The "Greatest of All-Time" Discussion

[QueensburyRules]

what the hell? What are you on about? Lol. Queeny your a piece of work. Ill remember that and not drink too much gaterade.

- -Too late for you.

Alas, billeau, I knew him well Horatio, a fine and game fellow of the previous mileau sadly outdated today.

[Granath]

We often see threads where a particular fighter is lauded as the GOAT. Most of the time it's a fighter who we can universally argue belongs somewhere in the conversation. Every so often someone will drop a name that met with denial, laughter or a sanity check.

I've never been one to say that any one fighter is the greatest of all time. Too many variables to consider and trying to compare one era to another is almost like apples and oranges.

When you consider who your GOAT is, do you take into account the era in which they fought, the quality of opposition (not just a resume full of recognizable names but ATGs at their best), number of fights, win/loss ratio, weight classes etc.?

What is your criteria for GOAT? Can you really narrow down that accolade to just one man?

Good question.

The first thing I realize is that I haven't seen some of the older great ones fight except on grainy video. It doesn't do it justice and therefore I can't properly evaluate them. I can see SRR hit someone but it can be hard to see how hard the punch really was. The video is often not at real-time speed so fighters can look slow or fast depending on how it's been transferred to modern mediums. It's tough to evaluate them.

And while I can look at these guys, there's a whole group of other boxers whose careers happened even before decent video. How do I even consider how good these guys were?

So I realize that while it can be fun to put together a list, I don't truly know who was #1. I can evaluate on the basis of records, competition, supposed size, etc. but I don't truly know who was best. Then throw in the changes in society, standards and the rules of the sport and it's truly a crapshoot.

The guys I can properly evaluate are the ones who I've seen - live or on TV - and who are modern enough where there's a lot of film on them so I can see the full body of their work. Again, it doesn't mean that I don't enjoy putting together a top 10 list. I just know that it's virtual toilet paper because it's worth nothing.

[billeau2]

Explain to me how Henry fought better opponents than Duran.

Its not something that works like a geometric proof. Look at whom both men fought. Both great fighters, but Armstrong fought a whole bevy of great fighters ATG's. Its not that Duran did not fight great fighters but head to head Armstrong fought better comp.

Now one can dissect each fight which is what posters tend to do, like "well when he beat opponent A, opponent A had one leg, (being funny)...

Ultimately it is a matter of opinion. My opinion is based on the amount of great fighters fought, the amount of fights, sheer rounds, and the time when they fought. Armstrong was lucky when he fought and Duran fought at a great time, but Armstrong just fought when more great fighters were around. IMO.

[billeau2]

- -I suppose he'll list Robinson and Ross, and then quickly move to cut his losses.

That shows how much you know about Armstrong.

Its not only the big names... But guys like Zivic, Ambers, Garcia who were excellent fighters. Davey Day, Angott and Beau Jack...Armstrong's resume is packed with excellent fighters and because of the sheer amount of fights he fought more excellent fighters.

Its no slight on Duran, but Armstrong has an excellent resume, one of the best, very little fluff.

Put the gatorade down and look it up Queeny

[QueensburyRules]

- -Lotta respect for both Lance and Henry, but any notion that Henry fought better fighters than did Duran nothing but warmed over hogwash.

Could make a provable case he had more fights against HOF fighters than did Duran, but I suppose you never ventured an opinion yet that you could actually back up.

The versions of SRL, Hearns, and Hagler are always at the top of any greatest chart whereas you tend to be MIA.

[The Old LefHook]

Hmm, I guess it is true that almost every legendary bout of Duran was beyond lightweight. Beyond lightweight his ledger of competition is very stiff, but at lightweight itself, somewhat ordinary. De Jesus and Buchanan were good fighters. That is exactly what they were.

Well, Ambers, Zivic, et all, had to be younger and closer to prime when they fought Armstrong than when they fought Robinson. And those guys are always used to show what good fighters Robinson faced. Therefore...can't have it both ways. I probably need to take a further look at Armstrong. It is easy for me to minimize the miniature weights because I am 6'9" myself. I'll pulp a young potato in one fist all right.

[Anthony342]

Yes "Gator" ade as in the Florida Gators. When money went into football football became a testing ground. Then, just as with electrolytes these forms of fitness came to the public. Its fascinating. I learned about it as a trainer while I was teaching martial arts in Baltimore of all places. This was the eighties.

Nautilus fitness machines were originally designed for athletes...they were supposed to be used a very specific way. Its very interesting actually. I learned from a guy that everyone thought was an idiot. But I will listen to anyone lol! Ill give them a chance.

This guy was kind of pudgy BUT he had definition. he had a nice build but very specific development on the different muscles, not at all like a body builder. He taught me what the concept behind what Arthur jones and Nautilus was about. you would maximize the intensity of the lift, and shorten the reps, and make sure form was impeccable. What would happen is you would work the muscle group to muscle failure which made the muscles grow. Thing is the general public could not get it, its very difficult to work at that intensity. Professional athletes could do it, but most people could not work that hard.

When you did things this way you got results and your workout time, your reps for each set of an exerscize all decreased... You could work every major muslce group in your body to exhaustion in ten minutes! If you really trained properly.

There's another short on Arnold Schawzenegger called The Arnold Blueprint, which talks about how he came up with his own workouts while in the Austrian military to bulk up for his first bodybuilding competition. He actually then escaped and like in a movie, hopped on a freight train and hitched his way to the competition, won it and made his way back to the base haha.

To muscle failure sounds good. I used to know guys who would take it further though and want their muscles to be sore later that day or the next day so they knew they really worked hard, which is crazy to me.

[billeau2]

- -Lotta respect for both Lance and Henry, but any notion that Henry fought better fighters than did Duran nothing but warmed over hogwash.

Could make a provable case he had more fights against HOF fighters than did Duran, but I suppose you never ventured an opinion yet that you could actually back up.

The versions of SRL, Hearns, and Hagler are always at the top of any greatest chart whereas you tend to be MIA.

Its not just my argument queeny. And the HOF has nothing to do with it. Armstrong fought guys who were consistently excellent fighters, with ATG's sprinkled in and with some very tough fighters. He fought a lot more of them because he fought more than Duran, try to get that through that point that goes for a skull of yours.

[billeau2]

Hmm, I guess it is true that almost every legendary bout of Duran was beyond lightweight. Beyond lightweight his ledger of competition is very stiff, but at lightweight itself, somewhat ordinary. De Jesus and Buchanan were good fighters. That is exactly what they were.

Well, Ambers, Zivic, et all, had to be younger and closer to prime when they fought Armstrong than when they fought Robinson. And those guys are always used to show what good fighters Robinson faced. Therefore...can't have it both ways. I probably need to take a further look at Armstrong. It is easy for me to minimize the miniature weights because I am 6'9" myself. I'll pulp a young potato in one fist all right.

I agree about the midgets lefty... and Armstrong was not elegant. But there are many who put him next in line behind Robinson and a few who put him in front. Yes, he fought a lot of the tough pittsgurgh fighters like Zivic when they were at their best. he also did beat fight benny L and Robinson. So as much as I like Duran this seems fairly straight forward to me.

[QueensburyRules]

- -You being a lineal, concrete thinker who can only see concrete in 2 dimensional directions.