forgotten by anyone, not just fight fans. By my calculations, these 10 belong where they are. So this ain't about me and I really hope that I'm not coming off like a dink. That being said, I hope that this series gets read... alot, because it is a rebuke to so many top tens that are, I find, not only common, but lazy.

It's gonna cause some hell, I hope, but much of its principles are held on ESB by more than just me. Hell, some of you who I've been going round-and-round with for years will see old arguments laced in these articles. Some of you may even see where you freakin' changed my mind.

Anyway, it's about damn time that this little oasis of ours got some damn press.

I hope when the Top10 are done you give us the next 10, if not as an article than at least the names and the figures :good

Great read and very interesting, I'm excited who comes out at 9. Rarely saw Burley in a Top10 before. Anymore similar surprises?

[sweet_scientist]

Burley was a surprise for me too. You'd never believe who he bumped into #11.

Don't tell me it's Benny!

[thesham01]

Burley was a surprise for me too. You'd never believe who he bumped into #11.

i'm not sure who you even talk about as top ten material normally, or of how highly (and lowly) you rate certain fighters, so guessing would be pointless; you wanna give a hint? or even tell us????

thought not..... :lol:

[Stonehands89]

Don't tell me it's Benny!
THAT would be a travesty. I should be more specific. The fighter who was bumped to #11 is someone who most boxing aficionados idolize. I may even be forced to defend the whole list in another article once it comes to light who it is. The Observer, Dundee, and Manny Steward will have a connipton fit once they see what is what on this end.

[Stonehands89]

Some of the poster's on here are harsher and tougher than Lou Stillman ever was and this forum is all the better for it.

Where else do legends like Burley,Holman Williams,Lloyd Marshall and Cocoa Kid,who were ignored in their time and are largely forgotten now,get the respect and praise that history has denied them?

For someone who can't devote as much time or money (average income,young family) into pursuing their love of this sport,this site is a godsend,and posters/writers like yourself who keep producing work of this quality make it what it is.

Fantastic and I can't wait to read who comes in at 9.:thumbsup
Well said about Stillman. We should rename the joint East Stillman Boxing. I appreciate it when posters call each other on bad argument or faulty facts. They're controlling quality. Out here, respect is earned.

[GPater11093]

THAT would be a travesty. I should be more specific. The fighter who was bumped to #11 is someone who most boxing aficionados idolize. I may even be forced to defend the whole list in another article once it comes to light who it is. The Observer, Dundee, and Manny Steward will have a connipton fit once they see what is what on this end.

After you have realesed the top 10 are you going to publish the rest of your ratings?

[Stonehands89]

The Ninth God of War ... see for yourself.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[bodhi]

The Ninth God of War ... see for yourself.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Hm, can't find it, can you give us the direct link please. :thumbsup

[Caponecartels]

Hm, can't find it, can you give us the direct link please. :thumbsup

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

There you go.

[GPater11093]

smashing read again really loved that as pep is one of my favrouites

absouloute class especially the Stillman stuff

[brando18b4h]

Great article i cannot wait for the next.

[john garfield]

If you devour everything on boxing, gotta read THE GODS OF WAR...It's a banquet.

[GPater11093]

If you devour everything on boxing, gotta read THE GODS OF WAR...It's a banquet.

Its a three course meal at the Ritz

[thesham01]

real warm storytelling

[Beau Geste]

The Tenth God of War has been announced...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

This is a great read. How do I access the other articles in the series?

[PetethePrince]

Nice choose for #9. I just hope that Ali makes the cut. To me, it's a disadvantage of being a HW when being viewed against the rest of the divisions. Heavyweights are big guys that take big damaging punches. They can't sustain a longer career. That might have them lose in longevity or experience in terms of a criteria. But at the same time, a long reign or title defense in a HW division should mean a lot more. And a resume like Ali's sparkles, regardless if he only had 60 or so fights rather than 100+ fights.

[john garfield]

bump

[Stonehands89]

This is a great read. How do I access the other articles in the series?
Go to the main page of the site. On the right you'll see a column that says "The Team." Click on "Springs Toledo."

[McGrain]

I'd like to see #8 now please. Yes, i'm ready for it.

[Beau Geste]

Go to the main page of the site. On the right you'll see a column that says "The Team." Click on "Springs Toledo."

Thanks. The Willie Pep story is outstanding. How about Carlos Monzon?

[Stonehands89]

Thanks. The Willie Pep story is outstanding. How about Carlos Monzon?
How about Carlos in the "p4p sense"? Are you asking if he is among the Gods of War?

[Shake]

I never knew just how great Burley was until I read that.

[Beau Geste]

How about Carlos in the "p4p sense"? Are you asking if he is among the Gods of War?

Yes.

[Stonehands89]

Yes.
What was that Max Schmeling said when asked what weakness he saw in Joe Louis...? I von't zay.

You'll have to check back and see... another eight times.

[McGrain]

01 -
02 -
03 -
04 -
05 -
06 -
07 -
08 -
09 - Willie Pep
10 - Charley Burley

Pep a nice stabaliser after the surprise choice at #10.

[Stonehands89]

01 -
02 -
03 -
04 -
05 -
06 -
07 -
08 -
09 - Willie Pep
10 - Charley Burley

Pep a nice stabaliser after the surprise choice at #10.
He was a surprise of sorts though. I've always had him way up in the top 4 or 5.

[McGrain]

He was a surprise of sorts though. I've always had him way up in the top 4 or 5.


I've had him between 6 and 9. But what I mean to say is, if your #9 had been, say, Tunney, we'd all be scratching our heads a little bit, wandering where we were going to end up. Nice to have a name we can almost all agree upon.

[Stonehands89]

I've had him between 6 and 9. But what I mean to say is, if your #9 had been, say, Tunney, we'd all be scratching our heads a little bit, wandering where we were going to end up. Nice to have a name we can almost all agree upon.
I can almost promise you that at least two posters out here will like the way the list ended up -namely you and Manassa.

After the calculations were all done and the dust settled, there were about four surprises for me. Not shocks, but surprises.

[McGrain]

Barney Ross is high, high.

[PetethePrince]

What was that Max Schmeling said when asked what weakness he saw in Joe Louis...? I von't zay.

