Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Top 20 Heavyweight of all time list agree or disagree

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    The moment somebody makes a stop heavyweight list and they mention 170-180 pound guys like Rocky Marciano, Gene Tunney, Ezzard Charles ect. you can't take that person's boxing knowledge seriously. Also when a person mentions a boxer from the late 1800's/early 1900's are all time greats you realize how clueless so many boxing fans are. Boxing has evolved since those times. Those guys were good for their era. That doesn't equate to all time greats,

    Comment


    • #22
      Yet another expert speaking in "absolutes" has arrived. Must we go through this period of arrogance with every new poster?

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Willie Pep 229 View Post
        Yet another expert speaking in "absolutes" has arrived. Must we go through this period of arrogance with every new poster?
        Something tells me they're not new, only a new name. Been here since July of last year, yet only starts posting today and it's all flaming and argumentative.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

          Something tells me they're not new, only a new name. Been here since July of last year, yet only starts posting today and it's all flaming and argumentative.
          You b right - this guy is a ghost - been here before, knows all the jargon - maybe War Room or maybe Rusty Tromboni.​
          Slugfester Slugfester likes this.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by WillieWild114 View Post

            How is Rocky too high he was undefeated and defeated notable heavyweight greats.
            He didn't beat any great HWs in their primes. Not his fault, but he got guys when they were old

            Originally posted by WillieWild114 View Post

            He literally defeated Joe Louis and got alot of HW wins that alone should put him there.
            When Joe Louis was 157 years old.

            Joe Louis was WAYYYY past his prime by the time Marciano got to him.
            Slugfester Slugfester likes this.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Willie Pep 229 View Post

              You b right - this guy is a ghost - been here before, knows all the jargon - maybe War Room or maybe Rusty Tromboni.​
              I guess there is no way of knowing.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by shawnkemp804 View Post
                The moment somebody makes a stop heavyweight list and they mention 170-180 pound guys like Rocky Marciano, Gene Tunney, Ezzard Charles ect. you can't take that person's boxing knowledge seriously. Also when a person mentions a boxer from the late 1800's/early 1900's are all time greats you realize how clueless so many boxing fans are. Boxing has evolved since those times. Those guys were good for their era. That doesn't equate to all time greats,
                Before the world became so Fat guys 180 lb+ were considered heavyweights and if we keep getting fatter at this rate guys 210-230 lb will not be considered heavyweights in the future.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by DeeMoney View Post

                  So then my next question is how do you quantify these things, and to what extent does each matter.

                  For example, "determination", since you listed it first I am assuming it is your most highly rated criteria. But how do you measure it? Is this just an eye test thing? How do you account for a fighter who is extremely determined but lacks athletic ability or boxing skills to make anything out of said determination? Then, once you have some sort of measure for 'determination' to what extent does it count towards your overall ranking compared to other criteria? 10%, 15%?

                  Similarly, when you sight "notable opponents", what specifically does that mean? Is it just name recognition, is it top 10 in the rankings? Do we create an arbitrary line that we give credence to a certain opponent but not another? For example, if we just give recognition to beating a top 10 opponent why draw the line at that arbitrary point? Wouldn't beating a #11 opponent be relatively strong as well. As the saying goes, "be ware of arbitrarily round numbers."
                  Notable opponents means other memorable great opponents they defeated in the opponent's prime.Everything I listed added up nothing greater than the other.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Willie Pep 229 View Post
                    Yet another expert speaking in "absolutes" has arrived. Must we go through this period of arrogance with every new poster?
                    Willie, do you think this clown could make a good attempt at telling us ignoramuses how boxing has evolved other than its equipment?

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Slugfester View Post

                      Willie, do you think this clown could make a good attempt at telling us ignoramuses how boxing has evolved other than its equipment?
                      No! . . .

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP