When are you considered Great?

[steptwome]

Maybe after you are dead, and 60-70 years have passed dince you've stopped boxing, when boxing historians can take your career as it is, without hype, without much monetary considerations, when your comments don't dictate which fights casual boxing fans want to happen, and when you can be viewed objectively as a boxer, taking only into consideration your accomplishments inside the ring. When you don't carry the banner of an entire generation, etc.

These two comments are classic]........ and The latter .......Priceless

[hardmanbrit]

For me, if you have been a World Champion for about a decade and have beaten all the best that your weight division has to offer, only then you can be considered great.

Either that or if you have won World titles in several different weight divisions.

That is why I do not consider Ricky Hatton to be a great.

[Degsy]

Are we all seemingly duped by the notion that all fighters become great when boxing retires YOU. Ali - Holmes, should never have happened but he strived for GREATNESS. Leonard - Norris was a lopsided embarrassment, yet again another fighter striving for GREATNESS.....my question again .....when do YOU attain GREATNESS? Is it when you are pounded into a submissive state, peeling yourself from the canvass in an attempt to recapture the HEYDAYS of yesteryear, or when you go out on your "shield" in an embarrassing fashion, for the Casual Boxing fan, Critic and others alike.

That's a very good and thought provoking post. With some boxers, they can't kill that desire to prove themselves, even when in reality they have nothing left to prove. It is clear, as I think you are hinting at, that Ali and Leonard were already greats and had nothing left to prove. Other boxers may be forced back by money issues as well as pride, take Tyson, the dude is broke. We as fans are partially responsible (not all of us but a percentage) , if we refused to watch a shattered fighter get beaten by a man who is clearly in their prime, then these fights would not get put on.

[steptwome]

For me, if you have been a World Champion for about a decade and have beaten all the best that your weight division has to offer, only then you can be considered great.

Either that or if you have won World titles in several different weight divisions.

That is why I do not consider Ricky Hatton to be a great.

...and at the end of the day It Will Still Not Be Enough for the Casual Fan, Boxing critic and other alike.

[MANGLER]

Somebody made a thread about this a few days ago. It basically comes down to fightin the best, beatin the best, not duckin challenges, bein around for a while, and makin a big impact on the sport while your career is going.

[PoetryInMotion]

Maybe after you are dead, and 60-70 years have passed dince you've stopped boxing, when boxing historians can take your career as it is, without hype, without much monetary considerations, when your comments don't dictate which fights casual boxing fans want to happen, and when you can be viewed objectively as a boxer, taking only into consideration your accomplishments inside the ring. When you don't carry the banner of an entire generation, etc.

co-sign....

[steptwome]

when a fighter risks everything record, legacy, status, etc to fight the best opponents available no questions ask

Thats a point to hold a valid argument

[Don Corleone]

I think a great boxer is a boxer who has the heart and determination to beat anyone they put infront of him whether it be a win or a loss. Titles aren't everything, titles don't make a boxer. There have been many boxers with titles but that doesn't mean they are great or not. Setting goals and achieving them is an example of a great boxer because you set out different tasks to prove not only to the fans but to youself that you can accomplish them. If a boxer can continually manage to beat the best in his era and keep boxing at his best while doing it I think he is a great boxer.

[Thread Stealer]

It's what you achieve. It can be through longevity or a lot of work in a small amount of time. Quality of opposition, talent, skills, etc...

when a fighter risks everything record, legacy, status, etc to fight the best opponents available no questions ask

It'd be nice if that were the case, but a number of greats played the risk/reward game. You can't fight everyone and even some of the greatest missed a few.

A guy may miss an opponent here and there but he's still a great if he did enough work otherwise.

[KnockoutTheFat]

When you're considered P4P #1 on BoxRec.