Is Ezzard Charles in your top 5 pound-for-pound of all-time?

[DINAMITA]

Please vote. It's a simple YES or NO here.

[PowerPuncher]

YES, but I'd like a maybe option

[Robbi]

Top 25

[BritInvasion]

Greb

Robinson

Duran

Langford

Charles


And before anyone says I know who's missing from my top5. And yes, Duran is that high. For me.

[PowerPuncher]

Greb

Robinson

Duran

Langford

Charles


And before anyone says I know who's missing from my top5. And yes, Duran is that high. For me.

Armstrong doesnt make my top5 either

[BritInvasion]

phew, I normally find that a minority opinion. Who rounds out your top 5?

[teeto]

YES, but I'd like a maybe option
Ditto. My thoughts also,

[TommyV]

#1 Sammy Langford
#2 Harry Edward Greb
#3 Walker Smith Jr
#4 Henry Jackson Jr
#5 The Cinncinati Cobra

:smile

[stevebhoy87]

I have him at 6 however i think i may be underrating him, next time i do a list i think i will swap him and duran and put him at 5

[TommyV]

I have him at 6 however i think i may be underrating him, next time i do a list i think i will swap him and duran and put him at 5

Exactly what I done.

[PowerPuncher]

phew, I normally find that a minority opinion. Who rounds out your top 5?

My list will be controversal to some having RJJ and Mayweather there, but I use the literal term of P4P - who would be the best of the best if they were the same weight in their primes, combined with how they performed against the best of the best in their respective divisions. So I see RJJ beating Greb at 160-168 and Mayweather beating Armstrong at 130-140

1. SRR
2. Duran
3. Charles
4. Langford
5. Greb
6. RJJ
7. Pepp
8. Mayweather
9. Ali
10. Armstrong

[the cobra]

I generally put him at #4, #5, or #6. He, Duran, and Armstrong are more or less interchangeable as far as where I rank them. Charles is a lock for the top 10 as far as I'm concerned and is probably top 5.

[Sweet Pea]

My list will be controversal to some having RJJ and Mayweather there, but I use the literal term of P4P - who would be the best of the best if they were the same weight in their primes, combined with how they performed against the best of the best in their respective divisions. So I see RJJ beating Greb at 160-168 and Mayweather beating Armstrong at 130-140

1. SRR
2. Duran
3. Charles
4. Langford
5. Greb
6. RJJ
7. Pepp
8. Mayweather
9. Ali
10. Armstrong:lol:

[Minotauro]

I have him at 5:
1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Sam Langford
4. Harry Greb
5. Ezzard Charles

[Robbi]

My list will be controversal to some having RJJ and Mayweather there, but I use the literal term of P4P - who would be the best of the best if they were the same weight in their primes, combined with how they performed against the best of the best in their respective divisions. So I see RJJ beating Greb at 160-168 and Mayweather beating Armstrong at 130-140

1. SRR
2. Duran
3. Charles
4. Langford
5. Greb
6. RJJ
7. Pepp
8. Mayweather
9. Ali
10. Armstrong


Good list mate. Makes a change.

[Russell]

Without a doubt.

[McGrain]

#5.

[PowerPuncher]

:lol:

You think I should bump RJJ above Greb?

[Stonehands89]

My list will be controversal to some having RJJ and Mayweather there, but I use the literal term of P4P - who would be the best of the best if they were the same weight in their primes, combined with how they performed against the best of the best in their respective divisions. So I see RJJ beating Greb at 160-168 and Mayweather beating Armstrong at 130-140

1. SRR
2. Duran
3. Charles
4. Langford
5. Greb
6. RJJ
7. Pepp
8. Mayweather
9. Ali
10. Armstrong
* Duran is too high at #2.

* RJJ and Mayweather's being anywhere near the top 10 is indefensible. Indefensible!

* You spelled Pep's name wrong. That extra "p" points toward your perpetration of presenting a peculiarly polemic post with a parade of pugilistic poop.

[JohnThomas1]

If i do a list i think he'd come in 5-10.