You'll have to check back and see... another eight times.

:lol:

[Sweet Pea]

Bump. We're ready for #8 Stoney.

[GPater11093]

i agree, bring on 8

[Stonehands89]

I'm doing some last minute edits right now and will be sending it on in tonight. I imagine it will be up tomorrow. Will let you know.

[GPater11093]

nice one SH cant wait

[McGrain]

Any guesses as to who it will be? Based upon what we know? I think it will be...Walker.

[GPater11093]

good shout McGrain i say Benny Leonard

[McGrain]

Sounds to me like Leonard is going to be higher.

[GPater11093]

you never know, would be great to see Leonard high up

[bodhi]

I think Ali or Duran don't make the Top10 and are edged by Burley for the 10th spot. My guess for 7: Barney Ross.

[Flea Man]

Duran would be in my top ten.

I think the next will be Barney Ross, and I see Armstrong getting the top spot, Greb 2nd, Robinson 3rd.

Just a feeing.

[GPater11093]

Just to let you know been reading some of Stoney's other work and its all class

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Bokaj]

C'mon Stoney, make with nr. 8. And I means, like now!

(It has truly been brilliant reads so far. If you do this right you might just replace Garfield as ESB's nr. 1 p4p.)

[Stonehands89]

C'mon Stoney, make with nr. 8. And I means, like now!

(It has truly been brilliant reads so far. If you do this right you might just replace Garfield as ESB's nr. 1 p4p.)
It should be up tomorrow. Fact-checking is a pain in the blank and I'm paranoid about making a stupid mistake.

Me top Garfield? Not in this lifetime. I bought his jock strap for a bunch of money, had it bronzed, and it sits in glass in the middle of my living room.

[GPater11093]

It should be up tomorrow. Fact-checking is a pain in the blank and I'm paranoid about making a stupid mistake.

Me top Garfield? Not in this lifetime. I bought his jock strap for a bunch of money, had it bronzed, and it sits in glass in the middle of my living room.

Im up for it Stoney, i thought it was up now when i seen you had posted but you crushed my spirits.

If its any consolation you and JG are 2 posters who i really pay attention too.

[Clinton]

WOW!Thanks a million,Stonehands.Just another reason why the Classic is superior to the General.

[john garfield]

it should be up tomorrow. Fact-checking is a pain in the blank and i'm paranoid about making a stupid mistake.

Me top garfield? Not in this lifetime. i bought his jock strap for a bunch of money, had it bronzed, and it sits in glass in the middle of my living room.

you could at least have waited till i took it off, s

[GPater11093]

you could at least have waited till i took it off, s

:rofl:rofl

[Bokaj]

you could at least have waited till i took it off, s

:lol::good

[Lunny]

WOW!Thanks a million,Stonehands.Just another reason why the Classic is superior to the General.
I hear that. I go to general to see people talking shit, see what the general mood is at the moment, maybe argue and get up to date news. I come on Classic to be educated. The people here are basically encyclopedias of the sport.

[Stonehands89]

The Eighth God of War, a man who took his last breath in a boxing ring at the age of 51, has made his appearance.

[john garfield]

The Eighth God of War, a man who took his last breath in a boxing ring at the age of 51, has made his appearance.

An ATG piece, S. BRAVO!!

[Sweet Pea]

Wow. You've got your work cut out for yourself with the other 7 articles Stoney, because I can't see that one getting topped. Maybe the best write-up I've ever seen from one of our members. Great choice as well, I hold Benny in similar esteem, though I doubt I've half the knowledge of the man that you do.

[McGrain]

Most excellent. I'm going to guess that Barney Ross doesn't make it in now. I really thought you had Leonard a little higher maybe...was perhaps even expecting things to be controversial. 8 is a fine spot for him.

[john garfield]

If boxing history's your passion, beat a path to this piece, and raise a glass to Springs Toledo.

[GPater11093]

looks like my guess was right

[GPater11093]

the best one yet as good an article as Leonard was a boxer. superb

[Robbi]

Stonehands89. One of the greatest of all-time.

[Shake]

Yeah, that article blew away even the first two. You had me out of it for a moment -- I was in that ring for just a little while.

[smitty_son408]

Incredible...

[prime]

Thanks! Two essentials for great boxing writing stand out here: the history around the events and inside knowledge of the Sweet Science, province only of those who have actually invested blood, sweat and tears on the path made by the Gods of War.

[Stonehands89]

Yeah, that article blew away even the first two. You had me out of it for a moment -- I was in that ring for just a little while.
Well, that's the best any boxing writer could hope for and I thank you for saying so.

[Stonehands89]

Thanks! Two essentials for great boxing writing stand out here: the history around the events and inside knowledge of the Sweet Science, province only of those who have actually invested blood, sweat and tears on the path made by the Gods of War.
I'm happy to see that this bent shoe of a nose I sport wasn't for nought. I never made it to the big-time, but if ESB Classic approves of something else these hands do now, then yes-the-hell-I did.

Even the post-nasal drip doesn't taste so bad.

...But fellas.... Benny's article only got two lousy comments on the site thus far. Show him (and me) some love. The editors read every comment submitted and I'm trying to get a blasted RAISE...!

[Axl_Nose]

Thanks! Two essentials for great boxing writing stand out here: the history around the events and inside knowledge of the Sweet Science, province only of those who have actually invested blood, sweat and tears on the path made by the Gods of War.

Also 'original opinions' count for a huge amount in boxing writing .. The amount of times i've read an article which the writer quotes endlessly, Futch, Arcel, or Schulberg is ridiculous ..

I enjoy reading the 'original' opinion of a boxing writer, not some re-hashed quote that ive read before, which happens alot on ESB Classic Forum ..

[PetethePrince]

A thousand thumbs up! I'm learning so much from these pieces.

[Rise Above]

Loving your work Stonehands. :good

[brando18b4h]

Another excellent article. I once read that Benny was so good he would internally time the round so that right before the bell rang signaling the end of the round he would maneuver the fight towards his corner so he could sit down while his opponent had to walk across the ring.

[john garfield]

bump

[McGrain]

01 -
02 -
03 -
04 -
05 -
06 -
07 -
08 - Benny Leonard
09 - Willie Pep
10 - Charley Burley



Who nex'?

