It is INTELLECTUALLY & ANALYTICALLY DISHONEST to rank fighters with NO FIGHT FOOTAGE

[Barn]

The reason you cannot rank fighters by H2H or skills is because the sport has changed.

Yes, Lennox Lewis and both Klitschko brothers would destroy Jack Dempsey...

But that's no fun is it, there needs to be a universal way to rank them and you do this with their accomplishments.

The whole "Floyd Mayweather would own in the 1920's" is ******ed because he wouldn't be like he is in the 1920's, and trying to assume what Mayweather would be like had he been brought up in the '20's is ******ed.

That's why you judge from accomplishments and resume relative to their era.

Also T-S is a dumbass who has clearly shown he has no idea what he's talking about.

[croz]

Slavery never existed because there is no extensive video footage of it.

Of slavery? Yeah there is. WTF?

[Barn]

My list just for reference:

1. Harry Greb
2. Willie Pep
3. Gene Tunney
4. Jim Jeffries
5. Jimmy McLarnin
6. Benny Leonard
7. John L Sullivan (yeah he was bareknuckle but one tough SOB)
8. Jim Corbett
9. Benny Leonard
10. Barney Ross
11. Mickey Walker
12. Tony Canzoneri
13. Bob Fitzsimmons
14. Battling Nelson
15. Benny Lynch
16. Andre Ward
17. Sam Langford
18. Joe Calzaghe
19. Tommy Loughran
20. Maxie Rosenbloom

[BoxingGenius27]

The reason you cannot rank fighters by H2H or skills is because the sport has changed.

Yes, Lennox Lewis and both Klitschko brothers would destroy Jack Dempsey...

But that's no fun is it, there needs to be a universal way to rank them and you do this with their accomplishments.

The whole "Floyd Mayweather would own in the 1920's" is ******ed because he wouldn't be like he is in the 1920's, and trying to assume what Mayweather would be like had he been brought up in the '20's is ******ed.

That's why you judge from accomplishments and resume relative to their era.

Also T-S is a dumbass who has clearly shown he has no idea what he's talking about.

That's ******.

If RJJ was the greatest fighter to ever live and most likely win all of his H2H matchups, then that's what it is, regardless of time frame.

Essentially, you're saying a fighter can only be as great as who's alive to fight him.

RJJ destroyed everyone in his prime, but because he wasn't born in a certain era or because certain fighters from a certain era weren't present when RJJ was fighting, let's put RJJ in this room with a glass ceiling thus only allowing him to go so high because "the available competition at the time wasn't worthy".

F outta here with that ******ness.

[croz]

My list just for reference:

1. Harry Greb
2. Willie Pep
3. Gene Tunney
4. Jim Jeffries
5. Jimmy McLarnin
6. Benny Leonard
7. John L Sullivan (yeah he was bareknuckle but one tough SOB)
8. Jim Corbett
9. Benny Leonard
10. Barney Ross
11. Mickey Walker
12. Tony Canzoneri
13. Bob Fitzsimmons
14. Battling Nelson
15. Benny Lynch
16. Andre Ward
17. Sam Langford
18. Joe Calzaghe
19. Tommy Loughran
20. Maxie Rosenbloom

I hope you have a nice white robe to go with that list

[New England]

My list just for reference:

1. Harry Greb
2. Willie Pep
3. Gene Tunney
4. Jim Jeffries
5. Jimmy McLarnin
6. Benny Leonard
7. John L Sullivan (yeah he was bareknuckle but one tough SOB)
8. Jim Corbett
9. Benny Leonard
10. Barney Ross
11. Mickey Walker
12. Tony Canzoneri
13. Bob Fitzsimmons
14. Battling Nelson
15. Benny Lynch
16. Andre Ward
17. Sam Langford
18. Joe Calzaghe
19. Tommy Loughran
20. Maxie Rosenbloom

yes.........

calzaghe appears twice in my top 35

[Barn]

That's ******.

If RJJ was the greatest fighter to ever live and most likely win all of his H2H matchups, then that's what it is, regardless of time frame.

Essentially, you're saying a fighter can only be as great as who's alive to fight him.

RJJ destroyed everyone in his prime, but because he wasn't born in a certain era or because certain fighters from a certain era weren't present when RJJ was fighting, let's put RJJ in this room with a glass ceiling thus only allowing him to go so high because "the available competition at the time wasn't worthy".

F outta here with that ******ness.

Yes that is what it is, but it's not an accurate way of comparing them.

No I'm not saying that, I'm saying your graded best on the relative opponents essentially.

If you beat a fighter who has held the undisputed title for 10 defences and avoided no-one today, and you did the same 90 years ago. As long as the opponents are of a similar calibre you get the same amount of credit.

For example it is noted that Marciano's title opponents were weaker than some other champions later on, for example Muhammad Ali, so he doesn't get as much credit for those wins.

It's a hard thing to explain but if you actually try to make a list and justify it through accomplishments and resume you'll get the idea. It's worth a shot.

Saying "roy jones beats everyone so hes the best" isn't anything really. Not that you said that of course, it's just to exaggerate my point.

It isn't any sort of analysis at all nor an accurate way of comparing fighters from different eras, considering it's about 100x more subjective than resume comparison.

[Barn]

yes.........

calzaghe appears twice in my top 35

I was unsure if Calzaghe was in my top 20 because that didn't leave any room for the "Philidelphia Fireman Harry McChesthair." as he had to be pushed out.

[lparm]

My list just for reference:

1. Harry Greb
2. Willie Pep
3. Gene Tunney
4. Jim Jeffries
5. Jimmy McLarnin
6. Benny Leonard
7. John L Sullivan (yeah he was bareknuckle but one tough SOB)
8. Jim Corbett
9. Benny Leonard
10. Barney Ross
11. Mickey Walker
12. Tony Canzoneri
13. Bob Fitzsimmons
14. Battling Nelson
15. Benny Lynch
16. Andre Ward
17. Sam Langford
18. Joe Calzaghe
19. Tommy Loughran
20. Maxie Rosenbloom

This man is smoking the Scottish good stuff. He ranks Andre ward and his short career with only 1 linear title and zero obvious names that would make the HOF over Manny and floyd with their multiple linear titles and numerous likely HOF elite fighters they have wins over on their resumes.

This list is clearly an attempt at humor.

[New England]

Boxing was never the most popular sport on the planet, not even in the US. Boxing didn't start properly growing on an international level until after Muhammad Ali retired when suddenly every country on Earth wanted their own Ali.

This was said about the health of boxing back in 1937
Jack Dempsey knows his own game. When he says boxing will be washed up within a year, unless something's done, he's talking straight from his heart. "It isn't boxing anymore, he complains, "but just a big lawsuit."
Still, when Jack thinks the evils of his former occupation can be cleaned up by appointing a czar-someone like judge landis, who runs organised baseball, there is room for doubt

Here's an article of 1941 which says people have been saying boxing is dead for years:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...-is-dead&hl=en

These are hardly words to be directed at the biggest sport on the planet.

and were they right? especially if ali - frazier 1 is considered the biggest fight ever ( for which an argument can certainly be made.)

dempsey used to fight in front of 100k people.

louis - schmeling 2 had 75 k spectators and was one of the biggest radio broadcasts of all time



do you really think boxing is bigger or better than it used to be, when there were more fighters and it was a more widely watched sport.?