[Stonehands89]

If i do a list i think he'd come in 5-10.
Closer to 5 than 10, but I'm with you.

[Sweet Pea]

* Duran is too high at #2.

* RJJ and Mayweather's being anywhere near the top 10 is indefensible. Indefensible!

* You spelled Pep's name wrong. That extra "p" points toward your perpetration of presenting a peculiarly polemic post with a parade of pugilistic poop.:rofl

[Mendoza]

Please vote. It's a simple YES or NO here.

No

[Robbi]

My list will be controversal to some having RJJ and Mayweather there, but I use the literal term of P4P - who would be the best of the best if they were the same weight in their primes, combined with how they performed against the best of the best in their respective divisions. So I see RJJ beating Greb at 160-168 and Mayweather beating Armstrong at 130-140

1. SRR
2. Duran
3. Charles
4. Langford
5. Greb
6. RJJ
7. Pepp
8. Mayweather
9. Ali
10. Armstrong

I knew you'd crucified for such a list. Any fighter who started his career from the 80's onwards in your top 10 and you're asking for it.

[JohnThomas1]

Closer to 5 than 10, but I'm with you.


I'm sure it will come out that way for me, yes. While not having thought much on it i really don't think i can find him a spot above Duran.

[Stonehands89]

I knew you'd crucified for such a list. Any fighter who started his career from the 80's onwards in your top 10 and you're asking for it.
So today it's the 80s. Before it was the 40s. Let's get serious here: make a defense for either of these guys being above Ray Leonard -never mind guys like Armstrong.

[Brian123]

He is my top 25 I am still working on BTW I just added "Nonpareil" Jack Dempsey

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Robbi]

So today it's the 80s. Before it was the 40s. Let's get serious here: make a defense for either of these guys being above Ray Leonard -never mind guys like Armstrong.


Today it's the 80's, last week it was the 40's, next week it could be the 20's, maybe it could be the 70's, but more than likely it will be the 60's.

[PowerPuncher]

So today it's the 80s. Before it was the 40s. Let's get serious here: make a defense for either of these guys being above Ray Leonard -never mind guys like Armstrong.

Your right I forgot Leonard, pop him in above Pep and drop Henry out the top 10

My argument is simple, P4P is about how fighters compete if they were the same weight and Mayweather comfortably beats Armstrong for my money as does Duran, as does Whitaker

If Armstrong weighed 168 does he beat RJJ? He could well lose every round

I can't see anyone living with a Prime RJJ P4P, including Greb, he'd most likely lose a wide wide UD. And they fought at the same weight so RJJ has to be up there

[Manassa]

1. Harry Strongmen
2. Gay Herrrb
3. Rôbin Rayôns
4. Randy Nobleen
5. Crasher Dazzlé
6. Wippee Lil
7. Booter 'Abound Terror' Randur
8. Echo Armoiré
9. Jag-Nôse
10. 'Noses' Barry

[Robbi]

Your right I forgot Leonard, pop him in above Pep and drop Henry out the top 10

Leonard above Pep? The man only had 40 fights. It wouldn't even matter if 15 of his opponents were all-time greats. Even if he moved up to heavyweight and beat Tyson instead of Hagler in 1987 it wouldn't make a difference. Sorry mate, he wasn't fighting often enough no matter his resume.

[Stonehands89]

Today it's the 80's, last week it was the 40's, next week it could be the 20's, maybe it could be the 70's, but more than likely it will be the 60's.
What you are doing is transparent, Robbi.

You mentioned my name in a post last week where you implied that I am not impressed enough with Whitaker -and that if he were fighting in the 40s, I'd think better of him. That was false, and I offered you several names of more recent fighters who I very highly regard. In this thread, I (rightfully) criticized the goofy inclusions of Jones and Mayweather, and suddenly the 40s become the 80s.

--Coincidence? I doubt it.

Leonard above Pep? The man only had 40 fights. It wouldn't even matter if 15 of his opponents were all-time greats. Even if he moved up to heavyweight and beat Tyson instead of Hagler in 1987 it wouldn't make a difference. Sorry mate, he wasn't fighting often enough no matter his resume.
How silly.

