Comments Thread For: Which Active Fighters Deserve To Be Called Great?

[bluebeam]

Pacquiao is the only one.

Canelo is close

Loma, Crawford, fury, spence all have a chance

[1hourRun]

Neither were dismissed -- he specifically said they are in the conversation for greatness. However, he mentioned relevant caveats, and caveats are part and parcel of discussing a subject -- all the evidence needs to be examined.

Inoue will in all likelihood end up in the hall of fame. As the article says though, being in the hall of fame is not the same as being great. And like it or not, Inoue did struggle with an old Donaire. Great fight, and may end up as being a part of a career that we call great, but in and of itself it suggests a ceiling to his abilities that he laboured to get past a fighter who is well past his prime. As the article also points out, rating a fighter before their career is out is a perilous exercise. Inoue hasn't even had 20 fights.

The fact that the writer addressed the former P4P Roman Gonzalez and arguably the current P4P in the same sentenced, leads me to suspect that he dont think much of the lighter-weights. The notion that a tough fight with Nonito Donaire invalidates Inoue from greatness is ridiculous. I remember Floyd Mayweather struggling with Emanuel Augustus and far lesser competition.

Roman Gonzalez getting KO is no reason to eliminate him from this discussion, how many ATG have been KO? This happened in 'Chocolatito' fourth weight coming from 105! And hes still thinking about moving up, after reclaiming the WBA superflyweight title ; overcoming adversity after a career type ending brutal KO is what greats do! Roman Gonzalez and Naoya Inoue deserve to be called GREAT.

[Buggy bear]

Appalling grammar. Painfully melodramatic. Oddly patronising. Very little substance. A writer with shameful delusions of grandeur. Cringeworthy puerile analogies. Facile. Statement of the obvious. No conclusion of any value. This is the kind of basic **** a 16 yr old would write. It’s awful. American writers consistently seem to write articles for the lower end of the IQ bell curve and are insufferable in the delusion of their own value.

the last bit I agree on , Thomas does have a problem with writing in such a fashion that appears to patronise and I find it irritating , his articles are way to long , people lose interest and he could get his message across in half the article .

[soul_survivor]

This paragraph -

"Don King and Bob Arum despised each other. But they promoted in an era when the revenue in boxing had to be generated by fights. It didn't come from poorly-tutored television executives or foolish investors. So King and Arum put aside their differences and promoted genuine super-fights."

It's something I wrote almost 10 years ago on this forum, when people kept accusing Arum not wanting to work with Haymon and Mayweather etc etc. I said Arum hated King a lot more, read up on it and yet he worked with him to produce some of the biggest fights ever.

The issue is now and it was the issue in the whole May/Pac build up, that certain fighters were getting paid too much to fight too many nobodies. It started with HBO and Roy Jones and ended with HBO losing their place in the sport and Showtime's scathing comments last year about boxing.

[sugarsmosley]

I respect the Hauser, however this article was trash.

[H.B.Viper]

Say what you want about Hauser.
This article goes out to the gullible, the homer, the duped, or obsessed fanboy.
Promoters jobs are to promote, & hype their guys, & get the best $$$ for themselves.
So promoters like TR , will overprotect fighters...
Hide them with bums, & weak WBO ranked fighters. ..
I'm talking about Crawford.
I agree with the Larry Holmes quote.
You have to fight someone to be great.
Julius Indolgo was his greatest accomplished work to date.
But yet you, yes YOU! believe he's great.
I say Bob Arum for president.
You all fell for this sham.

[OctoberRed]

Appalling grammar. Painfully melodramatic. Oddly patronising. Very little substance. A writer with shameful delusions of grandeur. Cringeworthy puerile analogies. Facile. Statement of the obvious. No conclusion of any value. This is the kind of basic **** a 16 yr old would write. It’s awful. American writers consistently seem to write articles for the lower end of the IQ bell curve and are insufferable in the delusion of their own value.

I agree to a certain degree about American writers, but British writers are FAR worse. Do you read the daily junk from the British boxing outlets like Talk Sport, Daily Mail, Daily Express, Daily Star, etc.? They put clickbait and poor writing on a whole other level.

[Walexhris]

The reasons for dismissing Roman Gonzalez and Naoya Inoue in this article were very poor. Both are first ballot HOF, even at this stage, believe it or not.

I was thinking more people would pick on this.
He discredits Inoue based on one performance

[BangEM]

Junk article by a rogue journalist.

Why do these yanks always feel the need to extend the fang of their delusional American exceptionalism to boxing? It's a global sport - not an American sport. And just because the mafias in the US hijacked the sport and made it lucrative in the country (that's old news now btw), that doesn't make any idiot an authority on the sport.

[aboutfkntime]

2/ agreed

3/ who are you kidding? You are the high-priest of the Golovkin hate sect

like I have said MANY times (too many to count)...
... Golovkin is very good, just not as good as advertised...

if you are not aware of that fact, despite referring to me as "the high-priest of the Golovkin hate sect"... then I can see what the problem is

perhaps you can tell us why a few months after refusing to negotiate on weight with Cotto and Canelo, Bullshltkin stated that he is willing and able to fight at 154, but nobody will step up....




... because yea, none of us can figure that out