What do you guys think about this ATG list?

[The Big Dunn]

im on the same boat...unless i know that a person has done extensive research and has seen actual footage of full fights, i hold reservations about some guy in his 40s or 50s talking about something that took place before he was even born

You have to. Especially here on NSB where you get guys saying Ortiz is bum for quitting then lauding Duran as the greatest ever.

[Las Vegas,]

Respectfully, I think any list that includes men you didn't see fight is suspect. I think all ATG lists should be comprised of fighters you saw when they were good.

I feel this way aswell. I can't judge a fighter properly until I've seen atleast some footage of him.

For example, 2 days ago I was looking at GOAT Southpaw lists, and alot of people had Tiger Flowers in there top 5....Tiger Flowers has no piece of footage at all. So how exactly do people know if he's a top 5 southpaw or not?

[IronDanHamza]

Alot of those fighters have footage of them fighting.

Even then, I don't see why footage is necessarily needed to judge a fighters greatness.

I mean, there is no in ring footage of Harry Greb. But, it's hard to argue he isn't a Top 10 ATG considering the resume he posesses.

[IronDanHamza]

I feel this way aswell. I can't judge a fighter properly until I've seen atleast some footage of him.

For example, 2 days ago I was looking at GOAT Southpaw lists, and alot of people had Tiger Flowers in there top 5....Tiger Flowers has no piece of footage at all. So how exactly do people know if he's a top 5 southpaw or not?

Because Tiger Flowers has an exceptional resume.

[Medved]

Because Tiger Flowers has an exceptional resume.

"Resumes?" Boxing back then was a completely diffirent sport, he couldve fought BUMS (most likely did). Dudes fought the same people 10 times in their careers.

There needs to be 2 seperate Boxing Divisions when talking about ATG.

Make Modern Era and Past Era, alot of these guys are ATG just because you have fanboys shouting it for 10 years, if enough people listen they will go oh yea he's ATG. Did you see him fight? Well no but if everyone says he is then it must be true.

[IronDanHamza]

"Resumes?" Boxing back then was a completely diffirent sport, he couldve fought BUMS (most likely did). Dudes fought the same people 10 times in their careers.

There needs to be 2 seperate Boxing Divisions when talking about ATG.

Make Modern Era and Past Era, alot of these guys are ATG just because you have fanboys shouting it for 10 years, if enough people listen they will go oh yea he's ATG. Did you see him fight? Well no but if everyone says he is then it must be true.

Of course he fought bums during his career. He had well over 100 fights.

But, he fought and beat plenty of ATG's. Hense, why regardless to the fact there is no footage of Tiger Flowers it is still abundently clear he is an ATG fighter.

[Las Vegas,]

Alot of those fighters have footage of them fighting.

Even then, I don't see why footage is necessarily needed to judge a fighters greatness.

I mean, there is no in ring footage of Harry Greb. But, it's hard to argue he isn't a Top 10 ATG considering the resume he posesses.

Did YOU live in that era? Did YOU watch how great he was? Did YOU know who were the top fighters in that time? No? That's because you're going by another person's opinion. It's extremely hard to judge a fighter without you actually seeing them or watching footage of them.

Yes I know it's VERY disrespectful to fighters like Harry Greb and Tiger Flowers but at the same time you gotta consider that boxing has been around for WAY MORE than just a century. How about the bareknuckle fighters from the 1800s? For all we know there could of been a fighter better than Sugar Ray Robinson, but we just don't know.

[-MAKAVELLI-]

Alot of those fighters have footage of them fighting.

Even then, I don't see why footage is necessarily needed to judge a fighters greatness.

I mean, there is no in ring footage of Harry Greb. But, it's hard to argue he isn't a Top 10 ATG considering the resume he posesses.

for me, i just can't comment on someone i've never seen...i wasn't around back then and didn't know the landscape of the sport during that era...i can take someone's word for it but i wont repreach someone else's gospel as mine

[Alx.]

only saw footage of harry greb training, his resume is pretty good though and deserves the #2. also think jimmy wilde should've been considered in the list

[IronDanHamza]

Did YOU live in that era? Did YOU watch how great he was? Did YOU know who were the top fighters in that time? No? That's because you're going by another person's opinion. It's extremely hard to judge a fighter without you actually seeing them or watching footage of them.

I didn't live in that era, no. I don't see your point.

I'm not going by someone else's opinion I'm judging him by his resume and accomplishments.

It's not extremely hard. Harry Greb is an ATG, regardless to having no footage.

What he achieved is almost unmatched.

Yes I know it's VERY disrespectful to fighters like Harry Greb and Tiger Flowers but at the same time you gotta consider that boxing has been around for WAY MORE than just a century. How about the bareknuckle fighters from the 1800s? For all we know there could of been a fighter better than Sugar Ray Robinson, but we just don't know.

Surely we are judging by Queensbury rules and onwards, no?

It is quite disrespectful to consider Greb and Flowers as fighters who are not ATG's considering they blatently are.