You need to get over your vicarious jealousy of Pep. Somehow I doubt that Whitaker himself would be so hell-bent on minimizing the obvious greatness of Pep -as you do in your strange crusade.

[Stonehands89]

Your right I forgot Leonard, pop him in above Pep and drop Henry out the top 10

My argument is simple, P4P is about how fighters compete if they were the same weight and Mayweather comfortably beats Armstrong for my money as does Duran, as does Whitaker

If Armstrong weighed 168 does he beat RJJ? He could well lose every round

I can't see anyone living with a Prime RJJ P4P, including Greb, he'd most likely lose a wide wide UD. And they fought at the same weight so RJJ has to be up there
You're only confusing everyone -including yourself. Why don't you call it "H2H best"? And forget about the how fighters would compete if they were the same weight? That just gets senseless for obvious reasons.

If Greb doesn't beat Jones, then why is he ranked ahead of Jones? Why isn't Jones ranked #1? Where's Whitaker? Where's Tyson?

[PowerPuncher]

Leonard above Pep? The man only had 40 fights. It wouldn't even matter if 15 of his opponents were all-time greats. Even if he moved up to heavyweight and beat Tyson instead of Hagler in 1987 it wouldn't make a difference. Sorry mate, he wasn't fighting often enough no matter his resume.

Again its not about how many fights he has or even resume, its about they compete if they are the same size, thats the criteria of P4P.

Now if you want to make a new ratings system based on who had the greatest legacy regardless of weight class, do so but it wouldn't be called P4P

Old Timers get well overrated on these boards for fighting endless dross

[PowerPuncher]

You're only confusing everyone -including yourself. Why don't you call it "H2H best"? And forget about the how fighters would compete if they were the same weight? That just gets senseless for obvious reasons.

If Greb doesn't beat Jones, then why is he ranked ahead of Jones? Why isn't Jones ranked #1? Where's Whitaker? Where's Tyson?

I'll copy and paste this because it applys here:

Again its not about how many fights he has or even resume, its about they compete if they are the same size, thats the criteria of P4P.

Now if you want to make a new ratings system based on who had the greatest legacy regardless of weight class, do so but it wouldn't be called P4P

Tyson still has the same flaws P4P that see him getting beat in the later rounds, Whitakers boarderline top10

[Manassa]

Again its not about how many fights he has or even resume, its about they compete if they are the same size, thats the criteria of P4P.

That doesn't work, dick splash.

[Loewe]

My list will be controversal to some having RJJ and Mayweather there, but I use the literal term of P4P - who would be the best of the best if they were the same weight in their primes, combined with how they performed against the best of the best in their respective divisions. So I see RJJ beating Greb at 160-168 and Mayweather beating Armstrong at 130-140

1. SRR
2. Duran
3. Charles
4. Langford
5. Greb
6. RJJ
7. Pepp
8. Mayweather
9. Ali
10. Armstrong

Well, if you go by this criteria a list isn´t worth much because you could put a guy like Pavlik in there and say he would knock out everybody. It´s just speculation and oppinion. That´s why I don´t do lists based ion this criteria or take h2h into account to much speculation.

But going by your criteria I think I could agree with most picks though but I think yoiu underate Armstrong tremendously. Armstrong is the one guy most people think is the most similar to Greb. Greb is ranked very high but Armstrong who fought about the same as him - we don´t know who is better - is not ranked as high, even though we have prove of Armstrongs ability but not of Grebs. That´s a bit strange for me.

[Loewe]

Your right I forgot Leonard, pop him in above Pep and drop Henry out the top 10

My argument is simple, P4P is about how fighters compete if they were the same weight and Mayweather comfortably beats Armstrong for my money as does Duran, as does Whitaker

If Armstrong weighed 168 does he beat RJJ? He could well lose every round

I can't see anyone living with a Prime RJJ P4P, including Greb, he'd most likely lose a wide wide UD. And they fought at the same weight so RJJ has to be up there

Actually, I think Armstrong has a good chance against Whitaker and Duran and would beat RJJ, like Greb, at 168. In my oppinion you are overrating Jones very much. He was good but not that good.

