The DEFINITIVE top 20 all time P4P list!

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Roy Jones Jnr
4. Bernard Hopkins
5. Floyd Mayweather Jnr
6. Roberto Duran
7. Henry Armstrong
8. Sugar Ray Leonard
9. Willie Pep
10. Joe Louis
11.Pernell Whitaker
12. Julio Cesar Chavez
13. Carlos Monzon
14. Thomas Hearns
15. Marvelous Marvin Hagler
16. Manny Pacquiao
17. Evander Holyfield
18. Bob Foster
19. Harry Greb
20. Ezzard Charles

 

Is this based on talent, greatest peak, overall success, popularity or all together?

 

terrible list Sly

 

talent, peak and success

Popularity has nothing to do with it.

 

If so, then Holyfield has no room on the list and Pac only does if you rate talent much higher than success

 

::::

 

dsimon writes:

Agreed. Your point about Pac particularly is a good one.

 

Hmm..Pac has beaten.....

Morales TWICE
Barrera TWICE
(Only person to beat BOTH Barrera and Morales and the only guy to have offically stopped either)
Marquez at least once
Ledwaba
won titles from 120 to 135


Holyfield

Undisputed Cruiserweight champion
Undisputed Heavyweight champion
Won title THREE times...beating the likes of Douglas, Bowe, tyson, Mercer, Foreman, Dokes, Moorer

Are you being serious...or do you just not know who these guys are?

 

Great way to handle criticizm and argument.

If you want to take your wisdom to even greater levels, you can also consider who they have lost to, how dominant have they been and for how long and has anybody other ever achieved same kind of things

 

Sugar Ray Robinson lost to..

Turpin
Fulmer
Maxim
Basilio
Lamotta


and was NEVER dominant at 160lbs

Should he be removed from the top 10?

 

dsimon writes:

Bad anaology. Sugar Ray R fought almost 5 times as much as those other guys. Ugo is right neither guy (Pac not yet) got that shine of greatness.Holyfield did a lot and was very good, Pac might make it yet.

 

That is correct and that is why SRR is not the best middleweight ever. His illustrious career and skills and welterweight is what makes him special, although I am not sure if he was the best ever. Evander Holyfield's career at cruiserweight was not quite as great, but of course that is just my opinion.

 

Ray Robinson quit against Joe Maxime, it was disgraceful that Ray didn't go back out there and take his dehydrated beating like a man.

Anyway,.. whats up with that list?.. No Taylor??... you may aswell install all of Hopkins "friends" up there to cater for him...

 

This game is retarded

 

Nah. Sly just likes listing the more prominent names off the resume without any thought of context. I'm surprised he didn't also mention Larry Holmes & Pinklon Thomas among Holyfield's greatest hits.

 

hopkins certainly has the best resume in the last 10, 15 years.

he just may be the most accomplished fighter of this era.

 

I don't necessarily agree with Sly's list, but that's what lists are for... to create debate. But what I really don't get is Pacquiao's placement on his list being questioned. Perhaps Top 20 is a stretch, but to dismiss it outright is just wrong.

 

Roy beat Hopkins straight up,.. he also beat a top heavyweight at the time in Ruiz,..and he beat James Toney,.. Roy also holds victories over what is Hopkins greatest wins of his career, over Tarver, and Tito at 160+ ,..

I don't think it's much of a contest really...

