Billion $ point contest- Nat Fleischer's All-Time Top 10 list

[McGoorty]

As opposed to the newer always = better tripe that you and your ilk put out? You have absolutely no room to talk since your just drinking the KoolAid from the opposite side of the same cup :rolleyes9:

Poet

Well said, who are we to argue with Fleischer I would disagree myself for the order of some of them and a notable few I think have to be there but most of the names are there by right. Some people make lists of "" ALL TIME Top 100 fighters P4P " which would seem to suggest a list that represents ALL M.Q.R. boxing history, i.e. you go decade by decade but I've seen so many lists with 93 guys from the last 25 years and grudgingly name the 6 or 7 names they can remember, thinkin,' look at stupid old Granddad look how slow he moves, HOW COULD he be a fighter, you know the dummies only had Black and whi.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I laugh very hard, can you figure 'em out,.... I wonder how they'd go as Vikings a Thousand years ago,..... It stands to reason that in times gone by, men were very very HARD..... some of these kiddies are already back, on their X-BOX

[GJC]

That's the key. Contrary to most other 'historians', Fleischer saw them all from ringside.

To a point, but seeing and appreciating are not necessarily the same thing. I've seen the Mona Lisa up close and it did zero for me.
I've seen quite a few journalists and commentators down the years who have been put onto a sport with zero background or knowledge or even love for it, and after a few years become the voice of football/boxing or some such nonsense. Opportunity doesn't always equate to any special knowledge. I would sooner listen to your take/opinion of a fight you've seen on TV Battles than say Bert Sugar's opinion from ringside.
You also have to take into account a journalists opinion of a fighter is no less likely to be non partisan than anyone else's.
Might also be coloured by how helpful a fighter is with interviews etc?

[McGoorty]

A few things I'd alter

Mr. Nat Fleischer was a very important figure in boxing history. As founder of "The Ring" magazine, he's often credited or cited as a preeminent boxing historian. I say, there's a difference between being the founder of an outstanding publication and a boxing historian.

Arthur Mercante is a great referee. Is he also a great boxing historian?

My point being that just because you may excel at one area in the fight sport does NOT make you a boxing historian.

Here's a list of Nat's All-Time Top 10 list that was published in 1972, the year he died. Keep in mind that any fighter who fought up to 1972 would be eligible for inclusion in his ratings.

What are some of your opinions of his rankings? See anybody missing?

Heavyweights:
1 - Jack Johnson
2 - James J. Jeffries
3 - Bob Fitzsimmons
4 - Jack Dempsey
5 - James J. Corbett
6 - Joe Louis
7 - Sam Langford
8 - Gene Tunney
9 - Max Schmeling
10- Rocky Marciano

Light Heavyweights:
1 - Kid McCoy
2 - Philadelphia Jack O'Brian
3 - Jack Dillon
4 - Tommy Loughran
5 - Jack Root
6 - Battling Levensky
7 - Georges Carpentier
8 - Tom Gibbons
9 - Jack Delaney
10- Paul Berlenbach

Middleweights:
1 - Stanley Ketchell
2 - Tommy Ryan
3 - Harry Greb
4 - Mickey Walker
5 - Ray Robinson
6 - Frank Klaus
7 - Billy Papke
8 - Les Darcy
9 - Mike Gibbons
10- Jeff Smith

Welterweights:
1 - Joe Walcott
2 - Mysterious Billy Smith
3 - Jack Britton
4 - Ted Kid Lewis
5 - Dixie Kid
6 - Harry Lewis
7 - Willie Lewis
8 - Henry Armstrong
9 - Barney Ross
10- Jimmy McLarnin

Lightweights:
1 - Joe Gans
2 - Benny Leonard
3 - Owen Moran
4 - Freddy Welsh
5 - Battling Nelson
6 - George Kid Lavigne
7 - Tony Canzoneri
8 - Willie Ritchie
9 - Lew Tendler
10- Ad Wolgast

Featherweights:
1 - Terry McGovern
2 - Jim Driscoll
3 - Abe Attell
4 - Willie Pep
5 - Johnny Dundee
6 - Young Griffo
7 - Johnny Kilbane
8 - Kid Chocolate
9 - George K.O. Chaney
10- Louis Kid Kaplan