[Holmes' Jab]

#4.

[Maxmomer]

Langford
Greb
Robinson
Armstrong
B. Leonard

So, no Charles.

[Ezzard]

Anyone ever read "Notes From the Underground"? Seems like some are living it out right here...

Charles is definite top 10. I have in my top 5. But top 10 for sure.

[Sweet Pea]

Actually, I think Armstrong has a good chance against Whitaker and Duran and would beat RJJ, like Greb, at 168. In my oppinion you are overrating Jones very much. He was good but not that good.Those guys would all be poison for Armstrong.

[Bill Butcher]

I voted NO because I havent seen enough of him.

[JohnThomas1]

I think Armstrong would give a great account of himself vs Duran and Whitaker, and any other 135 in history to be honest. The man was a machine. He wouldn't give Whitaker a seconds respite or room, it'd be fascinating to see how the match developed and how Whitaker dealt with the constant blitz.

[Holmes' Jab]

I think Armstrong would give a great account of himself vs Duran and Whitaker, and any other 135 in history to be honest. The man was a machine. He wouldn't give Whitaker a seconds respite or room, it'd be fascinating to see how the match developed and how Whitaker dealt with the constant blitz.


Well said, I do too. Armstrong was a force of nature, P4P wise he's tops in my view. Duran and Whitaker could certainly lose maybe once if they were to face of against Armstrong in a trilogy. I've rarely ever seen a busier fighter from any weight class.

Needless to say Mayweather Jr would be toast.

[Stonehands89]

I'll copy and paste this because it applys here:

Again its not about how many fights he has or even resume, its about they compete if they are the same size, thats the criteria of P4P.

Now if you want to make a new ratings system based on who had the greatest legacy regardless of weight class, do so but it wouldn't be called P4P

Tyson still has the same flaws P4P that see him getting beat in the later rounds, Whitakers boarderline top10
I don't believe that you grasp what is meant by "pound for pound" and instead your'e inventing your own definition and forcing it.

You'll notice that the H2H discussions around you are about guys in the same weight class. No one with any sense is going to make a comparison between a LW Ali and Benny Leonard. Or a HW Duran vs. Holyfield. You have to suspend reality completely and control for too many variables.

It makes no sense.

[ChrisPontius]

Actually, I think Armstrong has a good chance against Whitaker and Duran and would beat RJJ, like Greb, at 168. In my oppinion you are overrating Jones very much. He was good but not that good.

I'm all for Armstrong in the top5, but how the heck is he going to beat Roy Jones?

The man is a 5'5" natural lightweight at best, or superfeather. Jones had tremendous power and speed at 168, and probably weighed about 175 for those fights. He also showed no vulnerability in terms of chin there, and considering Armstrong is a handful of weight classes lower, i think we can exclude him knocking out Jones. Again, what does he have on Jones? I think he'd be thrashed and probably stopped within 10.

Against Whitaker and Duran, of course that's a different story. But there is a gigantic difference between a super featherweight and a welterweight, not to mention a light heavyweight like Jones.

[Ezzard]

I don't believe that you grasp what is meant by "pound for pound" and instead your'e inventing your own definition and forcing it.

You'll notice that the H2H discussions around you are about guys in the same weight class. No one with any sense is going to make a comparison between a LW Ali and Benny Leonard. Or a HW Duran vs. Holyfield. You have to suspend reality completely and control for too many variables.

It makes no sense.

Stonehands, you makes sense though.

You can't possibly imagine how a match up between Sonny Liston and Jimmy Wilde would go. It's basically a worthless exercise.

H2H between different eras is fraught with problems.

Seems to me like some people decide who they want their number one to be and then create a set of criteria which establishes this.

[Ezzard]

I think Armstrong would give a great account of himself vs Duran and Whitaker, and any other 135 in history to be honest. The man was a machine. He wouldn't give Whitaker a seconds respite or room, it'd be fascinating to see how the match developed and how Whitaker dealt with the constant blitz.

