List your top 30 greatest fighters p4p of all-time

[therealpugilist]

To be fair I wont list any fighters that are pre-1900 or I dont have much knowledge off although I have researched Many, Many fighters i choose not to give opinions based off writers or so called experts

My list includes champions, fighters who were ignored by the color line, fighters who I rate based on skill, resume and success at higher weights(which is crucial in assessment)

this is an elite group and many are interchangeable, this is my latest list

1)Henry Armstrong
2)Sugar Ray Robinson
3)Harry Greb
4)Sam Langforde
5)Barbados Joe Walcott
6)Muhammad Ali
7)Wille Pep
8)Tony Canzoneri
9)Benny Leonard
10)Pernell Whitaker
11)Roberto Duran
12)Sugar Ray Leonard
13)Barney Ross
14)Ezzard Charles
15)Archie Moore
16)Jimmy McClarnin
17)Sandy Saddler
18)Floyd Mayweather
19)Alexis Arguello
20)Marvelous Marvin Hagler
21)Charley Burley
22)Ricardo "Finito" Lopez
23)Julio Cesar Chavez
24) Carlos Monzon
25) Eder Jofre
26)Jose Napoles
27)Kid Chocolate
28) Roy Jones
29)Bernard Hopkins
30) Manny Pacquiao

[IronDanHamza]

Decent.

Few a disagree with;

Canzoneri too high.

Ezzard Charles too low.

Floyd Mayweather way too high.

Whitaker too high.

Joe Walcott too high.

A handful of others.

But the choice of Top 4 is spot on IMO.

[therealpugilist]

Decent.

Few a disagree with;

Canzoneri too high.

Ezzard Charles too low.

Floyd Mayweather way too high.

Whitaker too high.

Joe Walcott too high.

A handful of others.

But the choice of Top 4 is spot on IMO.

thanks....its so many great fighters its hard to rank them, especially when you get past the top ten...I will explain a few of my selections for you though

1)Canzoneri...fought and beat every notable fighter of his era, has arguably the best resume in boxing if you check it out....dude was also ahead of his time slick, good power, could mix it up, great chin...also by the time he was 21 he already won 3 lineal titles(feathweight lightweight and juniorwelterweight) and drew with the bantamweight champ at the time as a teenager...thats rare territory

2) I usually have Charles top 10 but after research and observation anywhere 1-15 is fair

3)I have Floyd top 20 because in 43 fights he has 18 wins over champions, is probably the most adaptable fighter i have ever seen, and very few have combined technique and natural god given gifts the way he has...no fighter has had that few of fights with having beaten that many champions, success at higher weights, and beat a hall of famer for his first title in his 18th fight....very impressive

4)Whitaker is their based on skill, success at higher weights, dominants in his prime, and he beat the best of his day cant really ask for more, first time he clearly lost was when he was 35

5)Joe Walcott was a 5'1" a great welterweight but dude also beat middleweights, lightheavyweights, and Heavyweights..even kayoed tough guy Joe Choynski who kayoed Jack Johnson, George Godfrey, and fought the best heavies of the era...no fighter in history can say that besides Langforde who never won a title, and Carpentier who turned pro so early


like I said though its tough its interchangeable

[IronDanHamza]

thanks....its so many great fighters its hard to rank them, especially when you get past the top ten...I will explain a few of my selections for you though

1)Canzoneri...fought and beat every notable fighter of his era, has arguably the best resume in boxing if you check it out....dude was also ahead of his time slick, good power, could mix it up, great chin...also by the time he was 21 he already won 3 lineal titles(feathweight lightweight and juniorwelterweight) and drew with the bantamweight champ at the time as a teenager...thats rare territory

2) I usually have Charles top 10 but after research and observation anywhere 1-15 is fair

3)I have Floyd top 20 because in 43 fights he has 18 wins over champions, is probably the most adaptable fighter i have ever seen, and very few have combined technique and natural god given gifts the way he has...no fighter has had that few of fights with having beaten that many champions, success at higher weights, and beat a hall of famer for his first title in his 18th fight....very impressive

4)Whitaker is their based on skill, success at higher weights, dominants in his prime, and he beat the best of his day cant really ask for more, first time he clearly lost was when he was 35

5)Joe Walcott was a 5'1" a great welterweight but dude also beat middleweights, lightheavyweights, and Heavyweights..even kayoed tough guy Joe Choynski who kayoed Jack Johnson, George Godfrey, and fought the best heavies of the era...no fighter in history can say that besides Langforde who never won a title, and Carpentier who turned pro so early


like I said though its tough its interchangeable

Canzoneri is a great fighter, no doubt. But I don't think he's as high as you have him.

I'd have him around the Top 20-25 mark.

I personally can't see anyway Ezzard Charles can be outside the Top 10. I'd have him in the Top 5. His resume is one of the best of all time.

Mayweather, I just don't think he has a resume strong enough to warrant a Top 20 mark.

Whitaker, great fighter but the same reasoning as Mayweather.

Joe Walcott another great fighter, one of the greatest. But I think Top 5 is too high for him.

But I know it's very hard to put together these lists and outside of a handful I strongly disagree with, it's a solid list.

[Danny Gunz]

I never really liked doing these lists because the times are so different so the top of the list will almost always favor the older fighters.

[therealpugilist]

Canzoneri is a great fighter, no doubt. But I don't think he's as high as you have him.

I'd have him around the Top 20-25 mark.

I personally can't see anyway Ezzard Charles can be outside the Top 10. I'd have him in the Top 5. His resume is one of the best of all time.

Mayweather, I just don't think he has a resume strong enough to warrant a Top 20 mark.

Whitaker, great fighter but the same reasoning as Mayweather.

Joe Walcott another great fighter, one of the greatest. But I think Top 5 is too high for him.

But I know it's very hard to put together these lists and outside of a handful I strongly disagree with, it's a solid list.

thanks man, havent made one in a while...but when i do it reminds me how difficult it is and how exclusive a group even the top 50 is

[Goldie]

I never really liked doing these lists because the times are so different so the top of the list will almost always favor the older fighters.

Exactly. The top of the list will never change since so much weight is put on the perception of one's resume.

[therealpugilist]

Exactly. The top of the list will never change since so much weight is put on the perception of one's resume.

yeah most guys today will never get high on lists like this because the structure of boxing has changed...alot of meaningless belts, more money per fight, less fights in their careers etc. People forget though numbers are great but a fighter doesnt fight 80+ fights and all their competition is good or great...never gonna happen

[Goldie]

yeah most guys today will never get high on lists like this because the structure of boxing has changed...alot of meaningless belts, more money per fight, less fights in their careers etc. People forget though numbers are great but a fighter doesnt fight 80+ fights and all their competition is good or great...never gonna happen

like you said, the money has changed everything. It's extremely hard to judge fighters from different eras.

[therealpugilist]

like you said, the money has changed everything. It's extremely hard to judge fighters from different eras.

indeed...also its not fair to judge some fighters based solely on resume...some eras were Just deeper than others, dont mean they were lesser fighters...Holmes and Bob Foster were undoubted greats but their eras werent very deep....Fighters like Ali and Ezzard Charles were lucky to have other great fighters in their era