What is the requirements of an ATG?

"I wish I that smart"? is that english? you read Greb's bio which was written by some Greb fanboy like yourself and of course u read that Greb got robbed at least twice, right? well I read books which didnt have anything to do with Greb or Tunney in the first place, so there is a higher chance my source is more objective than yours. No, I didn't read Greb was robbed twice. I read that he was arguably robbed in the second fight. Plenty have shared this same view. I also read that the 4th fight that was a draw that you claim was a robbery, could easily have gone either way. And Greb could arguably have won. Despite being past his prime, whilst Tunney wasn't. I've read the the 5th was a decisive win for Tunney, and the 1st was a decisive win for Greb. The rest, all close fights. But, that was all in my post. And, plenty have said the same as opposed to Tunney clearly winning 4 out of the 5 fights. I have never heard or read anyone say Tunney clearly won 4 out of the 5 fights.

:lol1: :lol1: Oh, do I? You read books?!?! Oh my f*cking God you are one hell of a smart guy. I wish I that smart. So smart that I could read books and such. You ever read The Fearless Harry Greb? That book alone doesn't state that Gene Tunney won 4 out of 5 fights decisvely. Like I said, the first fight and the 5th fight are the only fights considered decisve victories; The 1st for Greb and the 5th for Tunney. The second fight, plenty considered Greb to have won. The 4th fight, which you claim was a robbery draw, was also considered a close fight. One in which Greb argubally won. Despite being past his prime whilst Tunney wasn't. The others were considered fights that coul have gone either way. "I wish I that smart"? is that english? you read Greb's bio which was written by some Greb fanboy like yourself and of course u read that Greb got robbed at least twice, right? well I read books which didnt have anything to do with Greb or Tunney in the first place, so there is a higher chance my source is more objective than yours.

Im not gonna argue with you about fights of which no footage is available. you only have your information from boxrec.com guess what: I read tons of books about boxing history. and pretty much all said Tunney should have won 4 fights. dont go further with this cause I am not gonna search for all the books I read so you can also read them. got better things to do :lol1: :lol1: Oh, do I? You read books?!?! Oh my f*cking God you are one hell of a smart guy. I wish I that smart. So smart that I could read books and such. You ever read The Fearless Harry Greb? That book alone doesn't state that Gene Tunney won 4 out of 5 fights decisively. Why are you making **** up? Which historians say that Tunney won 4 out of 5 fights decisively? Please, share. Like I said, the first fight and the 5th fight are the only fights considered decisve victories; The 1st for Greb and the 5th for Tunney. The second fight, plenty considered Greb to have won. The 4th fight, which you claim was a robbery draw, was also considered a close fight. One in which Greb argubally won. Despite being past his prime whilst Tunney wasn't. The others were considered fights that coul have gone either way.

Plenty of people claim that Greb was robbed in the second fight. The 4th fight which you claim was a robbery was also considered a close fight, one in which Greb argubally won as were most of their fights. Greb was also past his prime in that fight as opposed to Tunney, who wasn't. And only fight that Tunney clearly won was the 5th. And Greb won the first fight just as clear. The rest were all considered close fights. Im not gonna argue with you about fights of which no footage is available. you only have your information from boxrec.com guess what: I read tons of books about boxing history. and pretty much all said Tunney should have won 4 fights. dont go further with this cause I am not gonna search for all the books I read so you can also read them. got better things to do

I just said he beat him 4 times but one time he got robbed and it was a draw. can you read? officially its 3-1-1, but from various sources I heard it should be 4-1. The 4th fight that you are claiming is robbery, plenty said come have gone either way and Greb even had an argument of winning it. Also, their second fight that Tunney won, plenty consider that in a robbery that Greb should have won. The only fight's that were decisive were the 1st in favour or Greb an the 5th in favour of Tunney.