Agreed. if anything I'd say Armstrong would be the favourite against Whittaker. All close fights though.

[JohnThomas1]

Agreed. if anything I'd say Armstrong would be the favourite against Whittaker. All close fights though.

I'd make Duran 6-5 or 7-5 over Armstrong and Armstrong 6-5 over Whitaker, at a glance.

[PowerPuncher]

I don't believe that you grasp what is meant by "pound for pound" and instead your'e inventing your own definition and forcing it.

You'll notice that the H2H discussions around you are about guys in the same weight class. No one with any sense is going to make a comparison between a LW Ali and Benny Leonard. Or a HW Duran vs. Holyfield. You have to suspend reality completely and control for too many variables.

It makes no sense.

No you don't know what P4P means, the original P4P is exactly as I stated it. On boxing forums its been changed to say who had the greatest legacy BUT this is not the original definition of it at all. It first became big during the time of Robinson to say 'look he won't beat heavyweights but if he was the same size as heavyweights he would be the best'

You make a good point about comparing heavyweights and lightweights though. The human body as it adds more mass can not perform as quickly or with the same stamina. So if a heavyweight punches nearly as quick as a middleweight his P4P speed is much more impressive

[PowerPuncher]

I'm all for Armstrong in the top5, but how the heck is he going to beat Roy Jones?

The man is a 5'5" natural lightweight at best, or superfeather. Jones had tremendous power and speed at 168, and probably weighed about 175 for those fights. He also showed no vulnerability in terms of chin there, and considering Armstrong is a handful of weight classes lower, i think we can exclude him knocking out Jones. Again, what does he have on Jones? I think he'd be thrashed and probably stopped within 10.

Against Whitaker and Duran, of course that's a different story. But there is a gigantic difference between a super featherweight and a welterweight, not to mention a light heavyweight like Jones.

Were talking about upscaling Armstrong to 5'10 and 168lbs, he still loses

[DINAMITA]

No you don't know what P4P means, the original P4P is exactly as I stated it. On boxing forums its been changed to say who had the greatest legacy BUT this is not the original definition of it at all. It first became big during the time of Robinson to say 'look he won't beat heavyweights but if he was the same size as heavyweights he would be the best'

You make a good point about comparing heavyweights and lightweights though. The human body as it adds more mass can not perform as quickly or with the same stamina. So if a heavyweight punches nearly as quick as a middleweight his P4P speed is much more impressive

No, you are the one who doesn't know what pound-for-pound means.

Here is a post from a while back:


Over the past few weeks, more and more I have seen pound-for-pound being worked out on this basis:
p4p = h2h / weight
This is wrong, wrong to the point of ludicrous.

One guy who continually promotes this absurd view of p4p is our village idiot and resident Calzaghe obsessive ChinahandJoe. In the thread 'Calzaghe The Greatest Fighter of the Last 25 Years', Joey dismissed me with comments like these, from page 43 of that thread:
_____________________________________________________________
The wisdom of CHJ is in italics:


P4P is head to head.
By definition all that matters is skill and weight. Greatness doesn't come into it.
A weight lifter can be given a P4P ranking, his greatness doesn't come into it. It is how much he lifts per pound of his own body. Any professor of semantics would back me up here and would agree Joe Calzaghe is the P4P aka H2H number one of all time.

P4P is H2H*(Weight)^-1
Weight and fighting ability, this is clear as you can make a P4P list of weight lifters. The ignorance on display here is almost moderately frustrating, but I will be patient.
____________________________________________________________

This way of thinking has led to laughable threads such as the current one:
'Who Beats Pacquiao Head To Head?'
With the poll including among others- Pavlik, Calzaghe, Mijares, Calderon.

To help in increasing awareness of what pound-for-pound and head-to-head actually are, I will include a post from yesterday and my response to it:
___________________________________________________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Butcher
Even IF you believe Lewis was the best of British (which I most certainly do not) its a scandal that he should make a top 5 list of the last 15 yrs, thats outrageous.
Imagine every fighter was roughly the same size & weight but with their same abilities & strengths... there is NO WAY Lewis is gonna beat guys like PBF, Morales, Jones, Barrera, Whitaker, Calzaghe, Mosely, Pacman or DLH.... No way. Get real people.



