Post You All-Time Great Lists! (No Trolls)

[Stoppage]

Because historically that's the way it's always been. They are generally faster for their size than Heavyweights, usually have a better skill set, and by and large have a much higher work rate.

Poet

I don't know any historian who doesn't have Ali and Louis in the top 10 of all-time.

Fighters should mostly be rated for their accomplishments rather than anything else. For example, I would think that a prime Tyson would beat a prime Lewis. But overall I would say Lewis is the better fighter because of what he's done.

And how can you rate Bob Fitzsimmons so high? There's maybe one fight of his that was filmed. And if you're saying fighters should be based skill-wise then in no way does Bob Fitzsimmons have better skills than Roy Jones Jr.

[Boxing_12]

Any ranking I make is based on how I see that fighter's ABILITY. It's not based on overall achievements (ie. world titles, # of defenses, ect.) Now who one has beaten is verly likely to influence how I see that fighter's ability but in general I consider a fighter's resume to be a separate discussion.

Poet

Any chance I could see a list from you, based on accomplishments?

[StarshipTrooper]

I don't know any historian who doesn't have Ali and Louis in the top 10 of all-time.

Fighters should mostly be rated for their accomplishments rather than anything else. For example, I would think that a prime Tyson would beat a prime Lewis. But overall I would say Lewis is the better fighter because of what he's done.

And how can you rate Bob Fitzsimmons so high? There's maybe one fight of his that was filmed. And if you're saying fighters should be based skill-wise then in no way does Bob Fitzsimmons have better skills than Roy Jones Jr.

I have a policy against placing Heavyweights on p4p lists: It's as simple as that.

Accomplishments may or may not reveal ability as someone can accomplish a lot against weak opposition while someone else can accomplish less against a murders row but still be considered the better fighter.

Skill is only one part of the equation. Attibutes is a better term: Skills are one of those attributes. As for Fitzsimmons I've done quite a bit of research on him and how boxing historians have regarded him and his abilities. It's only relatively recently that people have developed such distain for pre-1960 fighters.

Poet

[StarshipTrooper]

Any chance I could see a list from you, based on accomplishments?

I don't have one based on accomplishments.

Poet

[Stoppage]

I have a policy against placing Heavyweights on p4p lists: It's as simple as that.

Accomplishments may or may not reveal ability as someone can accomplish a lot against weak opposition while someone else can accomplish less against a murders row but still be considered the better fighter.

Skill is only one part of the equation. Attibutes is a better term: Skills are one of those attributes. As for Fitzsimmons I've done quite a bit of research on him and how boxing historians have regarded him and his abilities. It's only relatively recently that people have developed such distain for pre-1960 fighters.

Poet

I guess we're just two different historians.

And believe me, I don't have any problems with pre-1960 fighters. Robinson and Armstrong make my top 5.

[Boxing_12]

I don't have one based on accomplishments.

Poet

Make One

[StarshipTrooper]

Make One

What for? I can tell you I have Ali rated over Louis at Heavyweight based on ability. Make it by accomplishment and Louis moves into #1 based on a 12 year title reign and 25 successful defenses.

Poet

[Boxing_12]

What for? I can tell you I have Ali rated over Louis at Heavyweight based on ability. Make it by accomplishment and Louis moves into #1 based on a 12 year title reign and 25 successful defenses.

Poet

What are your thoughts on **** Tiger and Manuel Ortiz?

[StarshipTrooper]

What are your thoughts on **** Tiger and Manuel Ortiz?

Both are good fighters. Tiger is a legitimate ATG and Ortiz a near great.

Poet

[GJC]

Chavez was a tough fighter and I give him credit for it but his lack of any kind of defense makes him suspect in my eyes (much in the way Marciano does). While I consider him an all-time great I have a hard time justifying a top 5 ranking for someone who ate as many punches as he did. Some might point to his 100 wins but I would also point out that much of that record was achieved by beating local toughman in obscure Mexican towns: Rather similer to the way Tommy Morrison and Peter McNeely inflated their records.
Poet

Could level that at Canto and Perez as well to a point to be fair Poet?

Lists are a taste thing agree with you on Burley and Arguello but Greb should be up there IMO style notwithstanding. Very much a fighter of his time though he'd last about 2 minutes before getting DQ these days!