top 10 welterweights of all time

[StarshipTrooper]

Does anybody have a link to Nat Fleischers all-time division ranking lists? Especially Welterweight and Lightweight.

I know cyber boxing mentions his rankings of certain fighters (top 10) but it would be interesting to see his full lists.

Careful now! Nat Fleischer is OLD and OLD boxing historians offend certain troglodyte posters here

Poet

[StarshipTrooper]

1. Ray Robinson
2. Sam Langford
3. Ray Leonard
4. Henry Armstrong
5. Emile Griffith
6. Wilfred Benitez
7. Thomas Hearns
8. Oscar De La Hoya
9. Felix Trinidad
10. Barney Ross

Poet

[C.Y.]

you made a mistake. tito lost to oscar.

if everyones going to rate hearns so high at welter, why not duran who at least accomplishmed more by beating leonard?

u also made a mistake hearns beat leonard too

[StarshipTrooper]

u also made a mistake hearns beat leonard too

I'm afraid the mistake is yours my friend: Leonard and Hearns fought twice, the first was Leonard KO14 and the second was Draw12. However we may feel about the bad decision (and yes, I DO think it was a terrible decision), the official record is clear on the matter. The truth is most fighters have gotten screwed by a bad decision at some point, but I think it's equally true that most fighters have also benifited from a bad decision as well. In the end, things tend to even out.

Poet

[Thread Stealer]

u also made a mistake hearns beat leonard too

But this discussion is about welterweights and their standing in the division, not what happened when they fought at 160+.

[them_apples]

Top welterweights..not sure what order

Ray Robinson
Ray Leonard
Thomas Hearns
Oscar De La Hoya
Tito Trinidad
Roberto Duran

[JAB5239]

Top welterweights..not sure what order

Ray Robinson
Ray Leonard
Thomas Hearns
Oscar De La Hoya
Tito Trinidad
Roberto Duran

Duran had less than 10 fights at 147. No way his name belongs on a list of greatest welterweights, at least not in the top 15 or 20. Oscar and Tito have more a claim to that than Duran, and Im not sure either of them belong in the top 10 either.

[wpink1]

Robinson
Leonard
Hearns
Henry Armstrong
Sam Langford

[LondonRingRules]

Duran had less than 10 fights at 147. No way his name belongs on a list of greatest welterweights, at least not in the top 15 or 20. .

** I see the point, but concensus IBRO rankings put him at 20th. They also put Leonard 2nd in spite of barely having 30 fights and 7 title fights there before having to retire. Tunney had less than a half dozen heavy fights, and he ends up 11th.

It seems all beat a prevailing media star which apparently resonates with those raters, that and all were topshelf talents.

[them_apples]

Duran had less than 10 fights at 147. No way his name belongs on a list of greatest welterweights, at least not in the top 15 or 20. Oscar and Tito have more a claim to that than Duran, and Im not sure either of them belong in the top 10 either.

i'm assuming you have a list of welterweights from the 19th century that are all better than Duran then?

Saying Oscar and Tito don't belong there is just pure Bias.