cox's corner fighter of the century.

[AntonTheMeh]

joe gans 1900's
sam langford 1910's
benny leonard 1920's
joe louis 1930's
ray robinson 1940's
archie moore 1950's
muhammad ali 1960's
roberto duran 1970's
ray leonard 1980's
roy jones 1990's

and ray robinson as fighter of the century.
the fighter of this decade[2000's] in my opinion is floyd mayweather.
so history repeats himself.
every thing I've read about joe gans is everything i hear and see about floyd.

i posted this on nsb, by mistake.

[JAB5239]

joe gans 1900's
sam langford 1910's
benny leonard 1920's
joe louis 1930's
ray robinson 1940's
archie moore 1950's
muhammad ali 1960's
roberto duran 1970's
ray leonard 1980's
roy jones 1990's

and ray robinson as fighter of the century.
the fighter of this decade[2000's] in my opinion is floyd mayweather.
so history repeats himself.
every thing I've read about joe gans is everything i hear and see about floyd.

i posted this on nsb, by mistake.

I agree Mayweather is the fighter of the 2000's so far. But with almost a year and a half left I think Pacquaio has a chance to surpass him as long as he is at least competitive with DLH and goes back down and collects 2 or 3 big scalps at 135 and maybe 140. For some reason I wouldn't bet on things going that way though.

As far as the Gans/Mayweather comparison......I don't think there is as much as you do my friend. Gans fought all the best and almost always won in a time where black men were routinely screwed by the judges. combine that with his longevity and willingness to face right up until the end of his career and I favor Gans considerably over Floyd p4p. That is only MY opinion though.

[AntonTheMeh]

I agree Mayweather is the fighter of the 2000's so far. But with almost a year and a half left I think Pacquaio has a chance to surpass him as long as he is at least competitive with DLH and goes back down and collects 2 or 3 big scalps at 135 and maybe 140. For some reason I wouldn't bet on things going that way though.

As far as the Gans/Mayweather comparison......I don't think there is as much as you do my friend. Gans fought all the best and almost always won in a time where black men were routinely screwed by the judges. combine that with his longevity and willingness to face right up until the end of his career and I favor Gans considerably over Floyd p4p. That is only MY opinion though.

when i compare floyd to gans i do it in reference to what i've heard of gans's ability and what I've seen of floyd.but your right about pacquiao though.he could sneak by him.

[marciano1952]

I agree Mayweather is the fighter of the 2000's so far. But with almost a year and a half left I think Pacquaio has a chance to surpass him as long as he is at least competitive with DLH and goes back down and collects 2 or 3 big scalps at 135 and maybe 140. For some reason I wouldn't bet on things going that way though.

As far as the Gans/Mayweather comparison......I don't think there is as much as you do my friend. Gans fought all the best and almost always won in a time where black men were routinely screwed by the judges. combine that with his longevity and willingness to face right up until the end of his career and I favor Gans considerably over Floyd p4p. That is only MY opinion though.

I agree with you on gans

[AntonTheMeh]

from cox's corner.

Gans was one of the all-time ring greats; He had fast hands and was quick on his feet like a cat; On offense, he hit with both hands but mostly utilized a long, straight left accompanied by a stiff right; He also had a great left hook; According to oldtimers, he threw nearly every punch perfectly

On defense, he guarded himself well; His quickness and ducking ability made him a difficult target to strike; News accounts assert that nobody was better at picking off punches

doesn't this sound like something they would say about floyd?

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/gans.htm

[wmute]

I think that something which relates Gans, Benny Leonard and Mayweather is their scientific method in the ring and in training. Students of the game, boxing nerds in the good sense of the term.

I am not talking about achievements.

[black.ink]

My knowledge on boxing history isn't great but for pre 1900's, i'd nominate Peter Jackson as the best fighter.

I pretty much agree with the other choices by decade and Robinson was most definitely the greatest of all time.

The hardest choice for me is who was best at Lightweight? Duran, Gans or Benny Leonard?

[JAB5239]

from cox's corner.

doesn't this sound like something they would say about floyd?

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/gans.htm

Lol, I gotta admit Alpha, it really does. Based on competition and era I still don't agree, but I see your point. This was an excellent example, my man.

[JAB5239]

My knowledge on boxing history isn't great but for pre 1900's, i'd nominate Peter Jackson as the best fighter.

I pretty much agree with the other choices by decade and Robinson was most definitely the greatest of all time.

The hardest choice for me is who was best at Lightweight? Duran, Gans or Benny Leonard?

Im not very well versed with Peter Jackson, but I havev read he was an incredible fighter, and have even read opinions that rank him ahead of Jack Johnson all time. I think that is tough to substantiate due to the lack of knowledge of the time, but I also think it is testament to how good he really was, as well.

As far as Duran, Gans or Leonard. I look at it this way. Duran was the most dominant of the 3 during his championship reign at 135. Leonard fought the best comp at that weight. And Gans, in my opinion was probably the most talented when going by his record. It is amazing the amount of wins compared to losses he has in an era where a black man was routinely screwed by the judges. Ant of these 3 in any order is acceptable in my opinion.

[AntonTheMeh]

Lol, I gotta admit Alpha, it really does. Based on competition and era I still don't agree, but I see your point. This was an excellent example, my man.

i know that post lightweight, floyd's resume has been weak.