BoxingScene's members top 10 P4P all-time

[Yogi]

I'll get to some more of their mysterious ways tomorrow, starting with that other NY Times decision they gave to Jim Barry over Langford in Sept 25, 1907, which is, once again, a puzzling source selection.

As it was with that Jeannette fight I alluded to, the NY Times were very much in the minority with the opinion that Jim Barry got the better of Langford on that date quoted, and in fact, they were the only one who had that opinion (yet BoxRec uses it?). All of the other opinions of the newspapers of the time thought Langford had the best of it, including the Trenton Daily News, Washington Times, Boston Daily Globe, Chicago Daily Tribune, etc., and the following one, which is probably the most detailed account of the fight I've seen from the time;


"New York, Sept 25th--Sam Langford, of Boston, scored a victory over Jim Barry, of Chicago, at the Sharkey Athletic Club here tonight. He outpointed his opponent in every round, and several times had the Westerner in a dazed condition.

In the first the negro tripped while backing away from one of Barry's rushes and before he could recover himself Barry struck him a slight right-hand swing on the jaw and felled him. Langford got up in a jiffy and fought back fiercely.

Langford scored a clean knockdown in the second round.

When Barry got up, after he had fallen, the Boston man landed a hard right and left swing to the jaw, and while Barry was reeling from side to side, landed another terrific left-hand swing to the same spot, and Barry struck the floor with a thud.

Langford had the better of the third and fourth rounds. After they had clinched several times in the fifth, Barry landed a hard right-swing on Langford's jaw, but the latter merely grinned and retaliated by three straight jabs on his opponents face and jaw.

Barry was extremely tired and hung on to prevent being knocked out.

Barry showed signs of fatigue in the final round and was content to fight at long range. At this style Langford was much the superior, and landed three blows to Barry's one." - The Washington Herald, Sept 26th, 1907

[Yogi]

Cheers Poet, Jab, and McGrain, and I'm glad you guys get a little bit out of this stuff no matter how **** it is of me to be posting it.

[dobermann28]

these list only have old fighters in them!!!

are modern fighters not good enough?

it seem to be we are only picking fighters from 30-50 years ago!! you all need to take your head out your asses and pick some active fighters!!!

just cos there legecy is finished dont mean they are the best!!!

[JAB5239]

these list only have old fighters in them!!!

are modern fighters not good enough?

it seem to be we are only picking fighters from 30-50 years ago!! you all need to take your head out your asses and pick some active fighters!!!

just cos there legecy is finished dont mean they are the best!!!

Maybe you should explain why active fighters should be ranked higher than their more accomplished counterparts?

[Hearnsz]

these list only have old fighters in them!!!

are modern fighters not good enough?

it seem to be we are only picking fighters from 30-50 years ago!! you all need to take your head out your asses and pick some active fighters!!!

just cos there legecy is finished dont mean they are the best!!!

The oldtimers on most people's P4P lists are either guys who fought ALOT (SRR, Armstrong, Langford, Greb, Charles), fighters who DOMINATED (Louis, Duran) and/or fighters who fought GREAT OPPOSITION (SRL, Ali, Jeffries).
(please note that I am aware of the fact that the guys who fought alot also faced crappy opposition often)

Today's fighters may seem to be fighting great opposition but their managers are very worried about their fighter's record and still protect them. There's alot of ducking.

I'm not saying current fighters are less skilled. But when you make a top10 list chances are higher that there's gonna be more fighters in it from the past 100 years than fighters from the past 5 years. That's just simple predictionmathematics. None the less I have PBF in my top10, but I'm not going to post it yet because I might still adjust it while learning from posts of Yogi, Jab, Poet etc...
The reason I have PBF in my top10 isn't because of his resume or accomplishments but looking at his skill I think he's technically the best ever.
However I do believe amazing physical specimen like Hearns and Leonard would be able to beat him with raw power and combinations.

Feel free to post your P4P list though. I'm interesting in seeing how you rank the former champions and the current ones. Everyone's views are welcome. And so is the critisism you gave btw.

