Bert Sugar's top 100 of all time

[Steak]

I wouldnt take Berts opinion all that serious. ever. hes said some really ridiculous stuff before, and its more of a celebrity or figurehead than a real historian. He knows his stuff, but his bias and odd comments detracts from his opinion.

[NChristo]

This list was done back in 2006.

Take what old man Sugar says with a pinch of salt, I never listened to the man said anyway, most of what he comes out with is just silly despite the resources that he has access too.

[Barn]

He doesn't even deserve his fame, true historians people like Henry Hascup who posts here deserve it more than him.

[Barn]

I have ol' Fitz at 10, Ezzard at 5, Langford at 3 with Jofre being a near miss. All these conflicting with Berts list.

[IronDanHamza]

I've read this before.

Some very odd choices.

[New England]

He doesn't even deserve his fame, true historians people like Henry Hascup who posts here deserve it more than him.

edit:
for the record i own the edition of the book from which this list is published
it's called "boxing's greatest fighters"

and of course i don't agree with everything on there
in some cases it's nothing more than a boxing conversation starter for me

but..

sugar has been in the game for decades

before he was a figurehead with a cigar and a hipster cap he was the editor of ring magazine and one of the best beat writers in the history of the sport
he's covered many of the greatest generations of fighters from ringside



now you can argue that he's become a bit more biased because he's working for HBO regularly
but can we knock a man for getting paid?


boxing writers don't make dirt for money.
newspapers are dying, and you better believe their dedicated boxing beat writers are dying out with them (considering the state of the sport.)
most of your favorite writers in the BWAA work dayjobs that have nothing to do with boxing
the ones that do make money from the boxing world usually get paid by private and subjective enterprises (HBO, top rank, etc,) with an agenda
i don't knock the guy in the least for getting paid.
he's probably a grandfather and wants to leave something for his family

[SCtrojansbaby]

This list was done back in 2006.

Take what old man Sugar says with a pinch of salt, I never listened to the man said anyway, most of what he comes out with is just silly despite the resources that he has access too.

by 2006 Barrera had already established a top 40(at least) resume

[RubenSonny]

by 2006 Barrera had already established a top 40(at least) resume

No he didn't.

[SCtrojansbaby]

No he didn't

A+ wins
Morales x2 Hamed

B+ wins
Mckinney Tapia Ayala

[New England]

by 2006 Barrera had already established a top 40(at least) resume

when i read your posts:

i have trouble figuring out exactly where your biases lie
sometimes i just think you go with the "wrong" side of an argument
marco antonio barrera's not even close to the top 40 in my eyes
you're talking about guys with better wins,
and without such losses (jr jones x2, pacquiao x2, morales, marquez.)


and finally..
what could Felix strum and Zoldt erdei have possibly done to become anybody's favorite fighters?
this i wonder