Best UK Boxer of all time

[Canelo and GGG]

I really don't think you're going to find many people who think Memphis Pal Moore has a better resume than Marvin Hagler.

If you will fallow your rules (this one you send me),idk how you can say that he dont have better resume ,you value names like Herman or Lynch very low (idk why),they are significant champs ,legendary ,if you compere them to some champs Hagler beat,Hagler ones are utter **** (with couple defenses and they never do **** again after loseing title)

Herman ,Lynch,Cirqui'-**** All over Haglers resume beside Hearns ,maybe .if we will count comp they lost to or wins over non title holders Pal is even more ahead .

You are probably right, cuse not Many ppl know Pal resume and Marvin fought in 80s and SRL and Hearns made him even more fameouse, but valueing names like that so low, is imo ignorance from you.and this are only 3 names.

Anyway its not the thread topic,i got to conclusion that Pick is to hard ,what can i say about fighter who was unbeaten from 1720-60 ,i cant watch or check his resume ,i doesnt make it bad, maybe it was better Then everyones else but i have no info,but it sounds like he was important for sport and its rules

[soul_survivor]

John "Jack" Broughton 1725-1767 was even bigger pioneer then Bob,check him out

i get what you saying here about some fans here,i made this thread and if you will read all post here ,you will see how many names i learned here ,and keep learning,When Iron Dan asked my about Wilde resume,i made deep research(keep doing when i have time).i just dont think that Eubank achived as much in boxing as this guys,his great fighter no daubt.but i love threads like this when i learn alot.i will never know all good fighters but i allways can try,Memphis Pal Moore resume is gold mine of knowwladge on flyweight post WW1,im glad that Dan asked about Wilde resume lol.

YOu can't mention names from an era where modern rules didn't even apply

[Canelo and GGG]

YOu can't mention names from an era where modern rules didn't even apply

How so? This guy came up with this rules ,if not him There would be no gloves and boxing would probably be underground sport,i shouldnt mention fighters who fought 15 round fights cuse no its 12?in Wilde times even 20 or more (38 for example) i have full right to mention very important man for our sport ,he was World champ ,and HoFer .

[IronDanHamza]

I don't really think so. Some good wins of course, resume isn't that deep.

Also, surprised no one has mentioned Carl Froch.
He's clearly one of the all time British best imo.

Yeah that's fair enough.

Not too deep (hard to gauge) but some impressive names and feats.

[Bundana]

If you will fallow your rules (this one you send me),idk how you can say that he dont have better resume ,you value names like Herman or Lynch very low (idk why),they are significant champs ,legendary ,if you compere them to some champs Hagler beat,Hagler ones are utter **** (with couple defenses and they never do **** again after loseing title)

Herman ,Lynch,Cirqui'-**** All over Haglers resume beside Hearns ,maybe .if we will count comp they lost to or wins over non title holders Pal is even more ahead .

You are probably right, cuse not Many ppl know Pal resume and Marvin fought in 80s and SRL and Hearns made him even more fameouse, but valueing names like that so low, is imo ignorance from you.and this are only 3 names.

First of all, let me say, that it's not my intention to diss you in any way... and I think it's great, that a young chap like you takes such an interest in boxing history, that he starts posting on a forum like this. That's all fine.

However, at 19 years of age, and after only 6 weeks here, it's almost comical that you should call IronDan (one of the most knowledgeable posters here) ignorant... because he can't understand why Moore is more deserving of a Hall of Fame membership than Hagler!!

In reality, Moore is but a small footnote in boxing history - whereas Hagler is recognized as one of the very best middleweights ever and a true ATG. You won't find a single Top-100 p4p list with Moore's name on it... and I doubt you can find a single one without Hagler on it! I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is.

Anyway, as I said, it's good to have you on board. As you have noted yourself, this forum isn't all that busy - so your input is appreciated.

[Canelo and GGG]

First of all, let me say, that it's not my intention to diss you in any way... and I think it's great, that a young chap like you takes such an interest in boxing history, that he starts posting on a forum like this. That's all fine.

However, at 19 years of age, and after only 6 weeks here, it's almost comical that you should call IronDan (one of the most knowledgeable posters here) ignorant... because he can't understand why Moore is more deserving of a Hall of Fame membership than Hagler!!

In reality, Moore is but a small footnote in boxing history - whereas Hagler is recognized as one of the very best middleweights ever and a true ATG. You won't find a single Top-100 p4p list with Moore's name on it... and I doubt you can find a single one without Hagler on it! I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is.

Anyway, as I said, it's good to have you on board. As you have noted yourself, this forum isn't all that busy - so your input is appreciated.

I said that valueing names like this so low is imo ignorance, i know he is not ignorant person.

Resume dont mean ATGness ,or recognition ,fact is that Pal faced by far better competiton Then Hagler ,that doesnt mean he is greater ,but imo boxers fighting after WW2 are more recognised and respected ,idk why ,but post WW1 have greats too, no body will Tell me that Herman is not ATG, many people rank him as one of best Bantama ever ,Lynch is 11th ,Cirqui is great champion too, now look at best MW Hagler faced who is it? i dont count WWs or Lights like Duran.

There is no bad blood here i just disagree with Dan on many things, imo he dont fallow same rules in some fighters cases.also his opinions on fights are stright savage (no analitical)

Im Glad history section is here ,non stop boxing is cancer at Times

Thank you

ps:Fact that his older doesnt mean his right,and fact that im here 6 weeks doesnt mean i wasnt interestet in boxing before

Good example Is Harry Greb who is GOAT in my book,yet his recognition is much lower then Hagler ,yet Greb is 10time better,have probably Best resume in boxing,and fought half blind for half of his careere,but all ppl have in heads is ALi and SRR ,nobody care about Harry.

[REMOVE SHARK 55]

Carl Froch, Chris Eubank, Lennox Lewis, Barry McGuigan & Naz.

Edit: Joe Calzaghe

[soul_survivor]

How so? This guy came up with this rules ,if not him There would be no gloves and boxing would probably be underground sport,i shouldnt mention fighters who fought 15 round fights cuse no its 12?in Wilde times even 20 or more (38 for example) i have full right to mention very important man for our sport ,he was World champ ,and HoFer .

15 to 12 rounds is simply changing the distance of the fight. The rules remain the same.

Going back to the 18th century you're not only naming a man who fought at time when the sport would have looked more like wrestling than boxing but you're talking about him in a conversation of who's the best boxer to come from Britain . He wouldn't be a boxer by modern standards.

A separate list of pioneers in combat sport could list names like Loughton sure but here it doesn't make sense.

I'm not sure what you're saying about Wilde?

[Canelo and GGG]

15 to 12 rounds is simply changing the distance of the fight. The rules remain the same.

Going back to the 18th century you're not only naming a man who fought at time when the sport would have looked more like wrestling than boxing but you're talking about him in a conversation of who's the best boxer to come from Britain . He wouldn't be a boxer by modern standards.

A separate list of pioneers in combat sport could list names like Loughton sure but here it doesn't make sense.

I'm not sure what you're saying about Wilde?

I said that he was dominat champion, dispite being Flyweight ,he fought Bantama champs and even some featherwaights, he was beaten one Time in his Prime in 120 fights.

[REMOVE SHARK 55]

I named a couple of fighters but it is between Chris Eubank, Lennox and Froch. If you really followed UK Boxing you'd know what version of Eubank fought Calzaghe. Out of the three I named Eubank transcended the sport. He was a massive icon during his run. British level in those days was World level.

Larry Holmes beat Ali but is he greater than him? No way.