How do U rate Greatness?

[The Surgeon]

Do u go by accomplishments and record ect or head to head fantasy fights? Do u take into account modern training methods? Just curious. My 2 fav fighters are Tyson and Joe Louis, for me head to head Iron Mike walks right thru him for an early KO 1-6 rounds but lookin at statistics The Brown Bomber is far superior! Would Louis have been better if he fought today than when he did? Do u account for that? Let me know fellas, appreciated

[THE REAL NINJA]

First and and most importantly what they did in the ring and then based on who they may or may not have beaten .

[BloodClot]

I simply compare them to myself and if their half the man that I am, I consider them great

[Hydro]

Achievements in the ring, who and how you beat your opposition, which of the top opposition around you did you beat, etc...

Head-to-head is secondary.

"Impact" on the sport is very low on my scale, if it even comes into play at all.

[BmoreBrawler]

good question.

I rate it as a combination of record and competition faced.



I dont think that greatness should take into account style and things like that.

[psychopath]

Greatness?

First it's got to be fighting skills, then ring accomplishment (as to who they have fought and beaten) and how they stand among the other marquee fighters of their era and of course the legacy they made.

[The Surgeon]

I simply compare them to myself and if their half the man that I am, I consider them great

LOL Very very swell head!

[K-DOGG]

1. Accomplishments....you have to take into consideration what a fighter accomplished during his career and, most importantly, against whom...how good was his competition?

2. Heart.....to correctly gauge a fighter's greatness, you have to see how they do when the chips are down. Do they find a way to win against all odds? Do they comeback from the brink of destruction or do they fold like a cheap suit? How badly do they want to win? Are they able to win a fight at any moment in time either through power or guile or willpower? How do they respond to a loss if they lose? Do they give up, do they try harder, are they ever the same; worse or better? How do they do once they're past their best years? Are they still a theat? Do they have a championship will to win and is there irrefutable proof?

3. Skill.....How is their "game"? Are they intelligent fighters? Do they make up for lack of physical skill with mental willyness? How tight is their technique, their defense, their offensive weapons? How close to perfection have they honed their craft? How does their mastery of their craft compare to their contemporaries and those who were before and after them?

4. Mythical Match-ups.....the least important of the criteria becaue it is all subjective and can not be proven in any shape form or fasion; it is all opinion and based on the opinionizer's knowledge.

[GEOFFHAYES]

If you lose, come back and win. That's a factor.


JEFF

[Chups]

Believe it or not...some people consider how long you've held or defended your belt as greatness.