50 greatest fighters of all time poll for radio show

[tonyjones]

I guess you know better then all the boxing historians and experts put together, congratulations!

Just to let you know, I am a voting member of the International Boxing Hall of Fame on all 5 Committees (there only about 12 people in the World that can say that) and I am also a voting member of the new Boxing Hall of Fame in Las Vegas, plus many other Hall of Fames, including the NYBHOF and the NJBHOF where I am also the President now for close to 28 years. I am also a charter member of the International Research Organization which started back in 1982 plus an editor on BoxRec.

I am not questioning who is better Mayweather or Robinson, everyone has there own opinion But your saying that Robinson isn't even in the same class as Mayweather, and that is not true.

Honestly, I don't know 1 boxing historian that would agree with you on that, and I know almost all of them, in fact they would just laugh at you for even thinking it!

All I read there was I'm this and I'm that who cares what position you hold!i don't need so called experts or boxing historians to tell me who's good or not,I have watched all these fighters as much as I can and judged for myself....look at the lists people have made at the start of this thread including fighters they've seen little footage of purely because of reputation and been frowned upon by other posters.its a fact of life people see things from the past with rose tinted glasses and boxing is a prime example,for instance I've seen "historians" claim Marciano could hang with Lennox Lewis well in reality that's not possible

[tonyjones]

No, they're not better in most areas. Some from today might be better than those of the past, but some fighters from the past are still better than those from today or the more recent past. I'm sure others here can provide plenty of examples if you need some.

You name the best fighters in each division up until the 60s guarantee someone from the recent past who's clearly better....what's so hard to understand that ALL sports have progressed significantly why is boxing different?

[The Tase]

So what your saying is that if there no film of a fighter, they should be ruled out! There is very little film on a prime Sugar Ray Robinson, as a Welterweight, so should we rule him out as well. All we have is the highlights of him in his prime.

Why should fighters like Harry Greb be overlooked just because we have no film on them.

As far as the Greatest Players always come from the modern time goes, it does work on almost all sports, including boxing somewhat. BUT back in the day we had many more fighters and they fought a lot more.

Right now we have approx. 18,000 active fighters in the World and less then 3,000 in the USA and just 138 male pro boxers in New York. In the 20's and 30's the USA they had well over 10,000 licensed fighters and New York had over 2,000 of them.

In 1921 New York had approx. 950 shows. Last year, 2012, in the USA they had 624 shows, and New York had only 35. So they had over 50% more shows in the state of New York in 1921 as they did last year in the hold country.

In 1929, they had 6,450 shows in the USA, that's over 10 times the amount they had last year.

The total of 6,450 are the shows that we found, there could be even more.

I know sometimes the more is not better But this is not even close.

That's just one reason why it's different when it comes to boxing.

In baseball years ago we just had 16 teams now we have 30 teams. almost half of todays players would still be in the minors, including half of the pitchers. Just think what players like Ruth, Aaron, Mays, Mantle, and many others would do with those pitchers.

athletes of modern times are better than athletes of the 60s and below.

That's a fact.

Athletes are biggers, stronger, faster, and they have the benefits of modern science with them.

Athletes get targeted at a much younger age today and they get specialized training. The competition is global and stiffer because sports have had a chance to take hold and influence vast larger audience.

As time goes on, future generations get to see more fighters to emulate and get info on. The same cant be said for lets ray robinson growing up. Its not like he can look at youtube and see greats of the 20s and learn from them.

You hanging on to your antiquated numbers of more people boxing as reason why back then was better is just plain STUPID. MEMO TO YOU, America is not the only country in the world.

Global competition is better along with the passage of time giving all sports time to evolve and refine itself. You spouting of larger numbers of people participating in boxing as reason is just wrong and dishonest. That's like china saying we are the best at fighting because we have more people fighting in kung fu schools than anybody in the world.

You dont crown the greatest of all time during the infancy of your sport.

I guess you know better then all the boxing historians and experts put together, congratulations!

Just to let you know, I am a voting member of the International Boxing Hall of Fame on all 5 Committees (there only about 12 people in the World that can say that) and I am also a voting member of the new Boxing Hall of Fame in Las Vegas, plus many other Hall of Fames, including the NYBHOF and the NJBHOF where I am also the President now for close to 28 years. I am also a charter member of the International Research Organization which started back in 1982 plus an editor on BoxRec.

I am not questioning who is better Mayweather or Robinson, everyone has there own opinion But your saying that Robinson isn't even in the same class as Mayweather, and that is not true.

Honestly, I don't know 1 boxing historian that would agree with you on that, and I know almost all of them, in fact they would just laugh at you for even thinking it!

lmfaaooooo boxing historians?????

You are exactly the problem im talking about.