Mate, seriously, this is NOT what pound-for-pound is and it is NOT how it is worked out, think about what you're saying here, it is absolutely ludicrous.

Do you mean to tell me that when deciding if Lennox Lewis should be placed higher than Ricardo Lopez p4p, you either imagine a 5ft 4in and 7 stone Lennox Lewis fighting Lopez, or a 6ft 5in and 17 stone Ricardo Lopez fighting Lewis??

I am honestly not being rude mate honestly, but I have no idea where you got this idea from, but it absolutely is NOT what pound-for-pound is, the very idea is psychopathic!!!!

If you imagine that you so so radically change the size of a boxer for a fight, then he completely loses exactly what made him the fighter he is- this CANNOT be done, it makes no sense whatsoever. Of course you are going to think Shane Mosley would box rings round Lennox Lewis because he would be much faster and has better skills etc, but that is only because by nature, a lightweight needs those attributes to compete at world level. A heavyweight does not. He needs bulk and strength and power. If you imagine Mosley to be a heavyweight then at 16st, he cannot be that same quicksilver mover and puncher, so he is then a completely different fighter. If you imagine Lewis to be a lightweight, you can't imagine a 5ft 7in 135lbs guy standing flat-footed and lining up head shots, as that is not what a lightweight could ever do.

You can determine who was better between current and past fighters by H2H- if they fought at the same weight. You can decide who was better between Hagler and Monzon by imagining what you think would happen if they fought, because then you aren't changing anything about them, you're just taking both men and putting them in the ring.

But to decide properly pound-for-pound who was better, the way you work this out is by looking at how they performed against the men they fought, how much better they were than the best fighters in their weight division at the time.

Example: In my opinion, Roberto Duran is a better fighter pound-for-pound than Joe Frazier. I think this because Duran showed he was better than the best fighters he fought by a greater margin than Frazier was. Duran at lightweight got the better of everyone he fought, looked far far better than most of the guys he fought, and he fought many great fighters and took on many difficult and dangerous challenges, and did this more regularly and with greater ease than Frazier did.
I do not think this because if I blew up Duran to 16st or shrunk Frazier down to 135lbs, Duran would win a fight between them, because by definition this is impossible.

It's the same as saying I think Laila Ali is better p4p than Roy Jones Jr, because if you imagine Ali as a man, she would win a fight between the two. But she isn't a man! And obviously imagining her as a man (aside from being very very wrong!) would completely change the fighter she is!!
___________________________________________________________


OK, so that was my explanation for this mental trend of h2h/weight not having any relevance or meaning or significance in boxing, and hopefully the many people who commented in the Pacquiao thread will see how ridiculous considering him fighting Pavlik or him fighting Calderon is.

To further prove the point about pound-for-pound not being h2h/weight, I refer you to the Wikipedia definition of the term:

Pound-for-pound is the term used in boxing ([Only registered and activated users can see links]), mixed martial arts ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) and other combat sports ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) to describe a fighter's value in relation to fighters of different weight classes.
It is often said to have been created to describe world Welterweight ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) and Middleweight ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) champion Sugar Ray Robinson ([Only registered and activated users can see links]).[1] ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) Robinson is one of the most accomplished fighters of all time, but his supporters realized that, while he could beat anyone in his own class, as a Middleweight he would not be able to beat a top Heavyweight ([Only registered and activated users can see links]). Hence, Robinson was called the pound-for-pound best without being expected to beat much larger fighters, under the belief that he as a Middleweight was still a better quality fighter than any fighter fighting at heavier or lighter weights than him.

To put it in my own words as simply as possible:

Pound-for-pound is for deciding who is BETTER between two boxers, not who would WIN.

H2H is for deciding who would WIN between two boxers.

Pound-for-pound can be used to decide between ANY two fighters at any weights, because you are rating them on how good they were at their own weight and their overall greatness, it has nothing to do with H2H unless the two fighters in question fought at the same weight.




