View Full Version : My Personal top 10 rankings of middleweights, what do you think?


kendom
05-30-2011, 02:05 PM
This is just my personal top ten middleweights, I'm leaving off Robinson and Jones as i feel that they were in their prime in other weights, this only includes fighters who were in their prime at middleweight

1) Harry Greb
2) Bob Fitzsimmons
3) Carlos Monzon
4) Charley Burley
5) Stanley Ketchel
6) Marvin Hagler
7) Dick Tiger
8) Bernard Hopkins
9) Jake Lamotta
10) Marcel Cerdan

IronDanHamza
05-30-2011, 02:23 PM
Theres a couple I would have in different orders and I probably wouldn't include Cerdan in my top 10.

But all in all, excellent list. :fing02:

kendom
05-30-2011, 04:06 PM
Theres a couple I would have in different orders and I probably wouldn't include Cerdan in my top 10.

But all in all, excellent list. :fing02:

THanks LOL What's wrong with Cerdan? who would you replace him with?

Barn
05-30-2011, 04:46 PM
Hagler is greater than Ketchel and it's not even debatable in my opinion.

V.Good list apart from that though.

JAB5239
05-30-2011, 06:08 PM
This is just my personal top ten middleweights, I'm leaving off Robinson and Jones as i feel that they were in their prime in other weights, this only includes fighters who were in their prime at middleweight

1) Harry Greb
2) Bob Fitzsimmons
3) Carlos Monzon
4) Charley Burley
5) Stanley Ketchel
6) Marvin Hagler
7) Dick Tiger
8) Bernard Hopkins
9) Jake Lamotta
10) Marcel Cerdan

I think Robinson needs to be on there based on his resume and accomplishments at that weight.

Here is my list, which is always subject to change.

1. Monzon
2. Hagler
3. Greb
4. Ketchel
5. Robinson
6. Hopkins
7. Flowers
8. Burley
9. LaMotta
10. Apostoli

Marchegiano
05-30-2011, 06:35 PM
Fitzsimmons has no place on your list? I dunno IMO he's an ATG.

JAB5239
05-30-2011, 07:13 PM
Fitzsimmons has no place on your list? I dunno IMO he's an ATG.

I rank based on resume, accomplishment and longevity. I simply don't know enough of Fitz's middleweight comp to feel comfortable ranking him in the top 10. Not saying he wasn't great, but his record is tough to discern at middleweight.

kendom
05-30-2011, 08:11 PM
I think Robinson needs to be on there based on his resume and accomplishments at that weight.

Here is my list, which is always subject to change.

1. Monzon
2. Hagler
3. Greb
4. Ketchel
5. Robinson
6. Hopkins
7. Flowers
8. Burley
9. LaMotta
10. Apostoli

Nice list but no Dick Tiger? You think Hagler could have beaten Greb? and no BOB FITZSIMMONS!!! He was middleweight champ from 1891 to 1897, winning from “Nonpareil” Jack Dempsey he defeated crafty slick Joe Choyinski who would go on to train Jack Johnson and he was never more than a middlewight in his prime.

IronDanHamza
05-30-2011, 09:10 PM
THanks LOL What's wrong with Cerdan? who would you replace him with?

Absolutely nothing wrong with Cerdan. Cerdan is a great fighter, one of the finest fighters to come out of Europe.

I just personally wouldn't have him in my Top 10 at Middleweight. Middleweight is a very deep division and almost all of us in here would disagre with our choices.



1.Monzon
2.Greb
3.Robinson
4.Hagler
5.Fitzsimmons
6.Ketchel
7.Burley
8.Lamotta
9.Tiger
10.Hopkins

That's my personal list.

JAB5239
05-30-2011, 09:40 PM
Nice list but no Dick Tiger? You think Hagler could have beaten Greb? and no BOB FITZSIMMONS!!! He was middleweight champ from 1891 to 1897, winning from “Nonpareil” Jack Dempsey he defeated crafty slick Joe Choyinski who would go on to train Jack Johnson and he was never more than a middlewight in his prime.

I was on the fence with Apostoli, Tiger and Freddie Steele. Middleweight is so deep a number of fighters could be argued for the second half of the top 10.