MYTHOLOGIZING THE PAST AND PUTTING THEM IN GODLY PEDESTALS TO PRESERVE YOUR HISTORY.

lmfaaoo at im a voting member.



As if that gives you some other worldly knowledge only available to you.




You're just a older version of a hardcore boxing fan like an overzealous floyd or pacquiao fan.

@ this fool thinking he's some member of some secret society.

[hhascup]

All I read there was I'm this and I'm that who cares what position you hold!i don't need so called experts or boxing historians to tell me who's good or not,I have watched all these fighters as much as I can and judged for myself....look at the lists people have made at the start of this thread including fighters they've seen little footage of purely because of reputation and been frowned upon by other posters.its a fact of life people see things from the past with rose tinted glasses and boxing is a prime example,for instance I've seen "historians" claim Marciano could hang with Lennox Lewis well in reality that's not possible

So once again your saying that you know better and more then any other person that ever lived when it comes to boxing. Again, Congratulations!

I gave you my background so you would know that I am not just the average fan Plus I know almost all of the top boxing historians in the last 50 years.. They would think your nuts But you know better then any of them so you should be the only one to pick the Hall of Famers from on now.

We just finished picking a NEW Boxing Hall of Fame that will be based in Las Vegas. Some of the top people in boxing was asked to pick their top 50 all-time (the fighters must be retired for 5 years), and anyone that received 75% or more was elected. In the end 25 was selected, But I doubt if you would agree with most of them.

With that said, I do agree with you on Lewis and Marciano! Lewis would just be too big for him, But if I was like you I would say who cares what you think!

By the way, what's your background on the sport of boxing? Maybe you should try to become an official, either a referee or judge if you want.

[hhascup]

athletes of modern times are better than athletes of the 60s and below.

That's a fact.

Athletes are biggers, stronger, faster, and they have the benefits of modern science with them.

Athletes get targeted at a much younger age today and they get specialized training. The competition is global and stiffer because sports have had a chance to take hold and influence vast larger audience.

As time goes on, future generations get to see more fighters to emulate and get info on. The same cant be said for lets ray robinson growing up. Its not like he can look at youtube and see greats of the 20s and learn from them.

You hanging on to your antiquated numbers of more people boxing as reason why back then was better is just plain STUPID. MEMO TO YOU, America is not the only country in the world.

Global competition is better along with the passage of time giving all sports time to evolve and refine itself. You spouting of larger numbers of people participating in boxing as reason is just wrong and dishonest. That's like china saying we are the best at fighting because we have more people fighting in kung fu schools than anybody in the world.

You dont crown the greatest of all time during the infancy of your sport.



lmfaaooooo boxing historians?????

You are exactly the problem im talking about.

MYTHOLOGIZING THE PAST AND PUTTING THEM IN GODLY PEDESTALS TO PRESERVE YOUR HISTORY.

lmfaaoo at im a voting member.



As if that gives you some other worldly knowledge only available to you.




You're just a older version of a hardcore boxing fan like an overzealous floyd or pacquiao fan.

@ this fool thinking he's some member of some secret society.

The best athletics don't go into boxing any more, years ago they did, everyone knows that.

I am a Big fan of Floyd, Pacman, Jones and Hopkins, along with many others of today's fighters. These 4 will be 1st ballot Hall of Famers for sure, But to say that there head and shoulders over Robinson is in your words "just plain STUPID."

We can take a poll on who is better, Robinson or Floyd But when it comes out differently then what you want, you'll just say they don't know what their talking about, But you do!

[The Tase]

The best athletics don't go into boxing any more, years ago they did, everyone knows that.

I am a Big fan of Floyd, Pacman, Jones and Hopkins, along with many others of today's fighters. These 4 will be 1st ballot Hall of Famers for sure, But to say that there head and shoulders over Robinson is in your words "just plain STUPID."

We can take a poll on who is better, Robinson or Floyd But when it comes out differently then what you want, you'll just say they don't know what their talking about, But you do!

uhhh first of all i hate floyd's guts. second of all, i think ray robinson is the greatest of all time.

but nice job trying to extrapolate that as a way to discredit my post.

not going to work. I was using robinson or any fighter starting off in the 40s or 50s as an example that they cant really learn from fighters before them because they didnt have film back then.

at the end of the day, there is a huge vast of difference between a professional athlete in 1960 as oppose to say an athlete now.

from modern medicine, coaching, better equipment, food, training methods, analytics its a whole new ball game.

i dont see how that is even arguable.