[GPater11093]

Muhammed Ali?

[McGrain]

I don't think Ali will make the ten, personally. I'm going to guess Mickey Walker again, then forgedaboud him. But you were right last time!

[GPater11093]

Walker is a good shout.

Just think Ali scores highly in afew of the categories and he did say there was some surprises

[john garfield]

bump

[bodhi]

Who is number seven? Walker? Duran? Ali? Moore?

[GPater11093]

come on Stoney need a new one

[Stonehands89]

It's coming soon. I'm going to the gym after work, then supper, then final edits, then it goes in. Hopefully it will be up tomorrow or Wed.

[Flea Man]

Have I missed the Leonard one then? Is he at 8?

I think Duran will be at no.6

[john garfield]

It's coming soon. I'm going to the gym after work, then supper, then final edits, then it goes in. Hopefully it will be up tomorrow or Wed.

You have more fans on the edge of their seats, S, than waited for Robinson at the Garden.

[GPater11093]

i canna wait

[bodhi]

You have more fans on the edge of their seats, S, than waited for Robinson at the Garden.

Definitly! Every single one is better than the one before, so I have very high expectations for the next one :deal

[GPater11093]

just so you guys know,

SH has the most amazing Arguello article i have read, a must read

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Lunny]

just so you guys know,

SH has the most amazing Arguello article i have read, a must read

[Only registered and activated users can see links]
Great read.

[Caponecartels]

where you at stone [Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Stonehands89]

where you at stone [Only registered and activated users can see links]
Right here.

[Caponecartels]

Right here.

:lol:

[Caponecartels]

just so you guys know,

SH has the most amazing Arguello article i have read, a must read

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Just finished reading it.

Fucking great. [Only registered and activated users can see links]

[brando18b4h]

I hope you turn all this into a book with photos, you are one hell of a writer.
Thank you.

[Stonehands89]

I hope you turn all this into a book with photos, you are one hell of a writer.
Thank you.
Thanks Brando, but these 10 guys' are the engine behind any good writing. Their stories are rich with material.

A book? That's the plan. The working title is "The Gods of War: Counting Down the Greatest Boxers of the Modern Era."

The cover will be the photograph used in the last article of the series entitled "The God of War." I got permission to use it and it's a damn good one.

Also, although I have to credit "The Sweet Science .com" for publishing these, I also plan to credit to ESB Classic for the many, many hours I've spent out here learning, formulating theories, argument, and being challenged by unsung historians and analysts out here.

I think it will the book will be either a good companion piece to Bert Sugar's "Top 100" and Bill Gray's books ...or a rebuke.

[GPater11093]

well stoney i would definitly buy it, will it have more than the articles you have already written?

[Flea Man]

As would I. The articles have been top notch so far and more authentic than Sugars romanticised hyperbole.

[GPater11093]

Stonehands i mean thi 100% you are the best boxing writer i have ever read artcles from.

[Stonehands89]

well stoney i would definitly buy it, will it have more than the articles you have already written?

As would I. The articles have been top notch so far and more authentic than Sugars romanticised hyperbole.
Well, the Gods of War will probably have the introduction article, then the 10, and will also have an epilogue type one to bring it all together. I probably won't publish that one on the site. I'd also probably include "The Fourth Crown," "The Final Bell," "Shadow Boxing at the Golden Gate" (unpublished -about Eddie Booker. GPater has read it) and finish off with a look to the future with "Deconstructing Manny"...

I don't really know yet. Lots can change. I could get run over by a bus and die tomorrow.

[GPater11093]

Well, the Gods of War will probably have the introduction article, then the 10, and will also have an epilogue type one to bring it all together. I probably won't publish that one on the site. I'd also probably include "The Fourth Crown," "The Final Bell," "Shadow Boxing at the Golden Gate" (unpublished -about Eddie Booker. GPater has read it) and finish off with a look to the future with "Deconstructing Manny"...

I don't really know yet. Lots can change. I could get run over by a bus and die tomorrow.

Wiuld be a class book.

That Eddie Booker article is the best i have ever read about boxing.

I like your cheery thinking

[Stonehands89]

Stonehands i mean thi 100% you are the best boxing writer i have ever read artcles from.
Cut it out. I'm just a bum from the neighborhood shining a light on guys who deserve it. Read this by Liebling (the best boxing writer who ever lived bar none) and you'll forget my name:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[GPater11093]

Cut it out. I'm just a bum from the neighborhood shining a light on guys who deserve it. Read this by Liebling (the best boxing writer who ever lived bar none) and you'll forget my name:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Your up there. Liebling is another favrouie of mine aswell

[GPater11093]

That article was brilliant love his dry wit in it aswell as his description of Moore

[Stonehands89]

The Seventh God of War has made his way out of the literary dressing room. It's about DAMN time he got his due in the boxing world, too.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[McGrain]

Super stuff. I also had Walker at #7 for a stretch.

[Stonehands89]

Super stuff. I also had Walker at #7 for a stretch.
I underestimated him for years. That disputed draw he had with Sharkey is hard to beat in terms of great and unexpected performances and in real terms, that should have been a victory.

[GPater11093]

Nice one Sh cant read it right now but will as soon as i get time

[McGrain]

I underestimated him for years. That disputed draw he had with Sharkey is hard to beat in terms of great and unexpected performances and in real terms, that should have been a victory.

Something to think about alright.

I also love his losing effort v Schmeling. At one point he gets ditched, and gets up and runs at Max Schmeling. Probably the most comic-book like fighter we have on film until Ali rolled up.

I have Walker at #11 these days.

[Stonehands89]

Something to think about alright.

I also love his losing effort v Schmeling. At one point he gets ditched, and gets up and runs at Max Schmeling. Probably the most comic-book like fighter we have on film until Ali rolled up.

I have Walker at #11 these days.
Mickey was ten times the character that even Ali was. Ali was a performer. Mickey was the real thing -he's got more off the hook stories that no one even knows about than anyone this side of Lew Jenkins, who was a total nut.

