This is a test

[Doctor_Tenma]

I don't even know Billy Conn.

[DonTaseMeBrah]

trying to find out real boxing knowledge in NSB is like trying to find a real diamond in a swap meet.

what's the point jab?

I know you are a old school boxing golden age proponent. According to you & the bert sugars old school fighters are invincible & have god like superpowers compared to new school modern school fighters.

Nice bait thread tho.

[JAB5239]

P4P? I don't know much of Conn except the Louis article but being 169lbs in a heavyweight match speaks of serious skills. But will not vote because I really haven't seen him fight. If you could post a video then I probably could raise an opinion.

I know even know Billy Conn.

This is the whole point. Most fans today DON'T know about past fighters they're claiming their favorites are better than. How are you going to say your guy is top 20 or top 10 without being versed with other past greats? Fighters like Pac are great, but there are fighters from other eras who beat better fighters during their day and they're just being written off to create a spot for the Johnny come lately. Im not putting Pac down, Im criticizing those who would overrank him without seeing the whole picture. Its a joke on this board sometimes.

[warp1432]

Im talking in an all time sense, Warp.

Even then, Pacquiao has just as good of a resume. Zale and Zivic are great fighters, but Pacquiao also has great fighters on his resume.

Conn actually became a legitamite heavyweight contender, which adds to his greatness, but on an all time sense Manny might have just as good of a resume and he was a better fighter in terms of skill asset imo.

[JAB5239]

trying to find out real boxing knowledge in NSB is like trying to find a real diamond in a swap meet.

what's the point jab?

I know you are a old school boxing golden age proponent. According to you & the bert sugars old school fighters are invincible & have god like superpowers compared to new school modern school fighters.

Nice bait thread tho.

No that isn't it at all. But it would be nice to see a little common sense and less guess work. I see a lot people guessing that Manny has fought better fighters than Conn. I don't see to many actually pointing to any facts. From the look of it you aren't going to be the first to do so either.

[tesla_power]

This is the whole point. Most fans today DON'T know about past fighters they're claiming their favorites are better than. How are you going to say your guy is top 20 or top 10 without being versed with other past greats? Fighters like Pac are great, but there are fighters from other eras who beat better fighters during their day and they're just being written off to create a spot for the Johnny come lately. Im not putting Pac down, Im criticizing those who would overrank him without seeing the whole picture. Its a joke on this board sometimes.

Ok. I'd agree. But then let me return the question to you. If videos does not exist and we based the merits of each fighter on articles written about them, who will you vote P4P? IMO, you could opined an ATG ranking between Pac and Billy based on resume but not P4P ....

[DonTaseMeBrah]

Even then, Pacquiao has just as good of a resume. Zale and Zivic are great fighters, but Pacquiao also has great fighters on his resume.

Conn actually became a legitamite heavyweight contender, which adds to his greatness, but on an all time sense Manny might have just as good of a resume and he was a better fighter in terms of skill asset imo.

I see a lot of the old guard complain about overrated modern fighters all the time as if overrated was invented from 1970s,80s & up.

But nobody ever wants to dare call any old school fighters overrated because they have 100 plus fights.

Trust me overrated started in the oldschool. A lot of these white fighters that are being put in the pedestal by the jabs & bert sugars of the world are just as overrated as the new fighters they claim as overrated.

[Shadows]

I'm not going to vote becuase I don't know the full extent of Conn's record, who he faced, etc--only the major details. I think to simply vote for Pacquiao in the situation is just biased nuthugging.

What I do know about Conn is that he's generally considered amongst the best LHWs of all-time with Charles, Moore, Spinks, and Foster. Plus, he nearly beat Joe Louis in a fight he was outweighted by 20+ pounds.

[DonTaseMeBrah]

No that isn't it at all. But it would be nice to see a little common sense and less guess work. I see a lot people guessing that Manny has fought better fighters than Conn. I don't see to many actually pointing to any facts. From the look of it you aren't going to be the first to do so either.

jab,

You know too damn well that anybody that rates pacquiao or floyd top 10 or 1# of all time are not to be taken seriously. They immediately brand themselves as idiots who only nuthug their favorite boxers.

[JAB5239]

Even then, Pacquiao has just as good of a resume. Zale and Zivic are great fighters, but Pacquiao also has great fighters on his resume.

I would probably give Conn the edge in the resume department, though Pac os keep building his.

Conn actually became a legitamite heavyweight contender, which adds to his greatness, but on an all time sense Manny might have just as good of a resume and he was a better fighter in terms of skill asset imo.

This I disagree with. Billy Conns Maquez was Joe Louis and he was giving p 30+ pounds and still put up a helluva fight. Marquez had no size advantage and took Pac to the brink both times. Conn was extremely skilled.