[hhascup]

uhhh first of all i hate floyd's guts. second of all, i think ray robinson is the greatest of all time.

but nice job trying to extrapolate that as a way to discredit my post.

not going to work. I was using robinson or any fighter starting off in the 40s or 50s as an example that they cant really learn from fighters before them because they didnt have film back then.

at the end of the day, there is a huge vast of difference between a professional athlete in 1960 as oppose to say an athlete now.

from modern medicine, coaching, better equipment, food, training methods, analytics its a whole new ball game.

i dont see how that is even arguable.

I have to agree with that to a point, But lets put all of them on the same playing field.

What if the old-timers had the same modern medicine, better equipment, food, training methods, use of weights, etc. I wouldn't put coaching in their as I believe the trainers were better years ago. Yea the current trainers have learned from the old-timers, But they don't apply a lot of the teaching. Most of todays trainers are part time, years ago they did it full time. I have talked to many modern trainers and they all said that the trainers of today aren't nearly as good as the old-timers.

As far as learning from the old-time fighters where no or little film is available, it is true But again, some of the same trainers trained some of the modern fighters well as. Trainers like Ray Arcel, who I talked to several times, trained Benny Leonard and Roberto Duran. Jack Kearns trained Jack Dempsey and Archie Moore.

I know there bigger & stronger today But a Middleweight is still a Middleweight. Years ago they boxed many more rounds and trained morning, noon and night. Just read some of the bio's on the old-timers and you will find out for yourself.

Finally when I get sick, I don't ask my plumber what I need to take, I ask my doctor. The same goes with boxing or any other sport, you ask the people that know, the experts. That goes for just about anything! I respect everyone's opinion But I would much rather go by what the experts have to say. I have talked to many, many historians and experts on boxing and I have learned to listen to what they have to say, then make my own conclusion.

[The Tase]

I have to agree with that to a point, But lets put all of them on the same playing ground.

What if the old-timers had the same modern medicine, better equipment, food, training methods, use of weights, etc. I wouldn't put coaching in their as I believe the trainers were better years ago. Yea the current trainers have learned from the old-timers, But they don't apply a lot of the teaching. Most of todays trainers are part time, years ago they did it full time. I have talked to many modern trainers and they all said that the trainers of today aren't nearly as good as the old-timers.

As far as learning from the old-time fighters where no or little film is available, it is true But again, some of the same trainers trained some of the modern fighters well as. Trainers like Ray Arcel, who I talked to several times, trained Benny Leonard and Roberto Duran. Jack Kearns trained Jack Dempsey and Archie Moore.

I know there bigger & stronger today But a Middleweight is still a Middleweight. Years ago they boxed many more rounds and trained morning, noon and night. Just read some of the bio's on the old-timers and you will find out for yourself.

wrong wrong wrong.

that's the crux of the entire argument. You cant have it both ways. If older fighters had modern fighters amenities, wtf can we argue about?

and a middleweight back then is not a midddlweight today.

Have you heard of 24 rehydration?

Back then, a featherweight would weigh in as a featherweight and enter the ring as a featherweight.

Now, they weigh in on friday as a featherweight, come fight night they are lightweights and welterweights.

Its like that across all divisions. Bantamweights weigh in on friday as 118 pounders, come fight night they are featherweights and lightweights.

Im trying to tell you the game has changed.

[hhascup]

wrong wrong wrong.

that's the crux of the entire argument. You cant have it both ways. If older fighters had modern fighters amenities, wtf can we argue about?

and a middleweight back then is not a midddlweight today.

Have you heard of 24 rehydration?

Back then, a featherweight would weigh in as a featherweight and enter the ring as a featherweight.

Now, they weigh in on friday as a featherweight, come fight night they are lightweights and welterweights.

Its like that across all divisions. Bantamweights weigh in on friday as 118 pounders, come fight night they are featherweights and lightweights.

Im trying to tell you the game has changed.

I agree boxing has changed But we must put them in the ring with the same rules. Years ago they weighed in on the day of the fight, now they do it the day before. You can't go by two different rules.

If fighters today had to weigh-in on the day of the fight, they wouldn't be 2 or 3 weight class above and the same goes for the old-timers. They could have weighed a lot more on the day of the fight if the weigh-in was the day before.

Way back they weigh-in just before they fought.

[The Tase]

I agree boxing has changed But we must put them in the ring with the same rules. Years ago they weighed in on the day of the fight, now they do it the day before. You can't go by two different rules.

If fighters today had to weigh-in on the day of the fight, they wouldn't be 2 or 3 weight class above and the same goes for the old-timers. They could have weighed a lot more on the day of the fight if the weigh-in was the day before.

Way back they weigh-in just before they fought.

but the rules are not the same!!!!

back then refs used to be judges. back then it was 15 round fights. back then there were newspaper decisions.

how can you say that?

that's what im trying to tell you. Old school vanguards such as yourself like to pretend boxing is still some untouched pristine sport. Its not. It has changed and evolved despite what you old guys think.