Tunney beat him 4 times out of 5. one time he got robbed though and it was a draw. Plenty of people claim that Greb was robbed in the second fight. The 4th fight which you claim was a robbery was also considered a close fight, one in which Greb argubally won as were most of their fights. Greb was also past his prime in that fight as opposed to Tunney, who wasn't. And only fight that Tunney clearly won was the 5th. And Greb won the first fight just as clear. The rest were all considered close fights.

No, he beat him 3 times. Some feel Tunney shouldn't have gotten the split decision in their bout so either way by your logic it's still 3-1-1 in Tunney's favour. I just said he beat him 4 times but one time he got robbed and it was a draw. can you read? officially its 3-1-1, but from various sources I heard it should be 4-1.

Take a look at Pacquiao. There's your answer.

Tunney never beat Greb 4 times. :sad::liar: Tunney beat him 4 times out of 5. one time he got robbed though and it was a draw.

I'm was being generous. I've heard a few so-called experts make an argument for him being in the top 25. I just simply cannot see how.

Tunney never beat Greb 4 times. :sad::liar: He miss-read Boxrec.

Wins and Losses and some Knock Outs are great and all but I also think: THE TYPE IMPACT YOU HAVE ON THE NEXT GENERATION AFTER YOU! Some nerdy guy who only been watching boxing for 2-3 years is not qualified to tell you who is a ATG and who is not, I have some respect for what guys like maybe Bert Sugar thinks because he is older and seen a lot of fights but I have even more respect for what the FIGHTERS think, earning the respect for year PEERS is even more important then earning the respect of fans, because the Average Fans opinions changes after every fight...according to the "AVERAGE" Fans, your a ATG after one win and your a Bum and Overrated after one loss that is why P4P list should be voted on by the fighters and trainers...not a room full of nerds who never boxed before giving their opinions on who they think is the P4P Best for example, Mayweather gets bashed by the Media and Fans, but he is your Favorite Fighters...FAVORITE FIGHTER and he gets nothing but respect from his PEERS and also no fighter fighting today will have more of an impact on the next generation of fighters then Mayweather (LIKE HIM OR NOT), you already see it in guys like Adrien Broner, Gary Russell Jr and even Andre Ward and Canelo talks about how they studies Mayweather, more guys using the Philly Shell Defense and why the hell wouldn't they?...when you can influence the guys after you to the point in which they try to pattern themselves after you, that ALSO makes you a ATG IMO!

You'd struggle. I'm was being generous. I've heard a few so-called experts make an argument for him being in the top 25.

He's around 25-30 for me, personally. Top 30's a real push IMO. I'd say Top 40 is much more fitting.

I am austrian. and I follow the sport of boxing since 20 years. I have seen it all, read it all, compared it all. I know stuff about guys like Harry Wills, Sam Langford, Sam McVey and Joe Jeannette that you cant even dream off. your retarded asss has probably not even heard of those guys. You probably dont even know that Jack Dempsey didnt fight black guys and if he would have, he wouldnt have been a world champion as long as he was. I know that Gene Tunney fought Harry Greb 5 times and beat him 4 times. and that is just BASIC stuff I am talking about now. But I bet your silly asss doesnt even know those things. I'm going to pull up Wiki shortly and research Wall Street. So hit me up later so I can give u investment tips. I'm going to be giving free advice in NSB.