Yeah, Schmeling. Mickey was 158 lbs a week before the scheduled bout. Then Doc Kearns suggested he go relax because of the risk of peaking too early. So, both manager and fighter go and play golf course ...with a basket of champagne. Both get lit. After Mickey finds it hard to hit two golfballs, another contest breaks out. "Let's see who can clear that fence" a warbling Kearns suggests. Kearns makes it. Mickey jumps head first to belly roll and opens a cut on his forehead. The fight is postponed two weeks.

Long story short, Mickey comes into the ring to fight Schmeling at 174, with a spare tire on his middle.

Blarney? Possibly, but Mickey wasn't one to make excuses.

[Stonehands89]

"Drinking," Mickey said

"...was an excuse for acting up. The booze stimulated me and made me bubbly and gay. Under the influence of liquor, I'd think nothing of doing crazy things I wouldn't dream of doing when sober. Such as getting out to the center of the dance floor at Texas Guinan's and doing the Charleston, or climbing up on the stage to act as master of cermonies at a night club, or reciting poetry to an unappreciative whore in Polly's joint, or riding a horse on a busy highway in New Jersey..."

?!

[McGrain]

Mickey was ten times the character that even Ali was. Ali was a performer. Mickey was the real thing -he's got more off the hook stories that no one even knows about than anyone this side of Lew Jenkins, who was a total nut.

Perhaps you are right. I wasn't really talking about character though, more the way they fought. I mean why would you run at a huge puncher fighting two weight-classes above your best when he's just knocked you down? It's like something out of a comic book.

Ali, too, seemed like Superman sometimes.

[Stonehands89]

Perhaps you are right. I wasn't really talking about character though, more the way they fought. I mean why would you run at a huge puncher fighting two weight-classes above your best when he's just knocked you down? It's like something out of a comic book.

Ali, too, seemed like Superman sometimes.
I have that comic book somewhere and I think he even whipped Superman.

My personal favorire Ali quote occured in the dressing room after he KOd Foreman.

"ATTENTION! ALL YOU SUCKERS AT RING MAGAZINE WHO THOUGHT I'D GET WHUPPED. YOU BETTER NOT BET AGAINST ME TIL I'M ABOUT FIFTY YEARS OLD....

"I THINK IT'D BE BEFITTING IF I WENT OUT OF BOXING THE SAME WAY I CAME IN--- BEATING A BIG, BAD UGLY MONSTER THAN NO ONE COULD BEAT..."

[McGrain]

I like what he supposedly said to Foreman before the fight:

"You've looked up to me your whole life. You followed me as a child. Now I'll show you what it means to be a champion."

[Stonehands89]

I like what he supposedly said to Foreman before the fight:

"You've looked up to me your whole life. You followed me as a child. Now I'll show you what it means to be a champion."
Yeah, i always liked that. It's poignant bravado --rare indeed.

How 'bout Frazier's claim that Ali was punching on him in '71 and saying "DON'T..YOU.. KNOW... I'M... GOD."

To which Frazier responded "Well, god, you're gonna get whipped TONIGHT!"

[McGrain]

Yeah, I absolutley love that. But I have, "God, you in the wrong place tonight." I think that's amongst my very favourites actually. I love Ali these days, and I love his words, but I do feel a grim satisfaction when someone shuts down his bluster, be it Louis, Frazier or Herny Cooper tracking down Ali's single chest hair and exclaiming, "Look, he is a man!"

[punk]

Great stuff!!

[Flea Man]

Just......sublime.

[GPater11093]

Im running out of superlatives for this

[Stonehands89]

Faces with names....

Elmer "Violent" Ray from the Burley article[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Chalky Wright from the Pep article [Only registered and activated users can see links]

and of course, Sandy Saddler[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[GPater11093]

Ray looked one mean guy

[Stonehands89]

From the Benny Leonard article...

Charley White [Only registered and activated users can see links]


Rocky Kansas (IBHOF, 2010) [Only registered and activated users can see links]

And of course, southpaw Lew Tendler [Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Stonehands89]

From Mickey Walker's article.

Introducing, the Nebraska Wildcat himself... Ace Hudkins.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

This is Bearcat Wright...
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Stonehands89]

Great pictures from Antiquities of the Prize Ring from before, during, and after the Walker-Sharkey "heavyweight" bout...

[Only registered and activated users can see links] -notice Walker is wearing shoes. He insisted on it because he was mortified about how high Sharkey towered over him.

[Only registered and activated users can see links] Keep in mind when looking at these pictures, that Mickey was not even 5'7, a natural MW, and Sharkey was the NUMBER ONE Heavyweight contender.

[Only registered and activated users can see links] Sharkey knew who was boss over those 15 rounds. And it wasn't him.

[Clinton]

The Seventh God of War has made his way out of the literary dressing room. It's about DAMN time he got his due in the boxing world, too.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]
Stonehands 89 is Number One.Thank you again,Stoney.

[Stonehands89]

Also from the Walker article: Paul Swiderski.


[Only registered and activated users can see links] that's the 6'3 HW that Walker fought while three sheets to the wind in Louisville, Kentucky.

[Maxmomer]

Who the fuck is that SALT-lover fag and what's his problem? What a jerk-off.

[Godfather]

Im loving this thread

[thesham01]

the only problem I have is the length we have to wait for each installment......:)

[Stonehands89]

I hear you, sham man. The Sixth God of War is warming up.

[GPater11093]

looking forward to it, any guesses?

[Flea Man]

Duran at 6, Langford at 5, Charles at 4, Ray Robinson at 3, Harry Greb at 2 and Henry Armstrong at 1.

I dunno why I just feel this is how it may pan out. Duran MUST make thetop ten, surely?

[Stonehands89]

Duran at 6, Langford at 5, Charles at 4, Ray Robinson at 3, Harry Greb at 2 and Henry Armstrong at 1.

I dunno why I just feel this is how it may pan out. Duran MUST make thetop ten, surely?
Only fighters who reached their peak after 1920 are considered, for reasons given in "The Gods of War: Series Intro".

Duran was a Manson wanna-be, and a BUM.

[Flea Man]

My bad:good

I'm pretty wrecked don't get the Duran reference at all, though seeing as you're an awesome writer I doubt you believe Duran is a bum :lol: the only Manson I can think of is Charles Manson. Not a lot of people know what a good songwriter Manson was. Still dint get how you're comparing Duran to him, who was neither an acoustic troubador nor someone who incited murder.

