H2H best boxer ever in each division

[New England]

Johnny Steele, I suspect you of trolling.

i suspect him of being a f#ggot

[Johnny Steele]

hearns had issues making 147 and was much more comfortable at the weight.

Nonsense. That's just the excuse he used when he got made to look a punk by sucker ray.

that gutless chicken fought all time greats below and ABOVE the weight class

Name even one great fighter the chicken beat that was in there prime?

we're not measuring resumes at the weight.

How convenient.

if you can't tell who is in control in this sparring session [and who runs the gym,] you just don't know boxing.

Anyone who bases their opinion on a short sparring clip "just don't know boxing"

knocked out duran, a fighter who had successes below and above 154 and who was durable enought

You know it's bad when you got to big up knocking out a small old man.
Pathetic.

additionally, any matchmaking concerns or misses regarding his selection of opponents at the ewight can be attributed exclusively to money.

Yes why fight Mccallum when you can go up against legendary superstars like Luigi Minchillo, Murray Sutherland, Marcos Geraldo, Ernie Singletary etc. Hahaha! Household names those guys! Hahaha!

Tommy Hearns never beat a prime great. FACT!
Tommy ducked Mccallum AND Mugabi. FACT!

[Johnny Steele]

i suspect him of being a f#ggot

Mccallum and Mugabi were the biggest lmw threats in their day.
Hearns refused to fight either. Because he is a coward.

I'm glad the guy in your sig is in a wheelchair. It's a pity he didn't die an agonizing death. I hate drunk drivers. Better that scumbag be crippled than some innocent bystander.
Homeboy was a **** fighter anyway. Hahaha!

[Johnny Steele]

[robertzimmerman]

Yes. Eubank had a full career at smw whereas Jones had a couple of fights. That's not enough evidence for me to go off of. I guess Benn, Eubank and Jones had a common opponent in TM and they all beat him if I'm not mistaken. Again, that's not enough.

Eubank was the best smw of the 90s, followed by the best smw of the 21st century.

Now, if someone said "on a one off night, who was the best fighter to have fought AT the weight" I might say Jones...but we're supposed to rank fighters based on h2h, who would come out on top against the majority of fighters they fought. I don't have enough of a sample size to say tha tguy was Jones.

Eubank on the other hand was the best at 168 at time when the division was at its most competitive.

This is just silly.

It doesn't matter that Roy only stayed at SMW for a few years.

What more evidence do you need?

All the evidence is there.

You also saw him at MW and LHW. And it was the same guy, with the same attributes, give or take a few pounds either above or below. He fought Toney and Tate in the same year.

You saw the speed, the power, and the athleticism etc.

This is not looking at who accomplished the most, this is looking at who was the best fighter on a H2H basis.

At 25/26, Roy was on another level to any version of Eubank.

He was also on another level to Joe Calzaghe.

Regarding Eubank, he was a fine fighter. He had a lot of ability, and he was very strong, both mentally and physically. But although he put in some great performances at SMW, you are overrating him.

You cannot say that he was the best at the time the division was at it's most competitive.

You cannot say he was the best SMW of the 90's.

Based on what?

His greatest win at the weight was against Watson. After that he was very hit and miss. Although to be fair to him, the Watson fight took a lot out of him mentally. He was never the same after that awful tragedy. And you can't blame him for that. That was only natural. It was to be expected. So I don't want to be hard on him. But after the bold statements that you've made, we have to look closely at his reign.

As you're probably aware, his biggest downfall was signing his contacts with Sky/ITV, where he was fighting every few months. He bit off more than he could chew, and it burnt him out. And although he had good wins over the likes of Holmes and Rocchigianni, he was extremely lucky to not have lost to Benn in the rematch, as well as to Ray Close and Dan Schommer. Many people think that he lost at least one of the fights to Close, and he admits himself that Benn and Schommer should have been awarded the decisions over him. He then went on to lose to Collins twice. And although Collins was a very good fighter, he was never elite.

So how on earth was he a better SMW than Roy? He's extremely lucky not to have 6 losses on his resume at the weight.

How can a guy who struggled with the likes of Close and Schommer, be classed as a better SMW than a guy who beat Toney, Malinga, Sosa and Lucas etc, with absolute ease?

It's not possible.

[soul_survivor]

This is just silly.