[dobermann28]

Maybe you should explain why active fighters should be ranked higher than their more accomplished counterparts?

i would base a all time p4p list on pure talent. not who they fought in what era...just pure talent!!!

and i belive alot of modern fighters are being over looked because people dont want to take a chance because the best might still be to come...

on pure talent i think modern fighters like RJJ, bernard hopkins,calzaghe,mayweather,de la hoya,castillo,pacman,berrera should be in some lists.

i just think people need to see that on talent alone we are in a better time!!!

[Hearnsz]

i would base a all time p4p list on pure talent. not who they fought in what era...just pure talent!!!

and i belive alot of modern fighters are being over looked because people dont want to take a chance because the best might still be to come...

on pure talent i think modern fighters like RJJ, bernard hopkins,calzaghe,mayweather,de la hoya,castillo,pacman,berrera should be in some lists.

i just think people need to see that on talent alone we are in a better time!!!

Well that's kinda hard to judge as the kind of skill you need has changed over the years as boxing has evolved.
Let me elaborate:
In the old days the thinner gloves forced the fighters to clinch more because that was the only way they could rest. They couldn't just stand there and block shots with their gloves because then they would break their hands. That's why you see fighters just throw a few punches and rush in to clinch in the old fights.
Would some of the fighters have looked technically even better than Mayweather or Hopkins if they had bigger gloves? Who knows.

I can see where you are comming from though and I would probably also have more recent fighters in my list than the avarage Joe.
But guys like Yogi, JAB, Poet etc... who have alot of oldtimers in their list, also have done alot of research and know alot more than we do.
So if those guys say Sam Langford (or whoever) was, in their opinion, the greatest of all time, I'm not just going to accept it as my own opinion. But I'd deffinately find it interesting to hear out. And that's a big reason why I made this thread.

EDIT: and yes it's true that people are always saying: "damn the current scene SUCKS!", "It was alot better XX years ago!".
And then after XX years that scene finally gets the recognition it deserves. (Lennox Lewis is a great example; and Wlad will be too)

[StarshipTrooper]

After seeing LeftHookTua's thread about the current top10 P4P I tought it would be interesting aswell to make a same kind of all-time thread.

The fighter on #1 of a person's list will get 10 points, #2 gets 9 points, ... #10 gets 1 point.

I'll update the official list every now and then.
Also feel free to comment each other's lists and the "official" one.

PS: I do realise that there are ALOT of fighters that will be chosen but some will be chosen more frequently; making the "official" p4p list relevant.

PLEASE MAKE SURE TO: Give 10 different names, and only 1 name per number.

Current top10: (18 Posts: #2,3,5,7,9,10,11,12,14,18,19,21,23,25,32,48,59,60)

1. Sugar Ray Robinson (174)
2. Henry Armstrong (108)
3. Muhammad Ali (97)
4. Willie Pep (97)
5. Roberto Duràn (87)
6. Joe Louis (66)
7. Sugar Ray Leonard (59)
8. Sam Langford (56)
9. Harry Greb (45)
10. Ezzard Charles (20)

We were working on something similier on the All-Time Heavyweight thread.

BTW, your another newcomer that's really turning into a star on this forum: My hat's off to you, great work!

Poet

[Hearnsz]

We were working on something similier on the All-Time Heavyweight thread.

BTW, your another newcomer that's really turning into a star on this forum: My hat's off to you, great work!

Poet

Thanks!
I've recently started boxing and got more interested in the history scene of the sport. So I joined this forum for the T&N / History section.
Boxing is a very unpopular sport in Belgium. People here only know Ali and Tyson. They've never heard of SRR, Louis, Dempsey...
So I'm trying to learn more because a few months ago I also didn't know those names.
Boxing is getting slightly more popular lately though because the current WW eurochamp is Belgian and because we might actually have olympic players in 2012

Where's the all time heavyweight thread by the way?

[JAB5239]

Thanks!
I've recently started boxing and got more interested in the history scene of the sport. So I joined this forum for the T&N / History section.
Boxing is a very unpopular sport in Belgium. People here only know Ali and Tyson. They've never heard of SRR, Louis, Dempsey...
So I'm trying to learn more because a few months ago I also didn't know those names.
Boxing is getting slightly more popular lately though because the current WW eurochamp is Belgian and because we might actually have olympic players in 2012

Where's the all time heavyweight thread by the way?

When you click on the boxing history section, look at the very top of all the threads. It should be a "sticky".