You are wrong mate.

[Robbi]

What you are doing is transparent, Robbi.

You mentioned my name in a post last week where you implied that I am not impressed enough with Whitaker -and that if he were fighting in the 40s, I'd think better of him. That was false, and I offered you several names of more recent fighters who I very highly regard. In this thread, I (rightfully) criticized the goofy inclusions of Jones and Mayweather, and suddenly the 40s become the 80s.

--Coincidence? I doubt it.


How silly.

You need to get over your vicarious jealousy of Pep. Somehow I doubt that Whitaker himself would be so hell-bent on minimizing the obvious greatness of Pep -as you do in your strange crusade.

Originally Posted by Robbi
Today it's the 80's, last week it was the 40's, next week it could be the 20's, maybe it could be the 70's, but more than likely it will be the 60's.

How you managed to quote me on that I'll never know. I typed complete and utter nonsene and never knew myself what I was talking about.

Pep was great. Don't take me too serious when it comes to my comparisons on Whitaker and Pep. Some of i say I believe is true, some of it is simply 'goading' tactics.

[ChrisPontius]

Were talking about upscaling Armstrong to 5'10 and 168lbs, he still loses

Oh, like that. Well i think that sort of stuff is too speculative. You have to realise that as you increase a fighter's size, his workrate, speed, etc will go down. And vice versa.

[the cobra]

Just to get back to Charles, to those who don't have him in the top 5 I have two questions.

1. Is he in your top 10?

2. Who ranks above him for a top 5 spot and why? Based on resume and overall skill and ability, what 5 fighters were honestly greater than Charles?

[Manassa]

1. Harry Strongmen
2. Gay Herrrb
3. Rôbin Rayôns
4. Randy Nobleen
5. Crasher Dazzlé
6. Wippee Lil
7. Booter 'Abound Terror' Randur
8. Echo Armoiré
9. Jag-Nôse
10. 'Noses' Barry

Nobody liked this then? I have to say, I was quite proud of myself. See if you can work out who's who.

[Robbi]

1. Harry Strongmen - Henry Armstrong
2. Gay Herrrb - Harry Greb
3. Rôbin Rayôns - Ray Robinson
4. Randy Nobleen
5. Crasher Dazzlé - Ezzard Charles
6. Wippee Lil - Willie Pep
7. Booter 'Abound Terror' Randur -
8. Echo Armoiré - Archie Moore
9. Jag-Nôse
10. 'Noses' Barry - Barney Ross

The others? Mmmmmmm!

[Stonehands89]

No you don't know what P4P means, the original P4P is exactly as I stated it. On boxing forums its been changed to say who had the greatest legacy BUT this is not the original definition of it at all. It first became big during the time of Robinson to say 'look he won't beat heavyweights but if he was the same size as heavyweights he would be the best'
"Pound-for-pound" means "all things considered". What its meaning was in 1950 I don't know, but most agree that it asks the question: "if all of the name fighters were in one division, who would be the man to beat?" It considers factors such as record, skill, caliber of opponent, etc. It does not mean shrinking heavyweights or enlarging featherweights and if it ever did, it did so only until people realized that midgets fight differently than giants.

You make a good point about comparing heavyweights and lightweights though. The human body as it adds more mass can not perform as quickly or with the same stamina. So if a heavyweight punches nearly as quick as a middleweight his P4P speed is much more impressive
Right... and if George Foreman were a Jr. Middleweight, he'd be John Mugabi in slow motion. Maybe. It lurches into pure speculation when you think about it... so we should agree to avoid it.

[Manassa]

The others? Mmmmmmm!

Well done so far. Carry on.

[Stonehands89]

1. Harry Strongmen
2. Gay Herrrb
3. Rôbin Rayôns
4. Randy Nobleen
5. Crasher Dazzlé
6. Wippee Lil
7. Booter 'Abound Terror' Randur
8. Echo Armoiré
9. Jag-Nôse
10. 'Noses' Barry
Robbi got most of them.

