The Best 1980-2015

[SUBZER0ED]

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?

I do see the point you are trying to make. The problem is, the OP listed the "pros" for placing fighters where he did. He did not however, list the "cons" as reasons for them not ranking higher. Without him illustrating both, we are left to our opinions of his reasoning. I didn't necessarily agree with his order, as I took it to be what it is: His opinion. I imagine top fighter lists compiled by pro analysts & those in the business took reasonable amounts of in-depth conversations, critical thinking & research to complete.

[soul_survivor]

Holyfield is a great fighter.....had great fights but he was never the fighter Roy Jones was man.

that version of Tyson was after years away from boxing...If it happened in 1992 like it was supposed to it would be bigger....both men were past prime by then

WTF are hip hop credentials? Put it this way.....do you see any middleweights today that could win titles at 160, 168, 175 and a heavyweight belt against a top 5 heavy....John ruiz was a top 5 heavyweight..hated his style but he had one of the better resume of that era

could GGG do that? LOL i doubt it, when its posters say he is too small for 168 and he and Jones are the same size.

I dont care what Manny was voted......most accolades are popularity contests and most the time the more beloved fighter wins

Manny lost to a past prime erik morales and never beat JMM cleanly 1 time out of 4.....Mayweather was undefeated in the decade and was a champion since 1998......We all know you're biased man

Jones was so dominant in the 90s they couldnt deny him. he was flat out levels better than guys people hyped up just like floyd who wasnt beloved

Da ***??? You're entire basis for Jones being ranked top 5 is that he is fighter of the decade for the 90s and you're turning it around when it doesn't count in your favour?

Ok, this convo is over. You're just a snotty nosed, hip hop wannabe fanboy.

[soul_survivor]

I do see the point you are trying to make. The problem is, the OP listed the "pros" for placing fighters where he did. He did not however, list the "cons" as reasons for them not ranking higher. Without him illustrating both, we are left to our opinions of his reasoning. I didn't necessarily agree with his order, as I took it to be what it is: His opinion. I imagine top fighter lists compiled by pro analysts & those in the business took reasonable amounts of in-depth conversations, critical thinking & research to complete.

I didn't want to list the cons as that's not what a bio of a fighter on a list should be. This isn't an argument about how bad a fighter is but rather how good he is. Ranking him non top 5 doesn't mean I dislike him. Etc.

Having said that, I did a lot of research on these fighters and was lucky enough to have watched a tonne of them in my own life time.

Remember, this is fro m1980 on wards, I doubt you will find any boxing analyst, journalist etc who would rank Jones above Manny, Floyd, Holyfield, Hearns, Chavez, Leonard etc. The Hopkins v Jones argument is debatable and the guys can be switched.

[soul_survivor]

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.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.

what kind of list is that which wont have Manny Pacquiao? Other than that, all thsoe names are on my list, the order is only slightly different. And can you seriously argue iwth someone like Marciano being on that list and not Holyfield?

That's not a good list and you'd see that if you weren't so worried about where your Lord Mayweather placed.

[therealpugilist]

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?

dude...at least i can support my opinion with facts, and stats supporting my position...adding to the validity of my position


is a daily job of yours to quote my posts. the list is garbage and you know it....face it

look at the list man...be for real...it sucks

[therealpugilist]

Da ***??? You're entire basis for Jones being ranked top 5 is that he is fighter of the decade for the 90s and you're turning it around when it doesn't count in your favour?

Ok, this convo is over. You're just a snotty nosed, hip hop wannabe fanboy.

let me put this into perspective


did jones have rivals? no....he beat every one clearly

he beat the most champions of his era, cleaned out 175 and do you see anyone today at 160 winning titles at 160, 168, 175 and a heavyweight strap

use your friggin brain

Jones made it look easy against world class opposition across 4 divisons

did Mayweather have rivals? no because he dominated across several divisions which was 5 to be exact

did Manny dominate? NO

you dont get brownie points for struggling


Deal with it....hip hop wannabe fan boy? damn you are really corny man....

[therealpugilist]

Da ***??? You're entire basis for Jones being ranked top 5 is that he is fighter of the decade for the 90s and you're turning it around when it doesn't count in your favour?

Ok, this convo is over. You're just a snotty nosed, hip hop wannabe fanboy.

bwahahahahaha...these closet racist are a trip....what does a music genre have to do with boxing?

please tell me...if you cant STFU

[The Big Dunn]

what kind of list is that which wont have Manny Pacquiao? Other than that, all thsoe names are on my list, the order is only slightly different. And can you seriously argue iwth someone like Marciano being on that list and not Holyfield?

That's not a good list and you'd see that if you weren't so worried about where your Lord Mayweather placed.

Manny came in at 25 or so and this was before losing to Floyd. Again, these are the top 25 from WWII to 2014. Just sowing you how experts judge guys you have outside the top 5.

You can't just defend fair criticisms by claiming it has do to with being a Floyd fan. The way you ranked Floyd and Roy gives insight into what your true intentions are with the list.

I think you can make a more honest list and not try to gerrymander it the way you did.

EDIT: you have duran at 10 from 1980-2015. He was 32-15 post 1980. Yes he had some incredible wins. we agree he is an ATG, and arguably a top 10 boxer of all time, does he deserve to be #10 post 1980?

[therealpugilist]

I do see the point you are trying to make. The problem is, the OP listed the "pros" for placing fighters where he did. He did not however, list the "cons" as reasons for them not ranking higher. Without him illustrating both, we are left to our opinions of his reasoning. I didn't necessarily agree with his order, as I took it to be what it is: His opinion. I imagine top fighter lists compiled by pro analysts & those in the business took reasonable amounts of in-depth conversations, critical thinking & research to complete.

what is it with you same 3-4 posters who get emo because some one doesnt agree with you....news flash...its a boxing forum...its opinion based

who needs to list cons when the obviously con is PREFERENCE....DUH

[therealpugilist]

Manny came in at 25 or so and this was before losing to Floyd. Again, these are the top 25 from WWII to 2014. Just sowing you how experts judge guys you have outside the top 5.

You can't just defend fair criticisms by claiming it has do to with being a Floyd fan. The way you ranked Floyd and Roy gives insight into what your true intentions are with the list.

I think you can make a more honest list and not try to gerrymander it the way you did.

I could understand if it was list of the last 50, 80 or 100 years

but lets be real...there are not 7-8 fighters that were better or greater than Jones and Floyd since 1980


No one had more talent than these guys and dominated their era like these guys


they are just upset someone called him and his alts out on their bull crap


an agenda is not hard to spot