My Top 20 All Time

[K-DOGG]

Reasons?

Also, to guys like RustyDan who don't have Ali in their top 10 and to guys like K-Dogg who don't even have him top 20 but have guys like Charles and Moore...why is he not there?

Seriously, the man has one of the best resumes ever, easily a top 5 resume irregardless of weight class, he was the number one heavyweight in the golden age of the division. I can only say that about Robinson being the number one in what was the greatest mw generation ever. How anyone can justify Ali not being at the very least a top 10 is beyond me.

I'm all ears to your reasons.

Something about me you need to know.

1. I never rank heavyweights in a p4p list; maybe I didn't clarify that's the list I was making.

2. I do rank Muhammad Ali as the # 1 Heavyweight of all time. So, it's not that I don't respect him. I'm probably his biggest fan. He's what got me interested in boxing in the first place. I just never have placed heavies on a p4p list.

If it were a top 20 all fighters included list, I'd definitely have him in the top 20 and more than likely in the top 10; but only he and Joe Louis would take the honor of being heavyweights on a top 20 list with me. I love him; but I've got my own rules I follow.


....Charles, Moore, and (you forgot Langford & Fitzsimmons) are there because they started out at middleweight (welterweight in Langford's case) and beat the ranking heavyweights of there day. Charles was probably the greatest light-heavyweight whoever lived and Moore was so good at 175 he didn't even get a title shot until he was well past his best at 39....and the man still ruled for another 10 years. That's why they're there in a microcosm.

[The Tase]

i cant put a great fighter with no fight footage over a great fighter with extensive fight footage.

[Bigg Rigg]

No Felix "Tito" Trinidad??? Jk guys.

[soul_survivor]

I wouldn't argue if someone had Ali in the Top 10 but he's not in mine. Everyone I've ranked in the Top 10 has a better resume IMO.

You highlight Greb and Moore but they clearly have better resumes than Ali. Especially Greb.

if that's one of the worst lists you've seen you should look harder. I'm not surprised you feel that way, though.

How do they CLEARLY have better resumes? LOL Moore lost to some of the best fighters he fought, Ali beat some of the best he ever fought. Moore lost to the greatest light heavy of his generation in Charles, Ali beat the two best heavies of his generation. Greb beat a lot of HOFers no doubt, but almost every guy from that generation has made it into the HOF by this point lol. I don't think some of those opponents were legit HOFers or ATGs.

I don't mind if someone is of the opinion they want to rank Ali lower than Greb and Moore but not to have him in a top 20 altogether? That's madness, I think I saw a list from a guy who didn't have a single heavy in his list...apart from Moore and Charles LOOL

I'm starting to think there are a few alts here :/

[soul_survivor]

i cant put a great fighter with no fight footage over a great fighter with extensive fight footage.

I partially agree with you, that's why my list is limited in terms of what I call "unseen" fighters or "newspaper pugilists" but, and this is a massive BUT some names are just too iconic and too integral to the soul of boxing for me to ignore them especially since certain writers that I really respect have them in their own lists.

[soul_survivor]

Something about me you need to know.

1. I never rank heavyweights in a p4p list; maybe I didn't clarify that's the list I was making.

2. I do rank Muhammad Ali as the # 1 Heavyweight of all time. So, it's not that I don't respect him. I'm probably his biggest fan. He's what got me interested in boxing in the first place. I just never have placed heavies on a p4p list.

If it were a top 20 all fighters included list, I'd definitely have him in the top 20 and more than likely in the top 10; but only he and Joe Louis would take the honor of being heavyweights on a top 20 list with me. I love him; but I've got my own rules I follow.


....Charles, Moore, and (you forgot Langford & Fitzsimmons) are there because they started out at middleweight (welterweight in Langford's case) and beat the ranking heavyweights of there day. Charles was probably the greatest light-heavyweight whoever lived and Moore was so good at 175 he didn't even get a title shot until he was well past his best at 39....and the man still ruled for another 10 years. That's why they're there in a microcosm.

Ok I kinda get that explanation, I've met people who don't rank heavies in lists such as this because p4p might become irrelevant when talking about a fully fledged heavyweight.

You won't see any argument from me for NOT having Charles or Moore in a list such as this, they are great fighters no doubt.

Fitzsimmons and Langford must have been great fighters in their for they are so highly spoken of but watching the rare footage you can find of those guys...it's not good to watch, especially Fitzsimmons. Boxers in those days stood back twirling their arms and threw a handful of punches per round (considering the fights often went well over 20 rounds). I just don't think those names, in terms of skill or accomplishments stand up to the test, especially since the sport really took off and evolved by the 1920s.

Yes Langford was tiny and fought at heavyweight but it goes to show the relative weakness of the division rather than the exceptional quality of a fighter (Langford was no doubt skilled but he would have lost to the leading heavyweight contenders just 15 years later, that's how fast boxing moved in the early 20th century).

I know I have Langford in my list but I have to admit, it's more to do with his reputation and how integral he was to early boxing rather than how I think he'd compare, p4p to other fighters throughout history.

[IronDanHamza]

How do they CLEARLY have better resumes? LOL Moore lost to some of the best fighters he fought, Ali beat some of the best he ever fought. Moore lost to the greatest light heavy of his generation in Charles, Ali beat the two best heavies of his generation. Greb beat a lot of HOFers no doubt, but almost every guy from that generation has made it into the HOF by this point lol. I don't think some of those opponents were legit HOFers or ATGs.

I don't mind if someone is of the opinion they want to rank Ali lower than Greb and Moore but not to have him in a top 20 altogether? That's madness, I think I saw a list from a guy who didn't have a single heavy in his list...apart from Moore and Charles LOOL

I'm starting to think there are a few alts here :/

They both beat ATGs, a long list of which.

Moore going 0-3 with Charles is no shame, Charles is one of the greatest fighters that ever lived.

Not having Ali in the Top 20 isn't right, I agree. He would be in my Top 15 minimum.

[Sweet Pea 50]

You have the balls to list one, thread starter. In detail.

JCC at #9?

Nope.

And I won't give you a list to argue about.

[soul_survivor]

You have the balls to list one, thread starter. In detail.

JCC at #9?

Nope.

And I won't give you a list to argue about.

And I won't take you seriously considering your username is Sweat Pea lol

[Sweet Pea 50]

And I won't take you seriously considering your username is Sweat Pea lol

Of course not.

I see a JCC on a top 10 on any list?