Tweet
Pernell Whitaker is possibly the greatest boxer of all time.
-
-
whitaker. didnt even have to think about it.Comment
-
Who did Henry Armstrong fight? How many of those guys did you know?
It makes me laugh when guys say that uninformed nonsense. Unless you are 70+ years old, you can't really comment on Henry Armstrong's career.
I saw Pernell's whole career. I saw who he beat, how he beat them, and who his competition TRULY was. I have context.
WITHOUT looking at boxrec.... name the guys who HA beat that are better than Julio Cesar Chavez.Comment
-
Are you serious? Floyd Mayweather hasn't beaten anyone better than JCC.
But if you really would like to know....
Henry Armstrong held 3 world titles at once. We're not talking ABC belts either.
Armstrong is the only boxer in history to hold three world championship titles simultaneously, in three weight divisions, in one year - 1938. ( featherweight, lightweight,and welterweight). His record still remains unbroken.Comment
-
to be honest, you didnt really answer his question at all.
Im not going to comment on how good Henry Armstrong was, because honestly I dont know anything about his career. but I think the 'holding 3 world titles at once' thing doesnt really prove anything by itself. If a fighter came up from featherweight to Welterweight and everyone unanimously thought that that fighter could beat everyone from Welterweight and below, wouldnt that basically be the same thing?Comment
-
Theres no need to answer who he fought. The guy was thee feather, light and welterweight champion all at the same time. To this day, some 70 years later, it still hasn't been done. Even if I did answer who he fought, most likely, he wouldn't know who those opponents were or simply wouldn't care and dismiss them because he doesn't know them. It what I've seen as the standard here. If poster doesn't know who a certain fighters opposition was, that fighter just gets dismissed as fighting nobodies. This is actually an opportunity for him to learn more about the sport and its past greats by actually researching the guy, like I did.
As for your question, there is a ginormous difference in thinking that a fighter could beat everyone in 3 divisions and actually doing it.
Nobody has done since 1938.
I could easily look up boxrec and give you an entire list, but I'm not going to front like I know every single guy on his ledger. The fact that there has been only 1 man in the history of the sport to hold 3 world titles at once,( mind you , not a single one was a jr. division) says something about his abilities.Comment
-
thats not really fair for the other fighters.
If its impossible for a fighter to do that, how do you expect him to pull off the same feat?He "was the first and the last boxer ever to hold three world titles simultaneously. After he turned the trick in 1938 no boxer was ever again allowed to be champion in more than one weight division at the same time."
Off the top of my head, Barney Ross seems like Armstrong's best win though. I would like to compare Whitaker's opponents and Armstrong's opponents, but I know very little about most the competition before the 1960sComment
-
The answer to the poll is Sweet Pea, and it is sort of hard to try to maneuver Floyd past him, but I don't think the gap is really as wide as it seems on first glance. People have fun discrediting Floyd's opponents, but his resume in history is going to go down as very good. It is a shame, though, imagine a 41-0 Floyd with Shane Mosley and Miguel Cotto on there. Now that would be unquestionable greatness. Still, his resume is very underrated. On the all time pedastal I think he's a lot higher than most have him, top 20 at worst. The problem is just that Sweet Pea is in that 8-15 range and it is impossible to drop him any further.Comment
Comment