Like I said to Marchegiano, I just don't have a comfortable enough knowledge of Fitz middleweight comp to rate him here.

fitefanSHO
05-31-2011, 11:41 AM
1. Marvin Hagler
2. Carlos Monzon
3. Sugar Ray Robinson
4. Stanley Ketchel
5. Harry Greb
6. Bernard Hopkins
7. Jake LaMotta
8. Marcel Cerdan
9. Nino Benvenuti
10. Gene Fullmer

kendom
05-31-2011, 12:18 PM
I was on the fence with Apostoli, Tiger and Freddie Steele. Middleweight is so deep a number of fighters could be argued for the second half of the top 10.

Like I said to Marchegiano, I just don't have a comfortable enough knowledge of Fitz middleweight comp to rate him here.

I see but i dont really know much about Apostoli what was he like as a fighter? what era did he fight in?

kendom
05-31-2011, 12:23 PM
I think Robinson needs to be on there based on his resume and accomplishments at that weight.

Here is my list, which is always subject to change.

1. Monzon
2. Hagler
3. Greb
4. Ketchel
5. Robinson
6. Hopkins
7. Flowers
8. Burley
9. LaMotta
10. Apostoli

Okay heres a revamped list if I were to put Robinson in it.
1) Harry Greb
2) Bob Fitzsimmons
3) Carlos Monzon
4) Sugar Ray Robinson
5) Charley Burley
6) Stanley Ketchel
7) Marvin Hagler
8) Dick Tiger
9) Bernard Hopkins
10) Jake Lamotta

Ziggy Stardust
05-31-2011, 01:44 PM
01. Ray Robinson
02. Bob Fitzsimmons
03. Sam Langford
04. Marvin Hagler
05. Stanley Ketchel
06. Bernard Hopkins
07. Charley Burley
08. Harry Greb
09. Jake LaMotta
10. Carlos Monzon
11. Tony Zale
12. Panama Joe Gans
13. Marcel Cerdan
14. Les Darcy
15. Mike Gibbons
16. Holman Williams
17. Mickey Walker
18. James Toney
19. Mike McCallum
20. Tommy Burns
21. Freddie Steele
22. Non Periel Jack Dempsey
23. Nino Benvenuti

fitefanSHO
05-31-2011, 01:57 PM
23. Nino Benvenuti

Too low! :boxing:

young_robbed
05-31-2011, 02:30 PM
This is just my personal top ten middleweights, I'm leaving off Robinson and Jones as i feel that they were in their prime in other weights, this only includes fighters who were in their prime at middleweight

1) Harry Greb
2) Bob Fitzsimmons
3) Carlos Monzon
4) Charley Burley
5) Stanley Ketchel
6) Marvin Hagler
7) Dick Tiger
8) Bernard Hopkins
9) Jake Lamotta
10) Marcel Cerdan

I don't know... To me it's hard to judge these old fighters on just resume when we have no footage of them.. i mean obviously they have to be great fighters but in the end we really don't know. I'd certainly have Hagler close to the top 3 with Monzon and Hopkins higher too...

Ziggy Stardust
05-31-2011, 02:58 PM
Too low! :boxing:

Who would you drop? Do you think he's better than, say, McCallum, Toney, or Holman Williams? :thinking9:

PS. I know someone, somewhere is going to question having Mickey Walker that far down on the list :chuckle9:

Poet

fitefanSHO
05-31-2011, 03:43 PM
Primes Benvenuti beats Zale IMO. :boxing:

Ziggy Stardust
05-31-2011, 03:48 PM
Primes Benvenuti beats Zale IMO. :boxing:

Gawd, Zale has such a low rep around here lol :hahahaha9:

Poet

Barn
05-31-2011, 05:37 PM
Who would you drop? Do you think he's better than, say, McCallum, Toney, or Holman Williams? :thinking9:

PS. I know someone, somewhere is going to question having Mickey Walker that far down on the list :chuckle9:

Poet
I had Walker at 5 last time I made a list :lol1:

kendom
05-31-2011, 05:40 PM
I don't know... To me it's hard to judge these old fighters on just resume when we have no footage of them.. i mean obviously they have to be great fighters but in the end we really don't know. I'd certainly have Hagler close to the top 3 with Monzon and Hopkins higher too...

