How do fans in their 20s, 30s, 40s have an ATG list?

[-Kev-]

I don’t know how people know so much about who are the greatest of all time. Like there have been 100s of great boxers in history and we don’t have footage for a lot of them. But some how people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, know the entirety of boxing’s history to know which fighters of the last couple of decades should be considered top 5-10.

When I speak of the ATG list, I leave numbers out. I just say “so and so is definitely one of the ATG’s”. But I don’t go around listing and numbering like some clueless fans do. And these fans basically just copy other people’s lists. Without ever even watching a fight of EVERYONE they list.

There’s no way you can have an ATG list in order from greatest to least unless you’ve actually watched every boxer in the history of boxing.

Now if you want to make an ATG list of fighters from the last half a century or so, that’s more believable. If you start at 1950+, and admit that you are omitting fighters you’ve never seen footage of. Then that makes sense. But I see fans making top 100 lists which consists fighters that can’t even be seen. Or fighters with limited footage. Or black and white shadowboxing videos. It just makes no sense.

I see relatively young fans debating who should be in the top 10, or who should be top 3. In my head i’m thinking, man how does young ass know that? Everybody thinks they’re Burt Sugar or something. Just copying his list and parroting what he said in the past. Nobody actually knows anything about who should be listed where on this fantasy list.

[KTFOKING]

The idea of these lists in the first place make no sense to me. Like people legit have heated arguments on subjective crap. I get debating who is better in the same era or when they are in the same weight class at the same time, but debating who has a better legacy or who was better between someone who fought in the 1930s compared to now? Meh, don't care about it at all....Mayweather vs Pacquiao debate is going to continue for decades and decades...And really, why the hell does it matter? If someone says Mayweather? Cool, if someone says Pacquiao? Cool...But nope, they will get passionate about this pointless debate and continue arguing forever.

[paulf]

100%. It's the same as fantasy matchups; no matter how scientific people tell themselves they're being, the exercise is 100% junk science.

Every generation stands on the shoulders of the prior ones. All of the variables that make a fighter: training techniques, nutrition, styles, even performance enhancers etc etc are impossible to control for as the different disciples evolve though the years. And if you can't control for it, you have no clue how one fighter would fare in a past era or a past era fighter would fare now.

These rankings and lists are always silly and pointless, but I guess the sportswriters have to talk about something.

[Left Hook Tua]

With modern training and evolution of men physically.

Most of those old timers would not be competitive to modern athletes.

Only the really special ones like say sugar ray Robinson would compete.

Imagine rocky Marciano fighting modern cruiserweights. David gaye would smoke his overrated pasta ass.

[Toffee]

Because studying the history of boxing is interesting. You've got footage, resumes to compare, fighter's dimensions. There's plenty of info out there to form an opinion.

I like having an opinion. As long as it's an informed opinion and not just regurgitating whatever some publication says.

I also think the 'fighters of generations ago couldn't compete against modern fighters' argument is interesting. I'm sure it's true... but if they'd had access to modern sports science would they have competed? Or is it fair to judge them against anything but their own era? Marciano was small by modern HW standards, but it's not like big fighters had never emerged at that point. I'm not convinced that the Heavyweight division will always be dominated by big super heavyweights.

At the end of the day, it's just discussion on a topic that people are passionate about.

[Roadblock]

With modern training and evolution of men physically.

Most of those old timers would not be competitive to modern athletes.

Only the really special ones like say sugar ray Robinson would compete.

Imagine rocky Marciano fighting modern cruiserweights. David gaye would smoke his overrated pasta ass.

Didnt you say recently Jack Johnson was better than Mayweather, a bit of a contradiction there.

[Left Hook Tua]

Didnt you say recently Jack Johnson was better than Mayweather, a bit of a contradiction there.

Wrong guy

I dont even like jack Johnson

Jack Johnson is overrated

[Roadblock]

Wrong guy

I dont even like jack Johnson

Jack Johnson is overrated

My apologies it was another guy.

[Left Hook Tua]

My apologies it was another guy.

I think I know which thread you're talking about

The guy was saying jack Johnson fought thru adversity because of racism

My thing with Jack Johnson is once he became champ he avoided the best black fighters himself

At least that's what I read before

[whollisboxing]

With modern training and evolution of men physically.

Most of those old timers would not be competitive to modern athletes.

Only the really special ones like say sugar ray Robinson would compete.

Imagine rocky Marciano fighting modern cruiserweights. David gaye would smoke his overrated pasta ass.

I think it’s important to note that the “old timers” fought way more frequently with much smaller gloves as well. There are plenty of other variables to consider but fighting twice a year instead of twice a month makes a huge difference.