Best boxer in the last 30 years.

I don't agree with this article completely but it's interesting they have Canelo as the #10 greatest fighters in the last 30 years.


What do you guys think?


The 10 greatest boxers of the last 30 years have been named and ranked

 

It's a pretty shit list.

Just basing them at their best, if their prime was since 1990 - makes things easier for me, I don't have to check any dates - I think I'd have it:

#10. Roman Gonzalez
#09. Lennox Lewis
#08. Evander Holyfield
#07. James Toney
#06. Bernard Hopkins
#05. Julio Cesar Chavez
#04. Manny Pacquiao
#03. Roy Jones Jr.
#02. Floyd Mayweather Jr.
#01. Pernell Whitaker

 

I think it's a pretty good list. Dont think tito should make the cut, but i rate him higher than Chocolatito. (Though calling him a cuban really throw some shades on the author)

Don't think there's any other name that could contend to be on that list, bar maybe Marquez and Mosley (to a lesser extent). Ward probably also deserves a mention, i think there's an argument for him to slip in at number 10

 

Yeah, was gonna mention the Cuban Tito thing too

 

chocolate tito > cuban tito

 

The top 3 is pretty reasonable in terms of "greatness." If we were a ranking them in terms of "best" i think its clearly Roy.

Pac and Floyd can be ranked ahead of Roy in greatness, but I can't say with a straight face that either were as good as the 90s Jones.

 

I think Roy was on a different level than the rest. He was on some matrix shit. The way he beat JT and made it look easy. Shit nobody has an easy fight with JT. What happened with Tarver was a scenario where a guy had his number and caught Roy at the tail end of his career. The same way Norton beat Ali. Doesn't make them any less great or take away from their legacy. I have no problem with Roy or Holyfield being number 1.

 

Jajaja I c what u did there

 

I think you can have Jones, Floyd and Whitaker in any order.

 

how can he be so misinformed as to think tito was cuban? and publish an article about him?

 

Pac is in the mix also. Really hard to separate between these 4

Jones, PBF and whitaker looked better than Pac, but he has some crazy results and an insane resume

 

I just noticed that the list had Hopkins above Whitaker.

Gtfoh!

 

I just noticed that the list had Hopkins above Whitaker.

Gtfoh!

 

I think there's an argument for it. Not a strong one, but there's one imo

 

I don't think Pac is on the same level as those in terms of peak-for-peak ability. I think there's a very convincing argument to say he accomplished the most - he clearly accomplished more than Whitaker and Jones - and has the style worse suited to longevity, yet stuck around world level for the longest. But I just don't think, peak for peak, he was as good as those guys.

 

I think this is something very important that doesn't get much mention. He had an aggressive combative style, got hit a whole lot because of it but still fought at a high level into his 40's.

For me that's more impressive in terms of longevity than being safety first and utilizing spoiler tactics.

 

Puerto Rican Tito was a better fighter than Nicaraguan Tito.

 

Agreed.

 

Yugoslavian Tito > both

 

Agreed otherwise, but in his fights against Barrera I, Diaz, Morales II, De La Hoya and Hatton Pac also looked as good as the other three, despite his different style.

And of course, he had some lackluster performances in between, but so did the others, and at feather-superfeather I'd say Pac had the toughest competition of the four

 

That's exactly how i see it. Hell, ive almost always picked against pac in big fights, but results count more than style

 

Certainly no need for X to repeat himself.

 

What about Jackson Bros Tito?

 

Doubt he's in the top 10.

 

I just rewatched both Roy vs Tate and Floyd vs Gatti, and I have no problem whatsoever saying Mayweather was better. Obviously both in the ten best ever, but Mayweather has a similar level of athleticism, but a much more sophisticated skillset - and Roy's was very, very good in it's own right. Jones was far more dangerous though, he had insane, pound-for-pound great power. He stopped some absolutely granite jaws.

 

Looking at some older.rj.fights, he jabbed a lot more before moving to lhw (bar the ruiz fight). Guess he felt he was fast enough against bigger guy to simply land lead right and.left hook. Probably was a mistake in the long term though.

And yes, PBF athleticism is a bit underrated (weird to say, i know, since he's pretty overrated ). He was only slightly less athletic than RJ, and as you said, he was a lot more skilled. A fight between the two (p4p) would have been great. Maybe not in action, but in a tactical sense

 

Roy was significantly more athletic than Floyd - the gap isn't small. Not at all to say that Floyd WASN'T super, super athletic, but Jones had a level of ring athleticism we haven't seen before or since. I won't go as far to say we'll never see a fighter as athletic as Roy again, because who knows? But we haven't seen it in the 17 years since his prime ended.

With respect to athleticism, Roy can be compared to Jordan. Even though athletes evolve, some guys are such freaks, it's hard to ever find it again. Jordan's prime ended well over 20 years ago, and there still hasn't been a guard in the NBA as athletic. Same as Jones.

Floyd was more skilled, and no one on Earth disputes that, but that doesn't make him "better" imo.

Roy was more dominant, and not over lesser guys either.

Floyd doesn't have a 12-0 whitewash over anyone as good as Toney, and doesn't have an early-round blowout over anyone as good as Hill.

He has quick blow outs over guys like Manfredy and Gatti, who suffice it to say, were not on the same planet as Virgil Hill.

Moreover, there's not a fight of a prime Roy you can point to and say he arguably lost. Obviously, a DQ is a DQ, but I'm referring to the first Castillo fight, which Floyd DID lose if we're being frank.

No one ever came that close to Roy, and no one can convince me that Roy would struggle P4P with a Castillo-level fighter.

Roy was better than Floyd, peak-for-peak.

 

In the early 00s, I remember that MM was posed: Roy vs Floyd, P4P. I'll never forget that Muzse did a BRILLIANT, and thorough breakd own of why Roy would beat Floyd. Pretty sure that thread is gone by now, it might have been on the S/O forum.

 

The Floyd vs Roy comparison is actually VERY VERY similar to the Kobe vs Jordan comparison, for anyone who knows b-ball.

Kobe was more skilled than Jordan, just like Floyd over Roy. And Kobe had better longevity than Jordan, just like Floyd over Roy.

But Roy and Jordan were just so motherfucking SUPER SUPER athletic and talented that they were more dominant and "better" than Floyd and Kobe. Mike and Roy were naturals, whereas Floyd and Kobe were both known for their insane, obsessive work ethics to achieve a similar level. Jones and Jordan both trained extremely hard, obviously, but like I said, shit just came more naturally for them.

Jordan could drink and gamble all night, get a few hours rest, and drop 50 on a team. Roy could play a game of basketball earlier in the day, and still light a guy up for 12 rounds. Whereas Kobe and Floyd had to be more dedicated and focused to perform on that level, and even still, weren't quite as dominant.

I'm sure @REED and @Neil would back me on this comparison.

 

Yeah good point. Though pbf had the corrales destruction, which was incredibly impressive. Might have became too hard on rj, since the last half of his career was not only marred with terrible losses, but he also showed mental weaknesses that disappointed me a lot, since i was a big fan of his (the worse being the calzaghe fight, where he fought extremely passively after flooring him hard)

P4P, yes he probably edges out pbf