We know how these fighters fought from newspaper accounts of their fights and primary sources ie trainers, opponents, refererees, boxing authorities from that time- Nat Fleischer, all this information has been collected thanks to boxing historians and i know more about these fighters than I do some modern ones ,(probably because i have a deep love for history lol) I know for example that Fitzsimmons was a boxer-puncher with good boxing skills and incredible accuracy in his punches, very much like Joe Louis, I know that he was a master of the feint and fought straight up. I know that he had great defense and was a master of blocking and leaning away from punches safely.

As for fighters like Harry Greb i know that he was a swarmer on the level of Henry Armstrong but faster and more manouverable, I know that his punch stats were so crazy that an opponent likened fighting him to "fighting an octopus" so from this we can tell that Greb se a very fast pace in his fights, in fact from the internet theres so much we can learn from these fighters and i have eough knowledge to compare them to fighters from later eras to see who is greater.

Pastrano
07-05-2011, 10:39 AM
Anybody not including Cerdan among top 10 is an idiot. The man had it all! He was fast, a concussive puncher, had finesse, had technique, even the physical strength and chin. He was hardened from having to fight Moroccan kids on the street as a boy. But I guess some of you dislike him because he was French or because he whooped Zale. Most experts say he woulda whooped LaMotta in the rematch and in the first match too, if he didn't get injured.

Greatest1942
07-05-2011, 10:48 AM
This is just my personal top ten middleweights, I'm leaving off Robinson and Jones as i feel that they were in their prime in other weights, this only includes fighters who were in their prime at middleweight

1) Harry Greb
2) Bob Fitzsimmons
3) Carlos Monzon
4) Charley Burley
5) Stanley Ketchel
6) Marvin Hagler
7) Dick Tiger
8) Bernard Hopkins
9) Jake Lamotta
10) Marcel Cerdan

Considering the guy fought at middle weight a lot and is generally considered one of the greatest ever, why do not include Robinson in your list.

IronDanHamza
07-05-2011, 11:22 AM
Anybody not including Cerdan among top 10 is an idiot. The man had it all! He was fast, a concussive puncher, had finesse, had technique, even the physical strength and chin. He was hardened from having to fight Moroccan kids on the street as a boy. But I guess some of you dislike him because he was French or because he whooped Zale. Most experts say he woulda whooped LaMotta in the rematch and in the first match too, if he didn't get injured.

Kind of like if someone were to have Ezzard Charles and Floyd Patterson in their Top 10 at HW and not Foreman?

Or having Oscar De La Hoya at #6 at WW above Sugar Ray Leonard?

Marcel Cerdan is a great fighter and definitely has a legit argument to be a Top 10 MW.

The fact is; if someone doesn't have him in there, it's not abserd.

Welsh Jon
07-05-2011, 11:33 AM
This is just my personal top ten middleweights, I'm leaving off Robinson and Jones as i feel that they were in their prime in other weights, this only includes fighters who were in their prime at middleweight

1) Harry Greb
2) Bob Fitzsimmons
3) Carlos Monzon
4) Charley Burley
5) Stanley Ketchel
6) Marvin Hagler
7) Dick Tiger
8) Bernard Hopkins
9) Jake Lamotta
10) Marcel Cerdan

Even though Robinson wasn't in his prime, he has to be on there considering what he achieved at the weight.

Pastrano
07-05-2011, 11:33 AM
Kind of like if someone were to have Ezzard Charles and Floyd Patterson in their Top 10 at HW and not Foreman?

Or having Oscar De La Hoya at #6 at WW above Sugar Ray Leonard?

Marcel Cerdan is a great fighter and definitely has a legit argument to be a Top 10 MW.

The fact is; if someone doesn't have him in there, it's not abserd.

Charles and Patterson were MILES above Foreman in p4p value. However, that doesn't come tru to thickheads like you.:rolleyes:

Welsh Jon
07-05-2011, 11:36 AM
Even though Robinson wasn't in his prime, he has to be on there considering what he achieved at the weight.