4 is Benny Leonard....7 is Roberto Duran....9 is Eder Jofre....

Right?

[Stonehands89]

I'd make Duran 6-5 or 7-5 over Armstrong and Armstrong 6-5 over Whitaker, at a glance.
That sounds agreeable to me.

[werety]

I wouldnt take armstrong over whitaker. What about his style do you really think would offset whitaker's game? I feel that whitaker actually performed his best against pressure fighters like armstrong.

[Stonehands89]

Just to get back to Charles, to those who don't have him in the top 5 I have two questions.

1. Is he in your top 10?

2. Who ranks above him for a top 5 spot and why? Based on resume and overall skill and ability, what 5 fighters were honestly greater than Charles?
Ezzard is absolutely in my top 10... I got him anywhere after 5 and usually close to it. Usually I rank Robinson, Greb, Armstrong, Duran, Langford, and Pep over him. I'm reluctant to rank anyone else over him. You don't whip prime Moore and Burley without being a serious ring general.

[Manassa]

Robbi got most of them.

4 is Benny Leonard....7 is Roberto Duran....9 is Eder Jofre....

Right?

Joe Gans :good

[Stonehands89]

Joe Gans :good
My dopey mistake.

[Robbi]

Well done so far. Carry on.

:huh I have managed another. Just thinking of the last two.

[Robbi]

Looks like I'm a bit slow and not read the posts above. The one I got after my initial go at it was, Roberto Duran.

[DINAMITA]

14-13 Yes. This is not what I was hoping for. Doesn't help me make a decision at all!!

[the cobra]

Originally posted by PACFAN84
14-13 Yes. This is not what I was hoping for. Doesn't help me make a decision at all!!
Well, I think everyone that knows his career in detail would agree that he's anywhere from 4-8.

The only fighters with superior resumes are Greb, Langford, and you could possibly argue the case for Robinson, and at his best Charles was every bit as impressive as any other fighter. I believe only Robinson, Langford, and Greb are certainly above him, with Duran and Armstrong arguably being over him. Based on at least how I rate fighters, no one else should be higher than the Cincinnatti Cobra, so the lowest I can personally see him ranked is #6.

[SuperSouthpaw]

Yes, he ranks top 5 right next to Corrie Sanders who is my Number 4. Ezzard was one of the best!

[Bummy Davis]

I'd make Duran 6-5 or 7-5 over Armstrong and Armstrong 6-5 over Whitaker, at a glance.

Duran 7-5 over Hank and Armstrong about the same over PEA but I think the 1st fight could be closer and the 2nd wider in favor of Hank

[JohnThomas1]

Duran 7-5 over Hank and Armstrong about the same over PEA but I think the 1st fight could be closer and the 2nd wider in favor of Hank

Yeah, we're pretty close to the same. It'd have to be around there.

[JohnThomas1]

I wouldnt take armstrong over whitaker. What about his style do you really think would offset whitaker's game? I feel that whitaker actually performed his best against pressure fighters like armstrong.

Whitaker has never fought a pressure fighter like Armstrong. Chavez was a great fighter but he and Armstrong are still a long way apart stylewise, at least IMO. Armstrong's oft ranked in the top 5, and indeed 2 or 3 in history - he's not your usual everyday pressure fighter.

[Bummy Davis]

Whitaker has never fought a pressure fighter like Armstrong. Chavez was a great fighter but he and Armstrong are still a long way apart stylewise, at least IMO. Armstrong's oft ranked in the top 5, and indeed 2 or 3 in history - he's not your usual everyday pressure fighter.

I agree, what a difference REAL pressure does to a guy....Frazier did it to Ali in 1...but Armstrong was relentless

[goat15]

number five on the button, maybe my favourite fighter to watch.

[Stevie G]

Please vote. It's a simple YES or NO here.
NO. I have to say,though,that he'd definitely be in my top 20.

[turpinr]

he's in mine.i don't know who else would be in it but charles definitely would be

[D.T]

Top 10 - yes
Top 5 - no

[Jorodz]

he has been but currently i think i have him just outside. no reason for him not to be in the top 5