[bodhi]

My bad:good

I'm pretty wrecked don't get the Duran reference at all, though seeing as you're an awesome writer I doubt you believe Duran is a bum :lol: the only Manson I can think of is Charles Manson. Not a lot of people know what a good songwriter Manson was. Still dint get how you're comparing Duran to him, who was neither an acoustic troubador nor someone who incited murder.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

:good

[Stonehands89]

My bad:good

I'm pretty wrecked don't get the Duran reference at all, though seeing as you're an awesome writer I doubt you believe Duran is a bum :lol: the only Manson I can think of is Charles Manson. Not a lot of people know what a good songwriter Manson was. Still dint get how you're comparing Duran to him, who was neither an acoustic troubador nor someone who incited murder.
I'm Stonehands. I love Duran. But I was as objective as I could possibly be when calculating placements.

Here's the reason for the comparison:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Stonehands89]

Ha! Bodhi beat me.

[Sweet Pea]

Seeing as Langford's not going to be considered, the final 6 must comprise of Robinson, Greb, Armstrong, Charles, Duran, and Ali. Maybe in that order?:think

[bodhi]

Seeing as Langford's not going to be considered, the final 6 must comprise of Robinson, Greb, Armstrong, Charles, Duran, and Ali. Maybe in that order?:think

Hm, Stonehands wrote earlier that Burley edged someone who is an idol for many on here, so I guess he meant either Ali or Duran.

[GPater11093]

i think Barney Ross might be high

[bodhi]

i think Barney Ross might be high

I'm very fond of him and thought he may be in the 7-9th range but as high as 6th? But then we had already a big surprise with Burley, so it very well might be. Would be great to see him geting his due :good

[Flea Man]

Worst lookalike since someone said Raging Bull looked like Peter Sutcliffe :lol:

in all seriousness, am on tenterhooks for the next article :good

[VX.Nefarious]

when is the sixth coming? and can you name the 20-10 before you get to the top 5?

[Stonehands89]

The Sixth has just been sent to the editor. I'm hoping it will be up tonight, but it's more likely to be up tomorrow.

Post 20-10? Nah. Not yet anyway.

[Nemesis]

Robbie will be top...

[VX.Nefarious]

Robbie will be top...

nah, i think pacquiao will be top... :deal

[VX.Nefarious]

...30

[dpw417]

The old Mongoose will be in there somewhere...I'll guess Moore, Charles, Duran, Robinson,Armstrong and Greb. This is just a tremendous effort...Each is a masterpiece for the fight fan. Stonehands...we salute you.

[Stonehands89]

The old Mongoose will be in there somewhere...I'll guess Moore, Charles, Duran, Robinson,Armstrong and Greb. This is just a tremendous effort...Each is a masterpiece for the fight fan. Stonehands...we salute you.
Stay tuned, dpw. You'll be saluted later.

[bodhi]

The Sixth has just been sent to the editor. I'm hoping it will be up tonight, but it's more likely to be up tomorrow.

Post 20-10? Nah. Not yet anyway.

But I hope it will. Even when it´s just the names :good

[Stonehands89]

The Sixth God of War.

A well-loved icon at ESB Classic.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Flea Man]

Can't see Duran making it now.

StoneHands your prose is awesome mate :good

[Stonehands89]

Forget the prose man! It's about the placement! The placement! Archie Moore is the sixth greatest fighter who ever lived.

It's high time to shake up the boxing establishment's stale and questionable ideas of what greatness is.

[john garfield]

You should be on TOP CHEF, S, serving-up a feast like MOORE.

[ricardoparker93]

Forget the prose man! It's about the placement! The placement! Archie Moore is the sixth greatest fighter who ever lived.

It's high time to shake up the boxing establishment's stale and questionable ideas of what greatness is.


Stonehands another great piece but don't you feel you are romantasising these fighters. Moore was a great fighter but he lost three times to Ezzard Charles; now maybe Charles will be above him in that list but the points based system that you are using favours old timers who had extremely long careers and fought everybody.

Modern fighters ( I'd say post 60's ) have their resumes broken down and their losses analysed whereas a guy like Archie Moore could get away with it because of what he achieved. Should a fighter gain so much kudos for longevity when he was a better fighter at 35 than he was at 25? It took Moore many years and countless bouts to gain the experience that allowed him to succeed at that advanced age. You could also claim that the fighters he faced earlier in his career were superior to the Joey Maxims of this world; a very good fighter but not in the class of Charles, Burley and Jimmy Bivins.

It was a great read but I think the majority of posters will feel that Moore is ranked too high on this occasion.

[PetethePrince]

Stonehands another great piece but don't you feel you are romantasising these fighters. Moore was a great fighter but he lost three times to Ezzard Charles; now maybe Charles will be above him in that list but the points based system that you are using favours old timers who had extremely long careers and fought everybody.

Modern fighters ( I'd say post 60's ) have their resumes broken down and their losses analysed whereas a guy like Archie Moore could get away with it because of what he achieved. Should a fighter gain so much kudos for longevity when he was a better fighter at 35 than he was at 25? It took Moore many years and countless bouts to gain the experience that allowed him to succeed at that advanced age. You could also claim that the fighters he faced earlier in his career were superior to the Joey Maxims of this world; a very good fighter but not in the class of Charles, Burley and Jimmy Bivins.

It was a great read but I think the majority of posters will feel that Moore is ranked too high on this occasion.

:good

Looks like Ali won't make the list, nor will Joe Louis. I'm fine with a Louis exclusion. But no HW making the list? Bothers me... says a lot about your point and the fact that it favors the little guys who can fight more often and not get damaged as much. Big guys and big punches don't make a lot of fights or a long career.

[Sweet Pea]

Stonehands another great piece but don't you feel you are romantasising these fighters. Moore was a great fighter but he lost three times to Ezzard Charles; now maybe Charles will be above him in that list but the points based system that you are using favours old timers who had extremely long careers and fought everybody.