Oops sorry should have read whole post before commenting.

IronDanHamza
07-05-2011, 11:38 AM
Charles and Patterson were MILES above Foreman in p4p value. However, that doesn't come tru to thickheads like you.:rolleyes:

Except, were not talking P4P value, are we?

We're talking about greatness at HW, something, only someone either very misinformed are outright senseless would have Floyd Patterson and Ezzard Charles above George Foreman in terms of HW greatness.

I guess you fit both those catergories, Mr. Oscar is ranked #6 at WW.

:lol1:

Welsh Jon
07-05-2011, 11:45 AM
My list:

1.Greb
2.Robinson
3.Hagler
4.Monzon
5.Fitzsimmons
6.Dick Tiger
7.Ketchel
8.Cerdan
9.Lamotta
10.Zale

IronDanHamza
07-05-2011, 11:53 AM
My list:

1.Greb
2.Robinson
3.Hagler
4.Monzon
5.Fitzsimmons
6.Dick Tiger
7.Ketchel
8.Cerdan
9.Lamotta
10.Zale

No Charley Burley?

How come?

Welsh Jon
07-05-2011, 12:17 PM
No Charley Burley?

How come?

In all honesty it comes from lack of knowledge. I love researching boxing history and looking up old school champs, but have big gaps in my knowledge when it comes to guys like Burley and Sam Langford who never won offical world titles.

I see that his name always crops up on lists like these, but since I don't personally know that much about him I decided it would be hypocritical to put him in.

IronDanHamza
07-05-2011, 12:40 PM
In all honesty it comes from lack of knowledge. I love researching boxing history and looking up old school champs, but have big gaps in my knowledge when it comes to guys like Burley and Sam Langford who never won offical world titles.

I see that his name always crops up on lists like these, but since I don't personally know that much about him I decided it would be hypocritical to put him in.

That's fair enough, my man.

Can't really make a judgement on a fighter that you don't know about, right?

Alot of people tend to have that problem on here.

I would recommend you have a look over Charley Burley's career, it's exceptional.

Long list of exceptional wins across his resume. And of course, was a very feared man in his time.

Definitely a Top 10 Middleweight, IMO.

Pastrano
07-05-2011, 04:27 PM
Except, were not talking P4P value, are we?

We're talking about greatness at HW, something, only someone either very misinformed are outright senseless would have Floyd Patterson and Ezzard Charles above George Foreman in terms of HW greatness.

I guess you fit both those catergories, Mr. Oscar is ranked #6 at WW.

:lol1:

Without his power, Foreman would get OWNED by both Frazier and Norton, wally. Christ, he almost got owned by LYLE!

NChristo
07-05-2011, 04:38 PM
Without his power, Foreman would get OWNED by both Frazier and Norton, wally. Christ, he almost got owned by LYLE!

Is that really your argument for having Charles and Patterson above George ?, because if George didn't have the power that he did have you think he would of got ''owned'' ?.

:lol1::lol1::lol1:

Yep lets not rate people on what actually happened and resume, lets rate on fantasy things like how far would a boxer go if they didn't have a certain attribute.

Also let's just pretend that if he did have no power he would fight exactly the same as he did.

Pastrano
07-05-2011, 04:44 PM
Is that really your argument for having Charles and Patterson above George ?, because if George didn't have the power that he did have you think he would of got ''owned'' ?.

:lol1::lol1::lol1:

Yep lets not rate people on what actually happened and resume, lets rate on fantasy things like how far would a boxer go if they didn't have a certain attribute.

Also let's just pretend that if he did have no power he would fight exactly the same as he did.

BOY, you guys really are thick, arent you?:nonono: It says everything about their comparative SKILL LEVEL fool! Foreman was all about power, he had no defence, no skills, nothing! He was a crude puncher, a lumbering bear.

JAB5239
07-05-2011, 04:48 PM
BOY, you guys really are thick, arent you?:nonono: It says everything about their comparative SKILL LEVEL fool! Foreman was all about power, he had no defence, no skills, nothing! He was a crude puncher, a lumbering bear.

Actually he had a good jab and was great at cutting off the ring, two much needed attributes for a fighter looking for the ko more often than not. I would say his speed was deceiving and underrated also.

