I was looking through the book boxing's greatest fighters by Burt Sugar today...

[Chase8400]

I think his list sucks, but your reasoning makes no sense either. did you want Ali lower or higher? because p4p I dont think I rate him in the top 10..

I'll start here. Ali certainly deserves consideration in the top 3 all time on any list. If you think otherwise, don't read any further. Note* This is not a P4P list, just an overall greatest boxer list. If it were P4P, Jones would be the #1 because nobody ever did the things he could do in a boxing ring. EVER.

and why couldnt Duran be rated above Leonard? the guy beat his first future champ at 130lbs, while Leonard's smallest class was 147lbs, and yet Duran still has a pretty clear win over him.

Back to this not being a P4P list. Weight did'nt matter. Leonard was a cut above and it was obvious. Plus Duran was beaten by Leonard in his prime, so how does he get a better ranking? I think you see my point. Bert Sugar is biased toward a certain kind of fighter in certain era's. Has nothing to do with acual rankings. You cannot tell me Lennox Lewis does not belong on this list, it's just shameful to asume.

and I dont think its mandatory to have Tyson even in the top ten unless youre counting popularity/historical importance, theres been a LOT of amazing fighters in boxing history. then again...100 is a pretty big number.

I don't recall saying that Tyson belonged in the top 10. Were you imagining things? One thing I know for sure is that Tyson beats 90% of the fighters on this list that are heavyweight in his prime and deserves at the very least a top 50 ranking.

You can take that how you like, and everyone has an opinion. Opinions are just like *******s though. They are all over the place and every one has one.

[TheGreatA]

Back to this not being a P4P list. Weight did'nt matter. Leonard was a cut above and it was obvious. Plus Duran was beaten by Leonard in his prime, so how does he get a better ranking? I think you see my point. Bert Sugar is biased toward a certain kind of fighter in certain era's. Has nothing to do with acual rankings. You cannot tell me Lennox Lewis does not belong on this list, it's just shameful to asume.

How was it obvious?

Duran beat Leonard decisively which Leonard avenged. Both hold wins over each other.

Considering that Duran was a natural 135 lb fighter (one of the greatest, if not the greatest lightweight of all time) getting up there in age by the time he stepped up in weight, he could easily be rated over Leonard and a lot of people do.

[Steak]

I'll start here. Ali certainly deserves consideration in the top 3 all time on any list. If you think otherwise, don't read any further. Note* This is not a P4P list, just an overall greatest boxer list. If it were P4P, Jones would be the #1 because nobody ever did the things he could do in a boxing ring. EVER.

how I consider the 'greatest fighters' is how good they were p4p, otherwise I would have it full of heavyweights. so maybe we just have a difference in how we rank here

Back to this not being a P4P list. Weight did'nt matter. Leonard was a cut above and it was obvious. Plus Duran was beaten by Leonard in his prime, so how does he get a better ranking? I think you see my point. Bert Sugar is biased toward a certain kind of fighter in certain era's. Has nothing to do with acual rankings. You cannot tell me Lennox Lewis does not belong on this list, it's just shameful to asume.

how was Leonard 'obviously' a cut above Duran when he lost to Duran, plus the fact that Duran was smaller than Leonard and came up to his weight class to beat him?
Sugar is most certainly biased.

I don't recall saying that Tyson belonged in the top 10. Were you imagining things? One thing I know for sure is that Tyson beats 90% of the fighters on this list that are heavyweight in his prime and deserves at the very least a top 50 ranking.

oops, I meant top 100. messed up. and I wouldnt dare try to name 100 fighters better than Tyson...it would take way too long. but theres been a ton of impressive fighters in the history of boxing, so I cant say for sure if he deserves to be there without question.

[Danny Gunz]

They got to get a more updated version of greatest fighters list... roy jones jr. 88, hopkins 91, hagler 47 and whitaker 48... come on man all those guys have a good enough resume to be top 25

Cause if he is doing the greatest fighters of all time rather than an era mike tyson would absolutely ruin jack dempsey and willie pep probably wouldnt even be able to make it in the ranks today

[Chase8400]

How was it obvious?

Duran beat Leonard decisively which Leonard avenged. Both hold wins over each other.

Considering that Duran was a natural 135 lb fighter (one of the greatest, if not the greatest lightweight of all time) getting up there in age by the time he stepped up in weight, he could easily be rated over Leonard and a lot of people do.

I should have said, he was obviously better to those who have general boxing knowledge and common sense that have seen them both fight.

.............sorry about that.

[TheGreatA]

I should have said, he was obviously better to those who have general boxing knowledge and common sense who have seen them both fight.

.............sorry about that.

I assume you haven't seen much of a prime Roberto Duran?

[Ryn0]

If he has Tyson at 100 and Billy Conn, Tommy Loughran within the top 50 and Jimmy Wilde at 18 and not withn the top 15 he's a dumb ass, I don't care how respected his opinion is.

[TheGreatA]

If he has Tyson at 100 and Billy Conn, Tommy Loughran within the top 50 and Jimmy Wilde at 18 and not withn the top 15 he's a dumb ass, I don't care how respected his opinion is.

What's wrong with Conn and Loughran being in the top 50?

One thing I'm surprised by is that he doesn't rate Bob Fitzsimmons higher than he does.

[Chase8400]

I assume you haven't seen much of a prime Roberto Duran?

I've seen plenty enough to know SRL was alot better and that's not just based on their fights with one another. One guy was a come forward agressive & strong brawler with granite for a chin and the other was super slick, fast and could throw lightning quick combinations and could also take quite a punch when he had to.

I lean toward SRL being better between these two and I'm sure most would side with that. Bert Sugar based this list off of the times when he was able to remember what happened in the fight the night before. In the 70's he was still coherent and got to see allot of Duran fights. It's simple logic in my opinion.

[Chase8400]

What's wrong with Conn and Loughran being in the top 50?

One thing I'm surprised by is that he doesn't rate Bob Fitzsimmons higher than he does.

I agree that Bob Fitzsimmons should def. be rated higher.