The Best 1980-2015

[SUBZER0ED]

is there a need for it? the list his hot GAAAAAWBAGE!!

You make a lot of subjective & biased threads yourself, pugilist. We're all subjective, opinionated & to some degree, biased. Sure, facts and stats are thrown in for support of our arguments, but isn't that kind of what a forum is about? It's ok to have your own opinion of who goes where on a list of top fighters, but why crap on the OP's list?

[The Big Dunn]

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=653826

1. Ray Robinson - 396pts - (17)
2. Henry Armstrong - 339 - (1)
3. Muhammad Ali - 324 - (1)
4. Roberto Duran - 296
5. Joe Luis - 293
6. Ray Leonard - 258
7. Willie Pep - 246 - (1)
8. Archie Moore - 189
9. Julio Cesar Chavez - 171
10. Ezzard Charles - 164
11. Perenell Whitaker - 132
12. Floyd Mayweather Jr - 118
13. Marvin Hagler - 117
14. Carlos Monzon - 98
15. Eder Jofre - 86
16. Sandy Saddler - 82
17. Roy Jones Jr - 80
18. Rocky Marciano - 77
19. Bernard Hopkins - 66
20. Ike Williams - 55

Here is the list of top 20 since WWII published in Ring Magazine October 2014. The guys from 1980-2015 I've highlighted. It is astonishing that the TS top 7 is so drastically different from the 7 on this list.

[SUBZER0ED]

reaction to adversity is too subjective. If you dominate everyone you face, you likely haven't reacted to adversity at all. domination shouldn't be a negative.

entertainment value is based on what? for example you will score floyd low on this yet he sells out fights (with the highest ticket prices) and sells more PPV's than anyone, indicating most people find him entertaining.
quality of opponents is too subjective as well. Are you going to arbitrarily decide if someone is shot or not? is it just name value?

lets not kid ourselves here folks, those "fans" want him dead

Got to love it when a poster knows what "most people" think & feel.

[The Big Dunn]

Yahoo did their own list not so long ago..i'm not sure if was posted in this thread. Their list was 'best ever' and not 'Since World War II' like the main list in this thread.

The guys voting were :
Jim Lampley, Max Kellerman, Al Bernstein, Steve Farhood, Rich Marotta, Lou DiBella, Chris Middendorf, Tim Dahlberg, Ed Schuyler Jr, Cliff Rold, Kevin Iole.




* The list was made before Mayweather Vs Pacquiao was done and dusted.

another list above. again, look at the guys from the era the TS is discussing and look at the TS list.

[SUBZER0ED]

another list above. again, look at the guys from the era the TS is discussing and look at the TS list.

Lighten up, Dunn. We're talking about a single fan's favorite list vs a list made by professional sports analysts & guys in the business. Of course they will differ.

[The Big Dunn]

Lighten up, Dunn. We're talking about a single fan's favorite list vs a list made by professional sports analysts & guys in the business. Of course they will differ.

Lighten up? I don't understand. I haven't criticized the list other than saying I am astonished his list is so different and my earlier complaint that some of his categories are designed to punish fighters for being dominant.

Roy is the perfect example. He is at 9 on this list, yet he spent about a third of 1980-2015 as the top p4p fighter in the world.

we are all entitled to our opinions but fans need to get past the point where they use individual lists to try and rewrite history or make up for their own unhappiness that a boxer they like lost to a better guy.

[Johnwoo8686]

The thread starter's list started well but he dropped the ball when he got into the top 20. He should really think it over. Floyd and Roy are definitely in the top 5 of the past 35 years.

[SUBZER0ED]

Lighten up? I don't understand. I haven't criticized the list other than saying I am astonished his list is so different and my earlier complaint that some of his categories are designed to punish fighters for being dominant.
Roy is the perfect example. He is at 9 on this list, yet he spent about a third of 1980-2015 as the top p4p fighter in the world.

we are all entitled to our opinions but fans need to get past the point where they use individual lists to try and rewrite history or make up for their own unhappiness that a boxer they like lost to a better guy.

How do you know this was the basis for the order of his list?

[The Big Dunn]

How do you know this was the basis for the order of his list?

My opinion is based on the criteria.

Quality of opponents faced/beaten
World titles won
Longevity and length of reign(s)
Skillset
Entertainment value/style
Impact on the sport
Reaction to adversity

Reaction to adversity basically punishes someone like Roy who was so dominant that he never lost in his prime.

world titles won penalizes a guy like Hagler for being disciplined enough that he maintained 160 his whole career and retiring "when he should have". IMO things like that should be rewarded.

Opponents faced- allows for too much name value and not actual value. Example -Erik Morales and John Ruiz. Morales is a HOF'er but Manny didn't beat him until after Raheem destroyed him. Morales wasn't the same guy. Ruiz is a bum, but Roy won the HWT title beating him, a monumental accomplishment.

I already raised the point about entertainment value.

You see my point?

[b00g13man]

The list was doomed right from the start tbh.