IronDanHamza
07-05-2011, 05:04 PM
Without his power, Foreman would get OWNED by both Frazier and Norton, wally. Christ, he almost got owned by LYLE!

Right. Without power Foreman would most probably lost to Fraizer and Norton. What's your point?

Pretty much the same as saying; 'Without reflexes, Pep would be a bum' or 'Without a good chin, Lamotta would be a bum'

Problem with this is; they DO have these attributes. Which in turn, makes your statment quite literally worthless.


BOY, you guys really are thick, arent you?:nonono: It says everything about their comparative SKILL LEVEL fool! Foreman was all about power, he had no defence, no skills, nothing! He was a crude puncher, a lumbering bear.

What does skill level have to do with greatness?

Who cares if he was a 'lumbering bear' as you put it?

It was effective. Allowing him to dismantle ATG fighters, hense, his HW greatness.

Pastrano
07-05-2011, 05:05 PM
Actually he had a good jab and was great at cutting off the ring, two much needed attributes for a fighter looking for the ko more often than not. I would say his speed was deceiving and underrated also.

A good jab??! Is that why Dundee always had to remind him to jab during the Holyfield fight?! LOL! The words Foreman and jab don't hang together. I think you are mixing up his pushing away of opponents with jabbing.

NChristo
07-05-2011, 05:18 PM
BOY, you guys really are thick, arent you?:nonono: It says everything about their comparative SKILL LEVEL fool! Foreman was all about power, he had no defence, no skills, nothing! He was a crude puncher, a lumbering bear.

Yeah I'm thick, forget everything that Foreman achieved and his resume, you don't like his style so he wasn't all that.





:lol1:


This is quite hilarious.

No one with just power gets a gold medal and beats who George beat, of course he had skills you dunce, pre Ali-Foreman in particular used his jab to a great extent and was pretty damn good at cutting the ring and could control the distance.

But however, Paulie Malignaggi with a better resume, better skills and power could be the GOAT, so **** everything else.

Scott9945
07-05-2011, 05:33 PM
Without his power, Foreman would get OWNED by both Frazier and Norton, wally. Christ, he almost got owned by LYLE!

Without his height, Klitschko would have been too small for David Haye. :rofl:

You're really circling the drain at this point. :dunce:

Pastrano
07-06-2011, 07:09 AM
Without his height, Klitschko would have been too small for David Haye. :rofl:

You're really circling the drain at this point. :dunce:

Fools...no helping them I guess. :nonono: We are talking about SKILLS, fools! Foreman had next to none, thats the issue! Frazier, Ali, Norton, they could all be his professors in boxing.

JAB5239
07-06-2011, 07:43 AM
A good jab??! Is that why Dundee always had to remind him to jab during the Holyfield fight?! LOL! The words Foreman and jab don't hang together. I think you are mixing up his pushing away of opponents with jabbing.

Yes, a good jab. He was also very good at hiding the straight right behind it which is exactly how he knocked out Moorer.

<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GOGOkeJI1Sc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Greatest1942
07-06-2011, 09:55 AM
No Charley Burley?

How come?

Burley is a great fighter!!! But its all about criterias. If you have a criteria like longevity of title reign , Burley falls short( through no fault of his).. I will like people to have him in their top 10 though...

Jab...Fitz did quite a bit at middle weight

Non pareil Jack Dempsey was a living legend of the sport. The Black Pearl Harris Martin was a coloured Champion, Peter Maher was actually a legitimate World Heavyweight Contender. In 1893 he knocked out the very tough Jim Hall, who had beaten him earlier in his career and KOd him in 4. He also KOd several other fighters in less than 4 rounds.




He held the middleweight title five years and never lost it, moving up to the higher weights, where he performed exceptionally well too. You cannot say the same about many middle weight champs in history.

Let us not forget also, that after Fitz' retirement to become the heavyweight champion, no middleweight chaampion emerged until 1898 so technically this would have made fitz reign as long as Hagler and Monzons and the longest ever.