Pac and Floyd are both around Top 30, and have a couple years left to make a push for the Top 20 in my eyes. If Floyd beats Cotto at 154 and Manny or Sergio, he'd without question make a jump to the Top 20 to me. And if Manny beats Bradley and Floyd, he'd make a jump to the Top 20 as well without question. The fact that some of Pac's delusional fans rate him as the GOAT or Top 5, let alone the Top 15-20, is why people say a ton of his fans are irrational and delusional. They say Pac has this great resume and than s**t on Floyd's. They say Floyd has a C resume, but then turn around and say Cotto has a B resume. It's ludicrous. Both Pac and Floyd have good resumes, but who's better all-time......we won't know until they fight each other or if they don't fight, how each finishes out his last 1-2 years here. By the way, Top 5 All-Time......... Ali, Leonard, Robinson, Armstrong, Louis. Any order is pretty much good to me. Based on career resume and era, that's it. H2H, it's a whole different story of course. For example, I would not pick Joe Louis to beat Mike Tyson in a H2H fight. But, given each guys career, resume, era, Joe Louis is the greater fighter and is higher on the ATG list by far. I can look right through you. the boxing experts shiit on Mayweathers resume cause he ducked Pacquiao,Margarito, Cotto, Paul Williams and lots of other fighters. now you just say BOTH Pacquiao and Mayweather have shiit resumes. the truth is Pacquiao has one of the best resumes EVER, comparable to Ali, Robinson and others. And when you really go into detail, I could destroy Ali's resume. I could say he needed gift decisions against Doug Jones and Jimmy Young, lost twice against Ken Norton, struggled with Frazier each and every time, got beaten by ****king Leon Spinks, and struggled with pretty much EVERY TOP FIGHTER he ever faced. Shavers, Ron Lyle, ....... But the bottom line is Im not gonna shiit on Ali cause he is probably the greatest ever. But Pacquiao is no different. you are probably a brother from america who doesnt like the fact that a non american fighter is ranked so highly on the ATG list by pretty much all boxing experts. its as simple as that.

WTF are you talking about? Don't compare Ali's issues with Manny's non-issues. Pac's an ATG. But he's not a top 5. You might be able to argue top 25 or 20. You'd struggle.

Pac and Floyd are both around Top 30, and have a couple years left to make a push for the Top 20 in my eyes. If Floyd beats Cotto at 154 and Manny or Sergio, he'd without question make a jump to the Top 20 to me. And if Manny beats Bradley and Floyd, he'd make a jump to the Top 20 as well without question. The fact that some of Pac's delusional fans rate him as the GOAT or Top 5, let alone the Top 15-20, is why people say a ton of his fans are irrational and delusional. They say Pac has this great resume and than s**t on Floyd's. They say Floyd has a C resume, but then turn around and say Cotto has a B resume. It's ludicrous. Both Pac and Floyd have good resumes, but who's better all-time......we won't know until they fight each other or if they don't fight, how each finishes out his last 1-2 years here. By the way, Top 5 All-Time......... Ali, Leonard, Robinson, Armstrong, Louis. Any order is pretty much good to me. Based on career resume and era, that's it. H2H, it's a whole different story of course. For example, I would not pick Joe Louis to beat Mike Tyson in a H2H fight. But, given each guys career, resume, era, Joe Louis is the greater fighter and is higher on the ATG list by far.

I am austrian. and I follow the sport of boxing since 20 years. I am a boxing historian since about 10 years meaning I have seen it all, read it all, compared it all. I know stuff about guys like Harry Wills, Sam Langford, Sam McVey and Joe Jeannette that you cant even dream off. your retarded asss has probably not even heard of those guys. You probably dont even know that Jack Dempsey didnt fight black guys and if he would have, he wouldnt have been a world champion as long as he was. I know that Gene Tunney fought Harry Greb 5 times and beat him 4 times. and that is just BASIC stuff I am talking about now. But I bet your silly asss doesnt even know those things. Then you'e are knowingly insulting the legacies of the actual top 5 fighters of all-time. You need to back off from the claim, Your getting caught up in fandom and its overriding your boxing knowledge.

:peeright:ur a clown. not worth my time to feed a troll you think it matters to me what you clowns think or pretend to think? Do you think it mattered to Muhammad Ali when the whole world wanted him to go to Vietnam? Do you think Pacquiao cares about a few clowns like you guys who post their crap on a boxing forum all day long? The truth always prevails. And if Pacquiao is not the greatest ever, we will see it. But as far as Im concerned, he is a top 5 ATG NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS NOW IN HIS CAREER. he can lose 10 fights in a row from now on and in his last 2 fights get knocked out by Charlie Zelenoff and Andrew Hartley, but he would still be a top 5 ATG. you guys need to stop hating and maybe just fokk off the internet Yes I'm the "clown"