Who do you consider to be the top 10 greatest welterweights

No way Oscar belongs on an all time top ten welter list. Not even close. Absolutely correct. Oscar has always been very overrated.

sensible list what's your reasoning behind placing Armstrong lower than top 3 and leaving Basilio/Ross out? So here is a little clarification: Let me preface by saying that I'm a relatively young man, not new to boxing (been watching since the early 90's), but I am obviously much more familiar with the modern era. Welterweight is one of the most storied divisions in boxing history in addition to being extremely talent rich. The list of hall of fame, all-time great type fighters to come from that division is loooooooooong (I know I'm telling you stuff you already know). Making this list really got down to splitting hairs for me. I also confess to just throwing out the first 10 names to come to mind. I did use some thought, but with further consideration I could probably craft something a little more accurate. I tried to take ability and accomplishment into account when making this. I really didn't place an even weight on one or the other throughout, hence Hearns being slotted at 6 when his accomplishments don't stack up. Maybe a bit misguided, but also a different take on things. I also tried to think about how they'd fare against each other in a potential match. I know Armstrong was a fantastic fighter, one of the 3-5 greatest of all-time in fact (or widely regarded as such). I ranked him behind Griffith and Napoles for a couple of reasons. The first being I'm more familiar with their careers, the second being I feel they'd come out victorious against Armstrong in a Welterweight bout. All of these men were top fighters. I'm prepared to say that Armstrong is a greater fighter overall, regardless of weight, but I couldn't bring myself to rate him ahead of them as a Welterweight champion. Being that I have read and seen more of Napoles and Griffith, I think I'm more comfortable assessing their ability/careers. I favor the work of Napoles and Griffith at Welterweight. Whew.... As far as Basilio and Ross go, one could certainly make cases for them as well. I usually think about BArney Ross as more of a Lightweight or Jr. Welter though. Hell what about Fritzie Zivic and Luis Rodriguez? Fritzie was a dirty ****er, but he fought just about everyone I could ever imagine.

I can see why Hearns would be ranked in there but his WW resume isn't that impressive: KO2 Pipino Cuevas KO1 Eddie Gazo (former WBA light middleweight champion) TKO4 Angel Espada (former WBA welterweight champion) KO3 Bruce Curry (had 2 close fights with Benitez, future WBC LWW champion) TKO Clyde Gray (65-6 at the time, top contender) TKO Saensak Muangsurin (former 2-time WBC LWW champion, won the world title in his 3rd fight) Only Pipino Cuevas out of those was a really big win for Hearns, the others were little more than stepping stones for Tommy by the time he fought them. If he had beaten Leonard then yes, he should be ranked among the top 5 no doubt. Duran had a great win over Leonard and a very good win over Palomino but aside from that he did nothing at welterweight. it's a tough balancing act taking both pure skill and achievement into account Burley jumped up and down from welterweight to middleweight and light heavyweight because he had trouble getting fights. I think he should be ranked as a middleweight because that's the weight division in which he beat Holman Williams, Archie Moore, Fritzie Zivic, Cocoa Kid and Bert Lytell. It's a shame that he never got a shot at a title. i see

This list isn't in order. cop-out :D Sugar Ray Robinson Pernell Whitaker Kid Gavilan Henry Armstrong Felix Trinidad Emile Griffith Jose Angel Napoles Joe Walcott Mickey Walker Sugar Ray Leonard quite a brave choice to include Sweet Pea imo... You rate him higher than the likes of Ted Kid Lewis, Barney Ross, Jimmy McLarnin, Carmen Basilio, Tommy Hearns, Fritzie Zivic, Jack Britton etc?

I can definitely see Hearns and I would probably put him in there myself Duran, however, I'm not convinced on I can see why Hearns would be ranked in there but his WW resume isn't that impressive: KO2 Pipino Cuevas KO1 Eddie Gazo (former WBA light middleweight champion) TKO4 Angel Espada (former WBA welterweight champion) KO3 Bruce Curry (had 2 close fights with Benitez, future WBC LWW champion) TKO Clyde Gray (65-6 at the time, top contender) TKO Saensak Muangsurin (former 2-time WBC LWW champion, won the world title in his 3rd fight) Only Pipino Cuevas out of those was a really big win for Hearns, the others were little more than stepping stones for Tommy by the time he fought them. If he had beaten Leonard then yes, he should be ranked among the top 5 no doubt. Duran had a great win over Leonard and a very good win over Palomino but aside from that he did nothing at welterweight. What are your thoughts on Charlie Burley? It's a name I've heard brought up in these discussions but I don't really know anything about him to be honest. Just from scanning his boxrec quickly he seems to have been larger than welterweight for the better part of his career? Burley jumped up and down from welterweight to middleweight and light heavyweight because he had trouble getting fights. I think he should be ranked as a middleweight because that's the weight division in which he beat Holman Williams, Archie Moore, Fritzie Zivic, Cocoa Kid and Bert Lytell. It's a shame that he never got a shot at a title.