He was probably the best middleweight in the world for much longer, as he could have always made the weight and even when way past his prime, he was still beating light heavyweight all time greats like Philladelphi Jack Obrien

Fitz did not lose honestly in a fight from the Hall fight in 1890 to the O'Brien fight in 1905, except for the two ko's by the massive Jeffries.

I think in h2h in middle weight he ranks high. Though it all depends on the person forming the list.

IronDanHamza
07-06-2011, 10:03 AM
Burley is a great fighter!!! But its all about criterias. If you have a criteria like longetivity of title reign etc, Burley falls short( through no fault of his).. I will like people to have him in their top 10 though...

I guess so.

Still, I think he did enough to be considered a Top 10 MW regardless.

I mean, he beat alot of great fighters during his career.

New England
07-06-2011, 10:08 AM
Without his power, Foreman would get OWNED by both Frazier and Norton, wally. Christ, he almost got owned by LYLE!


errrrr..




and if i picked the right numbers on my lotto card
well i'd be a millionaire

Pastrano
07-06-2011, 11:29 AM
errrrr..




and if i picked the right numbers on my lotto card
well i'd be a millionaire

:bsflag: Another such answer from anybody and I'm gonna call you all morons for the rest of my time here.:thumbsdow :lol1:

joseph5620
07-08-2011, 12:05 AM
A good jab??! Is that why Dundee always had to remind him to jab during the Holyfield fight?! LOL! The words Foreman and jab don't hang together. I think you are mixing up his pushing away of opponents with jabbing.

If you're dumb enough to believe Foreman jabbed only because of Dundee that speaks for itself. And yes Foreman used a very powerful accurate jab during his comeback. He always had a good powerful jab. Just check out how he used it against your hero Chuvalo. Step away from your agenda for once. For your sake it better be an agenda. If not it's just ignorance.

Marchegiano
07-08-2011, 12:15 AM
Burley is a great fighter!!! But its all about criterias. If you have a criteria like longevity of title reign , Burley falls short( through no fault of his).. I will like people to have him in their top 10 though...

Jab...Fitz did quite a bit at middle weight

Non pareil Jack Dempsey was a living legend of the sport. The Black Pearl Harris Martin was a coloured Champion, Peter Maher was actually a legitimate World Heavyweight Contender. In 1893 he knocked out the very tough Jim Hall, who had beaten him earlier in his career and KOd him in 4. He also KOd several other fighters in less than 4 rounds.




He held the middleweight title five years and never lost it, moving up to the higher weights, where he performed exceptionally well too. You cannot say the same about many middle weight champs in history.

Let us not forget also, that after Fitz' retirement to become the heavyweight champion, no middleweight chaampion emerged until 1898 so technically this would have made fitz reign as long as Hagler and Monzons and the longest ever.

He was probably the best middleweight in the world for much longer, as he could have always made the weight and even when way past his prime, he was still beating light heavyweight all time greats like Philladelphi Jack Obrien

Fitz did not lose honestly in a fight from the Hall fight in 1890 to the O'Brien fight in 1905, except for the two ko's by the massive Jeffries.

I think in h2h in middle weight he ranks high. Though it all depends on the person forming the list.

Yeah man Fitz was a bad ass. Nonpareil was pretty ****ing bad as **** himself, and he doesn't seem to get much love here either....busy talking about HW and what not...IMO MW Jack Dempsey is p4p trump over any HW.

Ziggy Stardust
07-08-2011, 12:51 AM
If you're dumb enough to believe Foreman jabbed only because of Dundee that speaks for itself. And yes Foreman used a very powerful accurate jab during his comeback. He always had a good powerful jab. Just check out how he used it against your hero Chuvalo. Step away from your agenda for once. For your sake it better be an agenda. If not it's just ignorance.

I saw the original version of your post.....Big Green from me when it lets me hit you again :439:

Poet

BoyFloyd
07-08-2011, 02:27 AM
Martinez is Middleweight king

Scott9945
07-08-2011, 02:32 AM
Martinez is Middleweight king


No, you're thinking of Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. :nono:

Pastrano
07-08-2011, 04:26 PM
No, you're thinking of Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. :nono:

Him?!? Even Khurtsidze murders him.:D

Marchegiano
07-09-2011, 04:26 AM
Kid McCoy murders them both