How do U rate Greatness?

[The Surgeon]

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.

Thats a good assesment id say man

[THE REAL NINJA]

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.

LOL yeah that too

The few times that I tried to make a list or ranking of the best heavyweights of all time I used something of the sort .

1. Power
2. Speed
3. pure boxing skills
4. chin
5. heart
6. ring generalship
7. defence

I rated them with letter grades A-F on skills and then based on how well they would each do in a fight vs the others. The only problem I ran into was that I always feel that I am giving too much respect to certin fighters exp the ones from my era .

[Emon723]

I dont buy head to head fantasy match ups, i'll go with quality of opposition and willingness to take on his best competition.

[brownpimp88]

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.

do u think michael spinks would beat archie moore in a head to head fight.

[freedom213]

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.

couldnt have said it bettr myself....nice response

[Addison]

I would consider greatness a combination of skill, heart i.e. guts - overcoming of adversity, and the willingness to take chances - and most of all; "winning the big one."

But you can be just really good; and posess greatness.

That's why I would say there are different kinds of greatness, for my taste.

Overall greatness means you have convinced EVERYONE that you's da best.


Great question, R1.

[Run]

Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

[Run]

Nobody was on Roy's level in his prime, nobody.



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

[oldgringo]

Accomplishments: (raw numbers, how dominant they were in their prime, number of titles/defenses/weight classes, opposition faced and beaten, etc)

Skill: (in ring ability/performance, technique/speed/power/intelligence/ring generalship, etc)

Intangibles: ("heart", ability to come back from stacked odds and win, comeback KO's, etc)

Fantasy Matchups...

Pretty much like K-Dogg's criteria. This criteria is why I hold a fighter like Erik Morales in such high regard.

-He was one of the most dominant fighters ever in a certain weight class (122)

-He showed exceptional skill and technique in the ring (he could box, brawl, punch off the jab, great right hand, good power, etc)

-He won several titles in different weight classes, he beat 4 potential hall of famers (one already in there)

-He showed unbelievable heart at all times in his career, often opting to brawl just to give fans a show when he could have won easier with his boxing ability

-He would do well in most fantasy matchups because of his toughness, chin, natural size advantages and boxing ability/versatility.

[pokpok]

Wins against top competition heads my gauge. Were the best possible competition faced or did he duck anyone? Ninety nine percent of the great ones have a loss or losses in their records, what separates them from ordinary is how they've responded after the loss. At what weight the fighter started his career and at what weight he retires is also a major factor. Roberto Duran is a major example....