My rankings

[RubenSonny]

Tell me some more of your beliefs to keep the amusement coming.

My strongest belief is that you should stick to your word and leave this forum.

[Humean]

My strongest belief is that you should stick to your word and leave this forum.

Sorry. Maybe in future i'll read everything you say and regardless of how ridiculous it is i'll just agree with it, would that be more to your satisfaction?

[RubenSonny]

Sorry. Maybe in future i'll read everything you say and regardless of how ridiculous it is i'll just agree with it, would that be more to your satisfaction?

You went on some cry baby rant about how you were going to leave because of the posters in this section, why are you still here? Why did you flip flop?

[Welsh Jon]

Appealing to authority does not help your case.

I look forward to seeing your list, but surely you should explain what you mean by resume. Your list like practically every other list I have ever seen seems extremely inconsistent and no detailed criteria is ever shown. Cliff Rold's lists on here http://www.boxingscene.com/-top-25-m...top-ten--24472 are about the only exception as it actually gives you the criteria and the showing of the basis of his lists. Dubious criteria like everyone else but at least it seems consistent.

By way of an example can you show me why Steele is 13 but Thil doesn't make your top 20?

Steele fought tougher completion. For a start he beat 8 men who had won or would go onto win a middleweight title which I believe is twice as many champs as Thil beat.

When I say I am ranking largely on resume I simply mean I am comparing who I think has the better record and not who actually think is the better fighter.

There is no formula or science behind rating someone resume, but how can there be when comparing over eras. I have Charley Burley
and Bernard Hopkins in by top 10 for completely opposite reasons. Burley is there for holding many wins over quality opponents, despite never being the champ. B Hop is in there for being a dominant champ despite not having many quality wins. It's gloriously inconsistent.

It is just meant to be a bit of fun you know!

[RubenSonny]

Very good list IMO.

[billeau2]

Steele fought tougher completion. For a start he beat 8 men who had won or would go onto win a middleweight title which I believe is twice as many champs as Thil beat.

When I say I am ranking largely on resume I simply mean I am comparing who I think has the better record and not who actually think is the better fighter.

There is no formula or science behind rating someone resume, but how can there be when comparing over eras. I have Charley Burley
and Bernard Hopkins in by top 10 for completely opposite reasons. Burley is there for holding many wins over quality opponents, despite never being the champ. B Hop is in there for being a dominant champ despite not having many quality wins. It's gloriously inconsistent.

It is just meant to be a bit of fun you know!

I envy you guys....It is too much if a calculus for me to make a meaningful list of such absolute criteria as "top dog." It is easy for people to critisize a list,me? I can't because I could never make one!

[Scott9945]

Steele fought tougher completion. For a start he beat 8 men who had won or would go onto win a middleweight title which I believe is twice as many champs as Thil beat.

When I say I am ranking largely on resume I simply mean I am comparing who I think has the better record and not who actually think is the better fighter.

There is no formula or science behind rating someone resume, but how can there be when comparing over eras. I have Charley Burley
and Bernard Hopkins in by top 10 for completely opposite reasons. Burley is there for holding many wins over quality opponents, despite never being the champ. B Hop is in there for being a dominant champ despite not having many quality wins. It's gloriously inconsistent.

It is just meant to be a bit of fun you know!

Too bad that doesn't go without saying. Good job with the list.

[Bolo Punch]

As much as I love Basilio, one (arguably two) wins over a past-prime Sugar Ray Robinson isn't nearly enough to see him make it into a list of the top 20 Middleweights of all-time.

[Anthony342]

He was champion for about 4 years, beating Mercado doesn't make you champion.

Joppy and Holmes were certainly worse than those two.

Yep, I'd go with that. Ring champ for 4 years and 6 defenses. Still not bad.

[MartinC]

Middleweight top 20

1. Carlos Monzon, Argentina
2. Harry Greb, USA
3. Sugar Ray Robinson, USA
4. Marvin Hagler, USA
5. Bob Fitzsimmons, New Zealand/UK
6. Jake Lamotta, USA
7. Mickey Walker, USA
8. Charley Burley, USA
9. Bernard Hopkins, USA
10.**** Tiger, Nigeria
11.Stanley Ketchel, USA
12.Marcel Cerdan, France/Algeria
13.Freddie Steele, USA
14.Billy Conn, USA
15.Tiger Flowers, USA
16.Les Darcy, Australia
17.Tony Zale, USA
18.Mike Gibbons, USA
19.Sam Langford, Canada
20.Emile Griffith, USVI

I am a big B-Hop fan but I wouldn't have him that high.