 

roy beat hopkins when hopkins was a NOBODY. i don't understand these fools who say that hopkins was in his prime when that fight took place. in reality, it would've been a much better win for roy had it taken place between 97-01.

beating ruiz and toney were indeed great performances, but let's not pretend like he had a walk in the park vs. tarver in the first fight. i thought he won, but hopkins (at age 41) made it look MUCH easier. hopkins also beat pavlik when he was unbeaten and roy beat a retired trinidad who had gotten his ass waxed by winky 2 years prior to that bullshit exhibition.

roy definitely had it better throughout the 90s, but his reign came to an abrupt reign whereareas hopkins continued to flourish. from a longetivity and accomplishment standpoint, hopkins has the edge.

roy also left questions unanswered when fights vs. d-mich, eubank, and benn never materialized. hopkins fought all there was to offer at 160, and even at this latter stage, is beating younger guys who are mostly within the top 10 p4p lists.

yea, roy beat hopkins, but hopkins DOMINATED two guys that knocked roy the fuck out. that must have count for something if you want to look it at that way.

what if hopkins beats roy now? shit, he's like 4 years older than roy. if he wins, it's not only because roy is washed up, but hopkins is simply a better fighter than him at this point in their careers. much like when the two first met, roy was better than hopkins at that point in their careers.

 

We can pick and chose Hopkins prime, and Roy's prime,.. but in the end,.. the better quality wins, over better quality opponents goes to Roy Jones,... ... you know... unfortunately for Hopkins,...unlike Roy, he fought these 'name' fighters.. like Pavlik and Winky, when they were out of thier optimal weight classes,..they had to move up to face him,.. what has Pavlik ever achieved at 170?.. or Winky?.. .. they've never fought at Lightheavyweight before??.. who's to say Pavlik or Winky can beat any other top Lightheavyweights?...how good are they really as Light-heavyweights?..

You know what would have been impressive?.. if Hopkins had beaten Pavlik at 160...Winky at 154,.. Trinidad at 147, or Calzaghe at 168 where they all belong..

 

trinidad knocked the shit outta joppy who was at worst, the 3rd best middleweight for quite some time. there's no way tito would've made 147 once he moved up.

winky looked dominant beating up tito and that aussie at 160 and most guys who know how to score fights thought he clearly won the taylor fight. in fact, he opened up as a 2-1 favorite vs. hopkins.

hopkins was a career middleweight, calzaghe was a career 168 pounder. you're telling me that hopkins had a signficant size advantage vs. calzaghe?

pavlik was a 5-1 favorite against a FORTY THREE year old hopkins coming off a loss. how is it hopkins fault that pavlik couldn't carry his power to 170? hopkins was able to do so when he finally made the move at the age of 41. hmm, perhaps it's because he's simply better than him?

 

The weight system is very misleading when it comes to REAL size, you have to have emphasis on how an individuals body performs with certain degrees of weight in relation to the frame, it's a genetic differentiation for handling weight loss,.. when a fighter like Bernard, is larger than Calzaghe in every aspect of measurement, height, robustness, reach,.. there's no plausible way to call Calzaghe the larger fighter,... as I've said before Joon,.. divisions should be categorised by measurements in my opinion, not by weight,....that way there would be no size advantages within divisions. Now I can't address everything you've said without typing out a couple of pages worth,..so I'll stick to the original point,.. .. of Roy's resume of Hopkins, Toney, Ruiz,... being irrefuteably superior to Pavlik and Winky making thier Light-heavyweight debuts..

 

how about the fact that hopkins beat these guys when he was FORTY TWO, FORTY THREE YEARS OLD as an underdog.

oh, and he also MOVED UP to embarrass the hell outta tarver, the same guy who was coming off his 2nd win over roy jones.

if you want to get all technical, let's not omit stuff like toney who killed himself to make weight (and shouldn't have had that unbeaten record) and the fact that hopkins was a NOBODY in 93, 94.

ruiz win was very impressive, that i agree. but then again, roy was a slight heavy going into that fight against a guy who was thought to be one of the worst heavyweight titlist in the history of boxing.

