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

[JAB5239]

Armstrong was a Lightweight who held the Welterweight strap.

Gans was a Lightweight who was KO'd by a Featherweight.

And how exactly does that give Armstrong a better career at lightweight, therefore deserving the higher ranking?Jack Dempsey lost to a former featherweight, what's your point? What you're saying makes no sense.

[Anthony342]

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

What about Barney Ross?

[JAB5239]

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.

You "think" any fighter could beat another. You may even be right, but there is no way to prove it unless they fought. Myself, I can't responsibly rank a fighter over another that hasnt beaten the same caliber of fighters as consistently as another fighter. Bottom line is they just didn't do as much. Pound for pound is another story. It's not a weight class, it's a Mythical line up of the greatest fighters ever with a ton of different variables to take into consideration. To me, that is why Hank Rates so highly p4p, but usually doesn't top a weight class, but is near the top in several. That's just my opinion.

[JAB5239]

What about Barney Ross?

One of my all time favorites!! But not a top 5 lightweight in my opinion. Like Armstrong though, he ranks higher p4p because of his ratings and resume over several divisions.

[Anthony342]

One of my all time favorites!! But not a top 5 lightweight in my opinion. Like Armstrong though, he ranks higher p4p because of his ratings and resume over several divisions.

Cool, thanks for the education. I guess Robinson, Greb and Armstrong is a solid top 3 pound for pound then.

[ron davis]

Dee Money, you nailed it! H.A. best weight was Lw. and he was protected by Mike Jacobs ( his house champion) who controlled all the fights in NY. Including Joe Louis, Lou Ambers, Jenkins, Sugar Ray Robinson, Zivic, Canzoneri, NYSAC, referees, judges, and the press. He picked who they can fight, and paid them, whatever, he wanted too, and they took it.

[Rusty Tromboni]

And how exactly does that give Armstrong a better career at lightweight, therefore deserving the higher ranking?Jack Dempsey lost to a former featherweight, what's your point? What you're saying makes no sense.

Who said anything about career?

At or about 135 pounds Armstrong simply proved a superior fighter.

The simplest questions will usually give you the clearest answer:

1) which is more impressive, beating up on guys your size or guys bigger?

2) which is more impressive, going undefeated or being defeated?


It's not that I don't make sense, it's that the conversation is going over your head.

Really, you're making a very definitive claim, shouldn't you be able to provide supporting information? Show me how Gans was the better Lightweight.

[Rusty Tromboni]

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

And yet McFarland was never defeated.
How do fighters beaten in their prime out-rank a fighter who went undefeated, especially when he was often undersized?

[JAB5239]

Who said anything about career?

At or about 135 pounds Armstrong simply proved a superior fighter.

The simplest questions will usually give you the clearest answer:

1) which is more impressive, beating up on guys your size or guys bigger?

2) which is more impressive, going undefeated or being defeated?


It's not that I don't make sense, it's that the conversation is going over your head.

Really, you're making a very definitive claim, shouldn't you be able to provide supporting information? Show me how Gans was the better Lightweight.

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/gans2.html

[billeau2]

So many great fighters

I find it very hard to think in terms of "Better" when looking at fighters at this weight at this time. Rusty has a point about McFarland being an exceptional talent... I would add the ***ish phenom Ted "kid" lewis, Jack Britton and others to the list. Lewis, like Gans was more technical in his approach, but these guys were all exceptional talents. McFarland had the gift of power, Gans the gift of exceptional technical ability... when we bring in Leanard, Ross, ect it gets really hard to designate the greatest.

Lewis is one of my favorites... Him and another great talent, jack Britton clashed many times...

I think Armstrong was perhaps a class above... but to argue that any of these men was the best has some merit.