What factors do you consider when determining a fighter’s greatness?

[Willie Pep 229]

We can all agree that quality of opposition and overall skills are primary factors when considering fighters for all time greatness. But what other traits or intangibles do you consider?

Do you consider longevity and durability? Does it require a certain degree of “greatness” to come out with a winning record after 100, 200 or more fights? Do we factor that in when comparing a fighter with 200 fights to one with 40 or less fights? How do we compare and rank Leonard with 40 fights to Robinson with 200? Or Spinks with 32 fights to Moore with over 200?

How about how they come back from losses, or cope with adversity during a fight? Recover from KO losses, have successful comebacks, fight and win beyond a certain age? How hard did they challenge themselves, or did they play it safe?

What are the most important factors to you?

Ankle size!

I challenge anyone to reasonably explain to me why, from the advent of the 'tale of the tape' until well into the 1960s, they measured the size of a fighter's ankle.

Has anyone ever laid bet moved by superior ankle size?

OR

I believe that ankle Size is the definitive marker of greatness. I am currently on BoxRec researching the matter.

P.S. important: Will Bill's magic quantum machine address ankle size? If not, it brings the computer's validity into question, in its refusal to respect tradition. Certainly those guys back then had a reason for measuring ankles, I just wish I knew why.

[markusmod]

Broner was in fact very talented. Larry used to take much shiat because he thought Bronner was going to be great. I don't think his prediction was a bad one. I felt that way about Juan Ma... LOL.

JuanMa's chin was his undoing.

[QueensburyRules]

Ankle size!

I challenge anyone to reasonably explain to me why, from the advent of the 'tale of the tape' until well into the 1960s, they measured the size of a fighter's ankle.

Has anyone ever laid bet moved by superior ankle size?

OR

I believe that ankle Size is the definitive marker of greatness. I am currently on BoxRec researching the matter.

P.S. important: Will Bill's magic quantum machine address ankle size? If not, it brings the computer's validity into question, in its refusal to respect tradition. Certainly those guys back then had a reason for measuring ankles, I just wish I knew why.

- -A fighter's pins are first and foremost the most important element of a fighter. Without them he's cripple.

Unfortunately like most of boxing, there is no uniformity in those rules of measurement, so take those historical stats with a grain of salt...

[billeau2]

JuanMa's chin was his undoing.

I'll never understand it... first of all I have my own ****** prejudices, one of which (I'm not proud of this and would call myself names if I were another poster lol). I consider any Fighters under middleweight, with many exceptions, the equivalent of midgets boxing.

So one day I see this lightweight and the guy looks like a pint sized Joe Louis... he has power, a rare commodity in the lower weights, cuts the ring off, stalks... im like this guy is going far! That was Juan MA.

I think his biggest problem was he fell in love with his power and could not process the loss to Salido. It destroyed him...

[GhostofDempsey]

Ankle size!

I challenge anyone to reasonably explain to me why, from the advent of the 'tale of the tape' until well into the 1960s, they measured the size of a fighter's ankle.

Has anyone ever laid bet moved by superior ankle size?

OR

I believe that ankle Size is the definitive marker of greatness. I am currently on BoxRec researching the matter.

P.S. important: Will Bill's magic quantum machine address ankle size? If not, it brings the computer's validity into question, in its refusal to respect tradition. Certainly those guys back then had a reason for measuring ankles, I just wish I knew why.

I’ll go out on a limb here and guess that the prevailing wisdom back then was smaller ankles and calves were synonymous with speed. Maybe they thought it was relevant to footwork?

[Willie Pep 229]

I’ll go out on a limb here and guess that the prevailing wisdom back then was smaller ankles and calves were synonymous with speed. Maybe they thought it was relevant to footwork?

Actually I have a hypothesis - in the early American penal system (circa 1840) body measurements were used as a form of identication.

Prisoners were measured with the logic being if later on a suspect tries to hide his identify and has a 12 point match up (I am making up the numbers) that the odds are it is the same person. Kind of a very crude DNA logic

You can see a moment of this process being deployed in the film Chicago when the main charter is imprisoned for murder.

(Also of course the numbers were being used for several pseudo sciences, eugenics and phrenology for example.)

RE boxing: I THINK that ignorant men, i.e. the beginning of 'sports science' just borrowed the process and began applying it to athletes with no real understanding what the numbers actually suggested about the athlete. They just followed the existing process ankle and all.

[markusmod]

I'll never understand it... first of all I have my own ****** prejudices, one of which (I'm not proud of this and would call myself names if I were another poster lol). I consider any Fighters under middleweight, with many exceptions, the equivalent of midgets boxing.

So one day I see this lightweight and the guy looks like a pint sized Joe Louis... he has power, a rare commodity in the lower weights, cuts the ring off, stalks... im like this guy is going far! That was Juan MA.

I think his biggest problem was he fell in love with his power and could not process the loss to Salido. It destroyed him...

He also had some weird relationship with some fat chick who had several kids - with none of them being his.

[billeau2]

He also had some weird relationship with some fat chick who had several kids - with none of them being his.

Those fat chicks...

[Ben Bolt]

What factors do you consider when determining a fighter’s greatness?

To me, forgotten guys such as Tyrell Biggs, Tony Tubbs and Carl Williams have proved their greatness.
Accepting to share the ring with Tyson at a time when he was the most feared man in the world.

A lot of guts from these guys, who were just there to satisfy the spectators’ wishes to witness another execution.

There are plenty of Biggses and Tubbses in boxing history. I find greatness in them, greatness doesn’t necessarily
has to come with a title.

[markusmod]

Those fat chicks...

Damn right, she worked him over and that's why he began to fail to make weight.