Do you consider Joe Gans as the Greatest Lightweight of All Times???

[HOUDINI563]

Rarely rate Armstrong highly in any weight class? Armstrong is always rated highly unless the person doing the rating is a moron. Monte Cox rated him the greatest featherweight. IBRO rates him the second greatest featherweight and top 5 lightweight and welterweight. The 1996 Ring Almanac and Book of Facts rated Armstrong 1st at welterweight. William Detloff rated Armstrong #4 Veterans Nat Fleischer and Charley Rose rated Armstrong in their top 10 at 147 pounds. Historian Tracy Callis agrees rating Armstrong the # 1 all time featherweight. You would find Armstrong listed top 5 within ANY noted boxing historians top 10 at least within one of the divisions he fought within.

[Anthony342]

Rarely rate Armstrong highly in any weight class? Armstrong is always rated highly unless the person doing the rating is a moron. Monte Cox rated him the greatest featherweight. IBRO rates him the second greatest featherweight and top 5 lightweight and welterweight. The 1996 Ring Almanac and Book of Facts rated Armstrong 1st at welterweight. William Detloff rated Armstrong #4 Veterans Nat Fleischer and Charley Rose rated Armstrong in their top 10 at 147 pounds. Historian Tracy Callis agrees rating Armstrong the # 1 all time featherweight. You would find Armstrong listed top 5 within ANY noted boxing historians top 10 at least within one of the divisions he fought within.

Yeah don't most pound for pound all time rankings go something like?

Robinson
Greb
Armstrong or

Robinson
Armstrong
Greb

Then usually there's a couple heavyweights I see thrown in Ali, Louis or Louis, Ali and then Dempsey in the top 10. That sound about right? And I believe you got B. Leonard, Duran for their lightweight careers, Duran also for his other wins, Charles-light heavy and add in a middle like a Hagler or Monzon, maybe Moore, something like that. Anyway, point is, Armstrong is usually 2 or 3 all time pound for pound right? And where do you place him?

[HOUDINI563]

Armstrong is always rated as one of the greatest in at least one of the divisions he fought within. Sometimes all three. He is in addition rated as a p4p ATG. He is in my top 5 ATG as Welterweight and Featherweight.

[Rusty Tromboni]

I see why people rarely rate Armstrong highly in any weight class (he seems to move around through many, not putting up a majority of his work in any given one). I agree though Armstrong was best when he was a LW competing against WWs, and I tend to usually look at him as a LW, maybe a JLW by todays standards for the start of his prime.

That being written, Armstrong has better wins than Garcia. He beat Garcia in '38, and I'd say that probably wasnt even his best win that year. Ross, Arizmendi, Wright, and Ambers I could see being better wins.

Beautifully said. I actually do believe the wins over Ambers are probably his best championship victories.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Rarely rate Armstrong highly in any weight class? Armstrong is always rated highly unless the person doing the rating is a moron. Monte Cox rated him the greatest featherweight. IBRO rates him the second greatest featherweight and top 5 lightweight and welterweight. The 1996 Ring Almanac and Book of Facts rated Armstrong 1st at welterweight. William Detloff rated Armstrong #4 Veterans Nat Fleischer and Charley Rose rated Armstrong in their top 10 at 147 pounds. Historian Tracy Callis agrees rating Armstrong the # 1 all time featherweight. You would find Armstrong listed top 5 within ANY noted boxing historians top 10 at least within one of the divisions he fought within.

Boxing AND Historian used in the same sentence... that's hilarious!

I bet they all wear velcro shoes just like you, Corky.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Yeah don't most pound for pound all time rankings go something like?

Robinson
Greb
Armstrong or

Robinson
Armstrong
Greb

Then usually there's a couple heavyweights I see thrown in Ali, Louis or Louis, Ali and then Dempsey in the top 10. That sound about right? And I believe you got B. Leonard, Duran for their lightweight careers, Duran also for his other wins, Charles-light heavy and add in a middle like a Hagler or Monzon, maybe Moore, something like that. Anyway, point is, Armstrong is usually 2 or 3 all time pound for pound right? And where do you place him?

Most people making lists have never Boxed... let alone researched their own lists.

It's like Billeau Forumstalker citing great Artists when he's never been allowed in arms reach of anything not made by Crayola.

Please, tell me what makes Armstrong better than McLarnin... other than being better managed.

[HOUDINI563]

Rusty is as always the class idiot.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Rusty is as always the class idiot.

Come on, Corky, how does the guy who dodged Miller and was out-hustled by a fat and old Wolgast rank as a top Featherweight?

Who was his best win?


Do you wear a bandana around your neck to catch your drool? We did that with my boys when they were teething.

[JAB5239]

So lightweight rankings all time would be:

Benny Leonard
Duran
Armstrong?

Duran, Leonard, Gans....in any order.

[DeeMoney]

Rarely rate Armstrong highly in any weight class? Armstrong is always rated highly unless the person doing the rating is a moron. Monte Cox rated him the greatest featherweight. IBRO rates him the second greatest featherweight and top 5 lightweight and welterweight. The 1996 Ring Almanac and Book of Facts rated Armstrong 1st at welterweight. William Detloff rated Armstrong #4 Veterans Nat Fleischer and Charley Rose rated Armstrong in their top 10 at 147 pounds. Historian Tracy Callis agrees rating Armstrong the # 1 all time featherweight. You would find Armstrong listed top 5 within ANY noted boxing historians top 10 at least within one of the divisions he fought within.

When I write that he is not rated highly in any given weight class I mean relative to his P4P rating. I think most people have him P4P ahead of Benny Leonard, Duran, etc. but not ahead of them in Lightweight ratings. There is a pretty popular ranking that just came out this past month thats been all over youtube that has him 6th at FW & 8th at LW. Behind people that he is clearly better than at that given weight. Yet he does not get ranked highly there because he didnt spend as much time in that class as others.

My point was, his P4P rating often exceeds his rating within any given weight class, because he did not spend as much time (relative to his career) in his best weight classes as others did.