Bantamweights:
1 - George Dixon
2 - Pete Herman
3 - Kid Williams
4 - Eder Jofre
5 - Joe Lynch
6 - Bud Taylor
7 - Johnny Coulon
8 - Frankie Burns
9 - Eddie Campi
10- Panama Al Brown

Flyweight:
1 - Jimmy Wilde
2 - Pancho Villa
3 - Frankie Genaro
4 - Fidel La Barba
5 - Benny Lynch
6 - Elky Clark
7 - Johnny Buff
8 - Midget Wolgast
9 - Peter Kane
10- Pascual Perez

(From the 1972 edition of The Ring Record Book and Boxing Encyclopedia)

HW -- 1. Louis, 2. ALI, 3. Marciano, 4. Dempsey, 5 Jeffries, 6.Tunney, 7.Johnson, 8.Wills, 9. J.Sharkey, 10. Schmeling,........................................ . LHW --1. A. MOORE, 2. Langford, 3. Charles, 4. Fitzsimmons, 5. Loughran, 6. Carpentier, 7. Kid McCoy, 8. Delaney, 9. Conn, 10. Dillon .......................... MW -- 1. L. Darcy, 2. Greb, 3. Ketchell, 4. M. Cerdan, 5. T. Ryan, 6. Zale, 7. Burley, 8. Flowers, 9. Fullmer, 10. Papke, ....... WW -- 1. Ray Robinson, 2. Joe Wallcott, 3. Walker, 4. Armstrong, 5. M.Billy Smith, 6. J. Britton, 7. T.K.Lewis, 8. Ross, 9. Napoles, 10. Basilio, Lightweights,-- not real sure BUT WHERE'S McFarland, the man never lost in all of his 113 fights (lost one Newspaper decision in a ND) and he beats Welsh, Britton several times and Owen Moran several times so Nat must have forgotten him he's top 3 for sure..//// the rest you can have, if those featherweights were ahead of Pep, we've missed out big if Fleischer is right and we're wrong, I placed them at their best weight except for Tunney, he was HW Champ, like it or not. I had Darcy there because he is far underated, and was, never floored and was freakishly strong " like fighting a gorilla" and because of his vast Potential, I know Darcy was better than Klaus, Gibbons and obviously Smith. I Rate Robinson more of course, but he was greatest at WW. NOTE this is my team, not the team, also I don't think Nat Fleischer had actually ever seen Darcy fight, he'd seen him sparring at best so Nat may have guessed a bit:

[jack p]

His heavyweight ratings are just as bad as his light heavyweight rankings. Ali is no where to be found. James J. Corbett over Joe Louis? Over Sonny Liston, who's also no where to be found. Joe Frazier was unbeaten in 1972, fresh off a W15 over Ali. Not even on his list. James J. Corbett over a 1971-1972 Joe Frazier and Muhammad Ali???

Bob Fitzsimmons over Muhammad Ali, Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, Gene Tunney, Liston, Marciano & Ali???

Heavyweights:
1 - Jack Johnson
2 - James J. Jeffries
3 - Bob Fitzsimmons
4 - Jack Dempsey
5 - James J. Corbett
6 - Joe Louis
7 - Sam Langford
8 - Gene Tunney
9 - Max Schmeling
10- Rocky Marciano


One thing about this list is its the same list he had in his 1959 book
He didn't change nothing between 1959 to 1971-72 when it was republished
If you take this list from 1900-1959 then all he needs to do is put Dempsey Louis Marchiano ahead of Fitz and Corbett...Leaving out Frazier Ali because it was before their eras and leaving Liston out because he wasn't champ yet

Also Tommy Burns around 1930 rated the heavys
1 Jeffries
2 Johnson
3 Fitzimmons
4 Dempsey
5 Corbett
6 Philadelphia Jack o Brian
6 tunney
7 Willard

But sometimes its hard seeing things through other people eyes ..Like people that think Klitschco's the greatest i don't see it

[billeau2]

You'll probably be like that yourself when you grow up.

Don't insult the guy! he left mom's basement last week and is now all growned up!