Modern fighters ( I'd say post 60's ) have their resumes broken down and their losses analysed whereas a guy like Archie Moore could get away with it because of what he achieved. Should a fighter gain so much kudos for longevity when he was a better fighter at 35 than he was at 25? It took Moore many years and countless bouts to gain the experience that allowed him to succeed at that advanced age. You could also claim that the fighters he faced earlier in his career were superior to the Joey Maxims of this world; a very good fighter but not in the class of Charles, Burley and Jimmy Bivins.

It was a great read but I think the majority of posters will feel that Moore is ranked too high on this occasion.I can't say I disagree, but I wasn't expecting to have the same general rankings as Stoney, at all. I'm just enjoying the case he makes for his fighters and the delicacy with which he writes his articles.

A quick point though, one of the main reasons the old timers can get away with a head scratching loss here and there is because of the amount of times they fought, and the circumstances in which they fought them. Often during non-title and/or exhibition type bouts against lower opposition it's a lot more understandable that they wouldn't have been at their very best for every fight.

Today's top fighters have their fights scheduled months in advance, primed for pay-per-view showings, even in simple showcase bouts. This gives them all the time, incentive and motivation needed to get in shape and show their stuff.

Guys like Moore and and a lot of those guys fighters didn't have it the same way. They were fighting every week or every other week, with little time to analyze and train for their opponents. They were constantly in shape due to all the fights they fought, but not always in the same frame of mind.

It's understandable even at their best how they could've lost multiple outings to member of the Murderer's Row, for instance. But the fact that they had to face each other so often, with numerous bouts in between, could really take a toll.

[Sweet Pea]

I gotta say I think Ali should've definitely made it, though. Stonehands is using a points based system for his rankings, by the way. It isn't all bias or romanticism.

[bodhi]

Stonehands another great piece but don't you feel you are romantasising these fighters. Moore was a great fighter but he lost three times to Ezzard Charles; now maybe Charles will be above him in that list but the points based system that you are using favours old timers who had extremely long careers and fought everybody.

Modern fighters ( I'd say post 60's ) have their resumes broken down and their losses analysed whereas a guy like Archie Moore could get away with it because of what he achieved. Should a fighter gain so much kudos for longevity when he was a better fighter at 35 than he was at 25? It took Moore many years and countless bouts to gain the experience that allowed him to succeed at that advanced age. You could also claim that the fighters he faced earlier in his career were superior to the Joey Maxims of this world; a very good fighter but not in the class of Charles, Burley and Jimmy Bivins.

It was a great read but I think the majority of posters will feel that Moore is ranked too high on this occasion.

Isnt't that how it should be?

[bodhi]

:good

Looks like Ali won't make the list, nor will Joe Louis. I'm fine with a Louis exclusion. But no HW making the list? Bothers me... says a lot about your point and the fact that it favors the little guys who can fight more often and not get damaged as much. Big guys and big punches don't make a lot of fights or a long career.

Hw overall is the least talented division historywise - aside from minimumweight perhaps. Ali wouldn't make my list either.

[Sweet Pea]

Hw overall is the least talented division historywise - aside from minimumweight perhaps. Ali wouldn't make my list either.

105, 108, 115, 122, 154, 168, and Crusierweight are all lesser divisions historically, IMO. Some of them easily so. The Heavyweights actually have a pretty rich history, they've just been down in the dumps for a while now.

[ricardoparker93]

Isnt't that how it should be?

I think Pete made a very good point that heavyweights dont have as many fights as lower weight fighters do due to the time it takes them to recover from a fight. All i'm saying is that the high number of marks given to 'experience' means that as long as you stick around and do what every other fighter did in that era did 'fight the best' then you will get very high marks whereas fighters who have more condensed careers but still have great resumes will score lower.

I also disagree with your claim that heavyweights is the least talented division. How are 200 pound guys supposed to show the same skills as a welterweight?

Nevertheless i dont really care who gets ranked where because of the superb quality of the articles. They are told with great insight and knowledge and attaching the rankings are almost a sideshow IMO, each story is like a condensed biography of the era and the fighter.

[ricardoparker93]

I gotta say I think Ali should've definitely made it, though. Stonehands is using a points based system for his rankings, by the way. It isn't all bias or romanticism.

Ali deserves to be there. His achievements were unrivalled in heavyweight history IMO and he truly transcended the sport; I would be interested to see what points were attached to him as well.

You never know he may still make the list...

[bodhi]

105, 108, 115, 122, 154, 168, and Crusierweight are all lesser divisions historically, IMO. Some of them easily so. The Heavyweights actually have a pretty rich history, they've just been down in the dumps for a while now.

True but 105/108 are no wonder. How many small guys are there. 154 albeit not knew was always just a "passing through" division. And 168 is a pretty new one - you could add 200 too btw.

The hws have a pretty rich history. But just not up there with 135 to 175 qualitywise. Aside from very special fighters like Pep or Ali, the greatest fighters will come out of those.

[Sweet Pea]

you could add 200 too btw.That would be Cruiserweight.:good

The hws have a pretty rich history. But just not up there with 135 to 175 qualitywise. Aside from very special fighters like Pep or Ali, the greatest fighters will come out of those.I agree with that. Of the original 8 weight classes the Heavyweights are arguably the weakest historically, but they clearly beat out the in-betweener weights for the most part.

[PetethePrince]

Hw overall is the least talented division historywise - aside from minimumweight perhaps. Ali wouldn't make my list either.

Eh, I beg to differ. And why would anyone rate exclusive on talent. The fact that Heavyweights generally don't fight 100+ times... even the old timers says a lot about how they have a worse chance of making such lists under certain criterias. Dare I say, their wins and performances should be given more credit. With bigger guys you get bigger punchers. Let's face it, there's more for a freak punch or bad luck to lose. In the smaller divisions, it happens less generally. But one punch should can change a fight just like that. In the Heavyweight division, we should appreciate that more. Especially the defense and victories you make. At least in my opinion...

[PetethePrince]

I think Pete made a very good point that heavyweights dont have as many fights as lower weight fighters do due to the time it takes them to recover from a fight. All i'm saying is that the high number of marks given to 'experience' means that as long as you stick around and do what every other fighter did in that era did 'fight the best' then you will get very high marks whereas fighters who have more condensed careers but still have great resumes will score lower.

I also disagree with your claim that heavyweights is the least talented division. How are 200 pound guys supposed to show the same skills as a welterweight?

