In your opinion, who are the 5 best fighters the sport has seen since the early 70s? My 5 has stayed pretty consistent, but has ever so slightly changed. I've got (in no order): Jones Duran Leonard Whitaker Monzon I would expect the first 4 to make most lists. Monzon I know might be a bit controversial, but it's my opinion. I wouldn't have any issue w/someone listing Floyd, Pac, Hagler, Spinks, Sanchez, Chavez, ect., instead.
I agree. Also, unless you stress peak form a lot more than longevity, I can't see Whitaker over Floyd, as painful as that is.
I said "best" not greatest. Pac would have made a 5 greatest list. Why doesn't anyone produce there own top 5?
This is where definitions get tricky. Imo, there's a difference between 'best' and 'best peak' or 'best performance'. Thus, a guy who maintains his level for five years is better than a guy who's on similar level for two years. If he also gathers a better record, he becomes greater. Furthermore, I believe Floyd at super-featherweight was as good as anyone. Not quite as slick as Whitaker at 135, but clearly the bigger puncher. My top-5 would be Floyd, Leonard, Pac and Duran in some order, then Hops/Roy/Monzon/ next based on what the listing stresses
Yeah thats pretty Much it. Id be tempted to put hearns in there, but he has a couple of losses that make it impossible to do so
I can't see how Leonard, Duran, Pac, Whitaker can be left out....the remaining place is a Floyd vs Roy discussion
Everyone is gonna be different, but for me Duran, Leonard, and Roy are the three must haves. I consider them the 3 best and most gifted fighters of the last 50 years. The other two spots could go to a lot of guys, but I definitely see Whitaker in his prime as a better fighter than Pacquiao. I consider prime Hagler a better fighter than Pac as well. Pac is greater than both, but not necessarily better imo.
For me, the other two spots could go to any pairing of Floyd, Pac, Hagler, Monzon, Hopkins, Whitaker, Spinks, Sanchez, Arguello, or Chavez. I'd be kind of hard pressed to say Chavez though.
My rationale for picking Monzon for my top 5 was that he was one of the most effective, adaptable, and cool-headed fighters OAT. Probably cool-headed because I suspect he was a psychopath with no emotions, but I digress. I think Monzon had gears that Pac didn't have, enough though Pac had more the natural gifts that we equate with greatness.
For what its worth, Monzon best victories almost always came against guys coming from smaller weight classes, while it was the opposite for Pac
Benvenuti was the lineal middleweight champ (Monzon was a big underdog in the first fight). Twice beat him. Twice beat Valdez. Twice beat Briscoe. Monzon has more big wins over true and great middles than Hopkins and Hagler have. If the Hall would do its job correctly and induct Valdez, Monzon would look better.
I agree with JOM, I really wanted to include Hearns (and also Tyson, but that's another story). Hearns for me is one of the most ridiculously difficult fighters to beat of all time at welter, he's essentially a cheat code. In fact, Leonard having a win over him is literally one of the reasons I hold SRL THAT high. It's an absurdly good win.
I wanted to include Spinks, damn near did. At 175, I think he has an excellent argument as a top 5 best fighter since the 70s.
I think Mike is top 5-10 one of the most gifted fighters of the last 50 years, but in good conscious I can't consider him among the 5 best.
Yes he was, but he also was Yes he (nino) was, but he started his career at ww if I'm not mistaken, and was a former junior middle champ. Same for Griffith. And Monzon was noticeably bigger than them. Pac big victories almost alway came against guys that were bigger than him.