Oscar? I rate him very highly but a disputed win over old Whitaker, a win against Quartey, losses against Mosley and a loss against Trinidad (although I did score the Trinidad fight for him myself) doesn't seem to stand up against what some of these other guys have achieved there No way Oscar belongs on an all time top ten welter list. Not even close.

I don't think people really agree on anything except that Leonard and Robinson are the top two. Other than that you see Armstrong, Griffith, Napoles and Gavilan frequently among the top 5. I personally believe that Hearns and Duran shouldn't be ranked in the top 10 but I can see why people would rank them that highly. Head to head they obviously do well but they don't really have the resume at the weight to back up a top 10 rating. I can definitely see Hearns and I would probably put him in there myself Duran falls short for me What are your thoughts on Charlie Burley? It's a name I've heard brought up in these discussions but I don't really know anything about him to be honest. Just from scanning his boxrec quickly he seems to have been larger than welterweight for the better part of his career?

honorable mention goes to zab judah

10. pablo ortiz 9. theodore mcmichael 8. sammie forte 7. jon m durant 6. wesley stanbryant 5. kendall holt 4. george ruxbin 3. lisa dimfield 2. landon wetnutt 1. nomar thundreburke (goat)

I don't think people really agree on anything except that Leonard and Robinson are the top two. Other than that you see Armstrong, Griffith, Napoles and Gavilan frequently among the top 5. I personally believe that Hearns and Duran shouldn't be ranked in the top 10 but I can see why people would rank them that highly. Head to head they obviously do well but they don't really have the resume at the weight to back up a top 10 rating.

From what i have seen. Robinson Leonard Armstrong Hearns Walker Whitiker Oscar Oscar? I rate him very highly but a disputed win over old Whitaker, a win against Quartey, losses against Mosley and a loss against Trinidad (although I did score the Trinidad fight for him myself) doesn't seem to stand up against what some of these other guys have achieved there

sensible list what's your reasoning behind placing Armstrong lower than top 3 and leaving Basilio/Ross out? Gotta go...my break is over but I'll be back to talk later.

Here are some lists: http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66198 ah thanks. i had a little look and couldn't find a existing thread

1. Sugar Ray Robinson 2. Sugar Ray Leonard 3. Emile Griffith 4. Jose Napoles 5. Henry Armstrong 6. Thomas Hearns 7. Kid Gavilan 8. Joe Walcott 9. Felix Trinidad 10. Mickey Walker Something like that. I think Hearns is probably as talented as anyone who has fought in the division, but he couldn't overcome his weak'ish chin and mental lapses in the ring against top fighters. sensible list what's your reasoning behind placing Armstrong lower than top 3 and leaving Basilio/Ross out?

Here are some lists: http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66198

1. Sugar Ray Robinson 2. Sugar Ray Leonard 3. Emile Griffith 4. Jose Napoles 5. Henry Armstrong 6. Thomas Hearns 7. Kid Gavilan 8. Joe Walcott 9. Felix Trinidad 10. Mickey Walker Something like that. I think Hearns is probably as talented as anyone who has fought in the division, but he couldn't overcome his weak'ish chin and mental lapses in the ring against top fighters.

its definitive one of the hardest division to have a top 10, because there was just to many great welterweights. Stuff like Hearns' credentials, whether Barney Ross was a legitimate welter, "How credible are McLarnin's big wins at WW", what did Duran really do at welter etc. all just really tangles it all up you can make reasons for and discredit quite a lot of names up there

Just wondering what the consensus is on here Personally I find it quite a difficult division to rank (probably down to my sketchy knowledge on a couple of the prominent names), but all the lists I've come across through Google have been quite varied too its definitive one of the hardest division to have a top 10, because there was just to many great welterweights.