Nevertheless i dont really care who gets ranked where because of the superb quality of the articles. They are told with great insight and knowledge and attaching the rankings are almost a sideshow IMO, each story is like a condensed biography of the era and the fighter.

Well said.

We're just talking here. The articles are wonderful. We can dissect/argue about the placement/criteria on and on I suppose. It makes for a good discussion, anyway.

[PetethePrince]

That would be Cruiserweight.:good

I agree with that. Of the original 8 weight classes the Heavyweights are arguably the weakest historically, but they clearly beat out the in-betweener weights for the most part.

Which says a lot about how hard it is to a heavyweight. This is no coincidence. It's also hard to gauge the talent respectively when you get guys jumping weight classes all over. With the big boys, attaining and unifying in a long and good era is difficult. Maybe Joe Louis 14 year run and 25+ defenses is underrated. Maybe just getting a lot of great victories is harder for Heavyweights. So in retrospect, it looks weaker historically, but the division features much more intangibles and factors as to why it's so harder to keep fighting over a longer spanned career. The Heavyweight champion has always been seen as the "Baddest man in the planet." Or was... I don't see how it can be the weakest division in history, especially when considering that many ATG fighters make their marks all around rather than in just one weight class. I guess that's where the allusion comes in. It's just more divisions being by great fighters.

[McGrain]

I don't think the HW division is that weak either. You've got guys like Peter Jackson, Riddick Bowe and Vitali Klitschkoarguably outside of the top 20. I think it does take a bit of a nosedivve when you get past 35ish, and Pea does tend to measure deep with more depth if you'll pardon the pun, compared to most of the rest of us.

[bodhi]

That would be Cruiserweight.:good

I overlooked that, sorry.


I agree with that. Of the original 8 weight classes the Heavyweights are arguably the weakest historically, but they clearly beat out the in-betweener weights for the most part.

That what I meant actually :good


I don't think the HW division is that weak either. You've got guys like Peter Jackson, Riddick Bowe and Vitali Klitschkoarguably outside of the top 20. I think it does take a bit of a nosedivve when you get past 35ish, and Pea does tend to measure deep with more depth if you'll pardon the pun, compared to most of the rest of us.

I never said it´s weak either. Just weak compared ot lw, ww, mw ... got it?
Also if you compare the fighters within the Top20 of those divisions you will see the quality of the lower weightclasses is just higher. Nothing to be ashamed about. Most people on earth are more in the lw-mw/lhw area sizewise than in the hw area. So, there will be more quality fighter there. It´s natural.

[bodhi]

Eh, I beg to differ. And why would anyone rate exclusive on talent. The fact that Heavyweights generally don't fight 100+ times... even the old timers says a lot about how they have a worse chance of making such lists under certain criterias. Dare I say, their wins and performances should be given more credit. With bigger guys you get bigger punchers. Let's face it, there's more for a freak punch or bad luck to lose. In the smaller divisions, it happens less generally. But one punch should can change a fight just like that. In the Heavyweight division, we should appreciate that more. Especially the defense and victories you make. At least in my opinion...

So, you want more or less to penalize the people for fighting more often? Putting themselves in danger more often? Having longer careers and proved them more thoroughly?

The hws are the most recognized division in the world that´s enough of compensating for what you critizise I think. Look at the lists of the people who are boxing fans but not as deep into it as most here on the classic board. You will find Ali, Louis and probably Marciano in the top10.

Which says a lot about how hard it is to a heavyweight. This is no coincidence. It's also hard to gauge the talent respectively when you get guys jumping weight classes all over. With the big boys, attaining and unifying in a long and good era is difficult. Maybe Joe Louis 14 year run and 25+ defenses is underrated. Maybe just getting a lot of great victories is harder for Heavyweights. So in retrospect, it looks weaker historically, but the division features much more intangibles and factors as to why it's so harder to keep fighting over a longer spanned career. The Heavyweight champion has always been seen as the "Baddest man in the planet." Or was... I don't see how it can be the weakest division in history, especially when considering that many ATG fighters make their marks all around rather than in just one weight class. I guess that's where the allusion comes in. It's just more divisions being by great fighters.

Joe Louis run would be great in any division and any era.

And no I don´t they the hw division bad or has no talent. It´s just that the lower divisions produce slightly higher talent and especially more of it.

[bodhi]

So, there are five left. I think it´s a given that Robinson, Armstrong, Greb and Charles are among those and I´m looking forward on the articles on them. But who is number five? Duran? Ali? Ross?

[Stonehands89]

Faces from the Sixth.

[Only registered and activated users can see links] Booker.


Joey Maxim...[Only registered and activated users can see links]





Jimmy Bivins... [Only registered and activated users can see links] who turned 90 recently...

NOTE: A message from Cleveland boxing writer Jerry Fitch.

Anyone who would like to send a belated birthday card or just say hello to Jimmy Bivins, here is the information. He won't be able to sign autographs or respond but it would mean a lot to him to hear from people. He has his good moments and bad moments but he looks terrific....especially for 90 years old!
Jerry

Mr. Jimmy Bivins
C/O McGregor House,14900 Private Drive
Cleveland, Ohio 44112-3495
Room 2202

[bodhi]

When can we expect number five?

[Stonehands89]

When can we expect number five?
It's been submitted. The editor tells me tomorrow.

[McGrain]

You've made a rod for you own back with the quality of these previous...anything less than excellent will be considered a failure.

[Stonehands89]

You've made a rod for you own back with the quality of these previous...anything less than excellent will be considered a failure.
Gee thanks, buddy, nothing like trying to write with a gun to the head. Now you know why some much time goes by before I feel frickin SAFE enough to submit it.

[GPater11093]

read anther article about Archie Moore the other day

John Scully when he was a boy sent a letter to Archie Moore and Moore wrote back and throughout the years they kept in communication. Just shows Moore really was a man of the people.

[McGrain]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[PetethePrince]

So, you want more or less to penalize the people for fighting more often? Putting themselves in danger more often? Having longer careers and proved them more thoroughly?

The hws are the most recognized division in the world that´s enough of compensating for what you critizise I think. Look at the lists of the people who are boxing fans but not as deep into it as most here on the classic board. You will find Ali, Louis and probably Marciano in the top10.