It doesn't matter that Roy only stayed at SMW for a few years.

What more evidence do you need?

All the evidence is there.

You also saw him at MW and LHW. And it was the same guy, with the same attributes, give or take a few pounds either above or below. He fought Toney and Tate in the same year.

You saw the speed, the power, and the athleticism etc.

This is not looking at who accomplished the most, this is looking at who was the best fighter on a H2H basis.

At 25/26, Roy was on another level to any version of Eubank.

He was also on another level to Joe Calzaghe.

Regarding Eubank, he was a fine fighter. He had a lot of ability, and he was very strong, both mentally and physically. But although he put in some great performances at SMW, you are overrating him.

You cannot say that he was the best at the time the division was at it's most competitive.

You cannot say he was the best SMW of the 90's.

Based on what?

His greatest win at the weight was against Watson. After that he was very hit and miss. Although to be fair to him, the Watson fight took a lot out of him mentally. He was never the same after that awful tragedy. And you can't blame him for that. That was only natural. It was to be expected. So I don't want to be hard on him. But after the bold statements that you've made, we have to look closely at his reign.

As you're probably aware, his biggest downfall was signing his contacts with Sky/ITV, where he was fighting every few months. He bit off more than he could chew, and it burnt him out. And although he had good wins over the likes of Holmes and Rocchigianni, he was extremely lucky to not have lost to Benn in the rematch, as well as to Ray Close and Dan Schommer. Many people think that he lost at least one of the fights to Close, and he admits himself that Benn and Schommer should have been awarded the decisions over him. He then went on to lose to Collins twice. And although Collins was a very good fighter, he was never elite.

So how on earth was he a better SMW than Roy? He's extremely lucky not to have 6 losses on his resume at the weight.

How can a guy who struggled with the likes of Close and Schommer, be classed as a better SMW than a guy who beat Toney, Malinga, Sosa and Lucas etc, with absolute ease?

It's not possible.

I need the evidence that he should have fought a higher calibre of opponent for a longer period of time.

It really is as simple as that. Wins over Malinga and Toney aren't enough, especially considering the latter was terrible that night and Jones should have battered him but instead went on a long, 12 round run. It was an easy victory but nothing to write home about.

But we're gonna have to agree to disagree. I go off of what I see not off of what may be imagined. time frame is very important for that.

[robertzimmerman]

I need the evidence that he should have fought a higher calibre of opponent for a longer period of time.

It really is as simple as that. Wins over Malinga and Toney aren't enough, especially considering the latter was terrible that night and Jones should have battered him but instead went on a long, 12 round run. It was an easy victory but nothing to write home about.

But we're gonna have to agree to disagree. I go off of what I see not off of what may be imagined. time frame is very important for that.

He fought the same calibre of opponents that Eubank did, but looked much better in doing so. He also fought the same calibre of opponents above SMW, displaying exactly the same attributes.

The evidence is there.

He beat Toney like nobody else did, he beat Malinga with ease, he beat Sosa with ease, and he beat Lucas with ease after playing a game of basketball. Then just a few pounds heavier, he took out Hill and Griffin etc.

You're saying that Roy didn't prove enough in beating Malinga and Toney etc with ease, and that Eubank was the best SMW of the 90's.

How was Eubank the best SMW of the 90's? By beating Watson, Holmes and Rochigianni, drawing with Benn, and then struggling with Schommer and Close, before losing to Collins twice??

It makes no sense.

[Banko Villas]

I'm a big fan of Eubank, but come on, we're talking about the H2H best fighters here. RJJ dominates anyone from 160 to 175 lbs.

[NYG]

Roy Jones was one of the best fighters ever. Why the hell is Eubank being mentioned in the same breath as him?

[soul_survivor]

I'm a big fan of Eubank, but come on, we're talking about the H2H best fighters here. RJJ dominates anyone from 160 to 175 lbs.

Roy Jones was one of the best fighters ever. Why the hell is Eubank being mentioned in the same breath as him?

None of this is based on what we saw Jones do but rather on what he could do.

Do you really think he'd dominate SPinks, Chalres, Moore, Benn, Eubank (Jones himself said that would have been the toughest style for him to face) and so on?

I'm not saying JOnes can't win those fights I'm just saying he was nowhere near as dominant as some people make out. I can't remember him fighting a single prime atg.