Who was P4P number one at the most advanced age.

[China_hand_Joe]

(only name genuine P4P number ones, who actually were the best fighter in the world)

Nobody bother mentioning Bernard Hopkins, he couldn't at any point in time be consisdered the best fighter in the world. Joe Calzaghe when he beat Lacy (days before he was 34) is probably the one that comes to mind over the last decade.

[heerko koois]

Archie moore maybe....

[China_hand_Joe]

Archie moore maybe....Up until what point in time (what age?), many people considered high P4P are done so on past achievement (Winky Wright at the moment perhaps.)

[fists of fury]

You mean this isn't a Calzhage thread? I'm impressed.

[China_hand_Joe]

You mean this isn't a Calzhage thread? I'm impressed.That depends on the outcome of the the question.

[Thread Stealer]

Roy Jones @ 34
Bernard Hopkins in the late 30s, early 40s

[PowerPuncher]

Roy Jones @ 34
Bernard Hopkins in the late 30s, early 40s

BHOPs was never P4P no1 for me as he had slowed down and threw so little leather, Mayweather succeeded RJJ. Taylor showed BHOPs wasn't good enough to be P4P in that period when he beat him twice. Eastman/Allen/small DLH is not P4P stuff

[Stonehands89]

According to the annual Ring ratings, two of the best fighters of 1958 were Archie Moore (~42) and Robinson, who was 37. You had other solid fighters that year including Patterson, Loi, Joe Brown, Ortiz, Basilio... but the best would have to be one of those two.

I don't believe that Ring inaugurated its "p4p" annual best for another thirty years.

[TBooze]

According to the annual Ring ratings, two of the best fighters of 1958 were Archie Moore (~42) and Robinson, who was 37. You had other solid fighters that year including Patterson, Loi, Joe Brown, Ortiz, Basilio... but the best would have to be one of those two.

I don't believe that Ring inaugurated its "p4p" annual best for another thirty years.

KO was one of, if not the first magazine to do it in 1980/81 (and they were annual)

The truth is no one cared pound for pound #1's until the late 80s. Everyone knew was Robinson was Pound for pound the best ever, and that was that.

Pound for pound rankings only came about because Tyson was so dominant and another talking point was needed.

[China_hand_Joe]

Just note for the purposes of this thread, although Jones was considered P4P number one a week before he suffered his first defeat, in hindsight we know in reality he wasn't at that time.

[China_hand_Joe]

Yeah, DLH was so small he just wieghed in 155 at the fight !!! But hey B-Hop weighed in 156 and DLH had a reach advantage and B-Hop was boxing DLH and didn´t use his size but well that all doesn´t matter ´cause we all know how he just won the fight because he was bigger, yeah ....

For me it has to be Moore or Hopkins.He consistantly lost a couple rounds to Howard Eastman standard fighters. That isn't P4P number one material for me.

[My dinner with Conteh]

KO was one of, if not the first magazine to do it in 1980/81 (and they were annual)


Boxing News did its first list in August 1976, although they only continued intermittently. The Top 10 were:


1. Carlos Monzon
2. Roberto Duran
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Carlos Zarate
5. Alexis Arguello
6. Alfonso Zamora
7. John Conteh
8. Victor Galindez
9. Miguel Canto
10. Alfonso Lopez


:thumbsup

[rekcutnevets]

You could say Hopkins. Some regarded him P4P #1. How do you get Calzaghe as #1 pound for pound, and not Hopkins? I think Hopkins had earned as much, if not more, right to call himself #1 as Calzaghe currently.

If not Hopkins, I would say Robinson.

[C. M. Clay II]

Archie Moore is the first that comes to mind.

[China_hand_Joe]

Well, losing rounds means nothing as long as you win the fight but i suppose JC isn´t p4p either ´cause he looked bad against some of mediocre opponents or does this not matter with Joe because he has more skills like Ali?It is more a rule with Hopkins though. He has only impressed once, against Tarver in the last decade. Calzaghe has hammered plenty of opponents, losing a several rounds for Joe is the exception rather than the rule.

[rekcutnevets]

Hopkins didn't lose a round to Trinidad. He as a 4-1 underdog in that fight.

The judges had him winning every round against Glenn Johnson.
Judges only had him giving up one or two against Council.
He was winning every round against Brown.
Only lost one round of the Allen rematch.
Gave up only one or two to Echols.
Lost between 1-3 rounds to Keith Holmes.
Daniels and Hakkar managed to win 0 rounds againt him.
Managed to drop 2 rounds to Vanderpool.
Managed to lose a round against Joppy.

The only other fighters he faced in the last decade were Oscar, Taylor, and Tarver.

It looks like winning around 10 out of every 12 rounds is the norm for Hopkins.

[China_hand_Joe]

Hopkins didn't lose a round to Trinidad. He as a 4-1 underdog in that fight.

The judges had him winning every round against Glenn Johnson.
Judges only had him giving up one or two against Council.
He was winning every round against Brown.
Only lost one round of the Allen rematch.
Gave up only one or two to Echols.
Lost between 1-3 rounds to Keith Holmes.
Daniels and Hakkar managed to win 0 rounds againt him.
Managed to drop 2 rounds to Vanderpool.
Managed to lose a round against Joppy.

The only other fighters he faced in the last decade were Oscar, Taylor, and Tarver.

It looks like winning around 10 out of every 12 rounds is the norm for Hopkins.In the context of this thread, those wins are irrelevant. They were a long time ago when Roy Jones ruled supreme. Hopkins was a better fighter back then than he has been more recently, but never a true P4P number one at any point in history.

[TBooze]

Boxing News did its first list in August 1976, although they only continued intermittently. The Top 10 were:


1. Carlos Monzon
2. Roberto Duran
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Carlos Zarate
5. Alexis Arguello
6. Alfonso Zamora
7. John Conteh
8. Victor Galindez
9. Miguel Canto
10. Alfonso Lopez


:thumbsup

Intresting....

I suppose Monzon and Duran are tough to split; 76 Ali was comming off the Thrilla; Zarate and Arguello are fine there; People were into the hype of Zamaro at the time; Canto I have no problem with; Lopez does not deserve his place; Conteh and Galindez show a slight bias towards Brits, but they are not far wrong.

Depending when in 76 this list was written, no Cerventas or his conqueror that years Benitez? Suprised Stracey or his conqueror Palomino cannot find a place. Apart from that maybe DeJesus or Valdez could sneak a place, as they only lost to the top two fighters; at the time Valdez closely (if the list was done after June) and DeJesus was 1 and 1 with Duran.