Joe Louis run would be great in any division and any era.

And no I don´t they the hw division bad or has no talent. It´s just that the lower divisions produce slightly higher talent and especially more of it.

It's scary talking to you with that avatar.

My point is simple. Big guys with big punches can't have as long as careers. I don't want to punish smaller guys for having more extended careers with more fights, I just don't want to have to punish bigger fighters (Heavyweights) who have less fights and less extended careers. Because a Heavyweight just can't fight 100 times like a lightweight, and end up in the same shape afterwards.

And smaller guys fighting more is putting themselves in more danger. Because bigger guys = bigger punches. I don't know how to equate it but I don't see anyone of the last 30 years coming out worse than Ali did... unless they died in a fight or something. Wait, Jerry Quarry came out worse. I can't think of a lighter division, though, which is my point.

[GPater11093]

:rofl :rofl

They are class and I think worth waiting for, the waiting makes them all the better

[bodhi]

It's scary talking to you with that avatar.

Sam McVey was a scary man :lol:


My point is simple. Big guys with big punches can't have as long as careers. I don't want to punish smaller guys for having more extended careers with more fights, I just don't want to have to punish bigger fighters (Heavyweights) who have less fights and less extended careers. Because a Heavyweight just can't fight 100 times like a lightweight, and end up in the same shape afterwards.

And smaller guys fighting more is putting themselves in more danger. Because bigger guys = bigger punches. I don't know how to equate it but I don't see anyone of the last 30 years coming out worse than Ali did... unless they died in a fight or something. Wait, Jerry Quarry came out worse. I can't think of a lighter division, though, which is my point.

I see your point but when you look at how much recognition the hw dicision gets I don't see the need to be soft on them.

btw. what about McClellan in the lighter weights? Or Tommy Hearns? Did you hear him speak lately?

[Stonehands89]

McGrain is precious.

The thing is, these are all supposed to be done. I've been doing them for two months, but when I take a final look before submitting them, I end up spending another 20 hours re-checking the facts and making adjustments.

...and wait til you get a load of the next graphic.

[PetethePrince]

Sam McVey was a scary man :lol:



I see your point but when you look at how much recognition the hw dicision gets I don't see the need to be soft on them.

btw. what about McClellan in the lighter weights? Or Tommy Hearns? Did you hear him speak lately?

Yeah, non-Heavyweights can get damaged too. Hearns doesn't sound all that bad, especially if you compare his situation with someone like Jerry Quarry.

In your personal top 10 list. Does Ali make the cut? Just out of curiosity?

[bodhi]

Yeah, non-Heavyweights can get damaged too. Hearns doesn't sound all that bad, especially if you compare his situation with someone like Jerry Quarry.

In your personal top 10 list. Does Ali make the cut? Just out of curiosity?

Well, it´s constantly changing and I don´t have a list ranking but I rank them in tiers. Ali is in the same as Pep, Ross and Moore between 9 and 13 in a ranking list.

[Clinton]

GPater is correct on more than one account,Stoney.1.Please take your time.The wait is well worth it.2.We are running out of superlatives.If Ring Magazine doesn't swoop you up and pay you a ton,it's their-as well as our-loss.Fantastic work!!!:happy:happy

[Stonehands89]

Thanks Clinton.

The Fifth God of War is now snarling in the corner. Go check him out. [Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Flea Man]

:happy

you bluffed me big time, the list has been fantastic so far but this is one placing I wholeheartedly agree with. For the record I'd have Charles 4th, Greb 3rd, Armstrong 2nd and Robinson 1st, though in theory any arrangement of those 3 would not stir any argument from me.

Right, I'm gonna read it now, can't wait :good

[Duodenum]

The Fifth God of War is now snarling in the corner. Go check him out. [Only registered and activated users can see links]!

[Flea Man]

'...when both fighters were at teir best: Duran was better'

Anytime anyone brings up the Montreal Theory they should be forced to read your article, which efficiently dispells that side of the story.

My favourite article thus far was the Archie Moore one, but this is a fitting tribute, which in line with your other pieces so far, a cut above the usual 'and then he fought....sparked by Hearns....then he fought....even fought Joppy...' career summaries.

As you said before it's not about the prose it's about the placing, but seriously, outstanding writing pal.

[Maxmomer]

There are only four places left. Langford, Greb, Robinson, Armstrong and Charles should all be in a top 10 P4P list.

[Flea Man]

He's already stated why Langford isn't gonna be in it., there's a cut off point in terms of a fighters prime occuring before a certain date. If I'm not wrong, haven't read the opening introductory offer, nor can I be arsed to skim back a page or so to when StoneHands explains to me why :lol:

[Caponecartels]

I'd say the best one yet StoneHands. :smoke

[PetethePrince]

Duran at #5. That's one of the highest rankings I've ever seen of Roberto. Great article Stonehands!

[Clinton]

I'm speechless,my man.Absolutely speechless.Thanks a million,Stoney.

[bodhi]

:happy

you bluffed me big time, the list has been fantastic so far but this is one placing I wholeheartedly agree with. For the record I'd have Charles 4th, Greb 3rd, Armstrong 2nd and Robinson 1st, though in theory any arrangement of those 3 would not stir any argument from me.

Right, I'm gonna read it now, can't wait :good

I agree with you! Those four must be the ones left since Langford isn´t included due to Stonehand´s rules.

[bodhi]

Thanks Clinton.

The Fifth God of War is now snarling in the corner. Go check him out. [Only registered and activated users can see links]

Thanks! Reading this send a shiver down my spine. Keep up the good work :good

So, I guess Ali finished at 11?

[Flea Man]

Duran at #5. That's one of the highest rankings I've ever seen of Roberto. Great article Stonehands!

Really? Fair ranking IMO

[punk]

Another great read and great choice at number 5.

[GPater11093]

Stoney the website aint loading at all for me

oh no!

[Stonehands89]

Stoney the website aint loading at all for me

oh no!
Should be good now.

[ricardoparker93]

The best one yet stonehands. Duran was an animal the like of which we wont see again. Absolutely agree with your placing as well.

Superb

[McGrain]

For the run in -

4 - Langford
3 - Armstrong
2 - Robinson
1 - Greb