 

:nono: Joon please,...Age, Age, Age,.. here we go with that ever essential Hopkins tag,.. some fighters become more difficult to beat as they age after much ring experience,.. Lennox Lewis is an example of a fighter who became better with age,...but Hopkins has a style that doesn't require his youth,..so he's better off that he wasn't that same dashing young lad who was clocked onto his arse multiple times by some Equadorian scrub many moons ago,... he fights negative,.. he backs up and times you with pot-shot hybrid clinches.. .. if he fought going forwards for once like a headstrong young fighter does, then it would present ~heavenly~, ~heavenly~ ~majestic~ openings for counter-punching oppurtunities that his opponents never, ever ever ever fucking see these days so no,.. ...having to go through Hopkins gauntlet in order for there to be a fight AT ALL,.....in this present day,.. is even MORE difficult to handle than his apparent physical prime as this unknown spring-chicken,..probably getting whupped on by a green Roy..

 

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Roy Jones Jnr
4. Bernard Hopkins
5. Floyd Mayweather Jnr



I stopped here.

My goodness horse, I would even accept Ali at 2, which is ridiculous, but to have Roy/Bernard/Floyd as the next 3.

This is as biased as the poop spouted by old timers that doesn't get to a fighter after 1960 until #23.

 

In the past 5 years, he has attempted to make up for the 10 years of his physical prime in which his resume was shitty.

I think its a severe stretch to say he's got a better resume than Pacquiao and DLH.

DLH, Trinidad, Wright, Taylor 2X, Roy, Tarver, Calzaghe, Pavlik looks nice right now.

But that was DLH, Trinidad, Wright, Pavlik all moved up in weight, past where any of them has proven the least bit successful.

And then losses 2X to Taylor at 160, loss to RJJ, loss to Calzaghe, and a win over Tarver, who has lost to every good fighter he's ever faced the first time around.

 

i'm beginning to wonder if you've seen hopkins fight in the 90s.

he was clearly affected by the altitude in ecuador yet he still did enough to win the fight in the eyes of many. he thoroughly bashed that ecuardorian in the rematch.

hopkins from the first or even second antwun echols fight would've stopped pavlik in a brutal fashion.

so i guess according to your eyes, hopkins right now is at his best?

funny, you say fighters become more difficult to beat as they age, yet tarver knocked roy the fuck out w/ one punch and johnson simply beat his ass from pillar to post and then knocked him unconsious. so what does that make roy? lewis was more cautious in his approach against guys who can punch but his chin wasn't reliable. when was the last time hopkins has been hurt?

funny, he took some clean shots from roy, yet i don't ever recall hopkins remotely close to being hurt or stunned.

just admit it, you're a hater.

 

Well, sly has some great names in there to be sure, and they were or all are great fighters.

I'd have Monzon way higher up though, sly.

Just my personal thoughts.

 

Yep. The password is..."biased".

 

de la hoya has ZERO legitimate or impressive win over a great fighter who was in his prime. even in his prime, he sought for fights against guys who managed to look like shit beforehand or was small in size. let's not pretend like trinindad was a tiny middleweight (vs. hopkins) and much more goes for pavlik, who is a huge middleweight.

oscar has a great resume in terms of having names and official 'W's, but his accomplishments does no where near hopkins.

hopkins beat and ruined a lot of guys who could've at least won a title at 160. his dominant reign is somewhat tarnished by the fact that most of his opponents couldn't move on to achieve better things after they lost.

if hopkins wasn't around, joppy and keith holmes would've been considered the best two middleweights in the world. hopkins beat the shitta outta both when they met.

the guys that roy beat were just as bad, but luckily for some, guys like julio gonzalez and clinton woods somehow managed to win titles.

roy was fighting bryant bannon's of the world but he was doing it on HBO, while hopkins was fighting on USA, BET and sometimes on Showtime. yet when there were fights on demand, which hbo would've backed, roy failed to step up.

hopkins sought for big fights that weren't really there in the 90s. when the opportunities came, he took full advantage and emerged as a star in his LATE 30s! it's not like he was bullshitting for 6 years waiting for cashout, rather he continued to make big fights and to this day, wins against top fighters.

if tarver sucks so bad, then roy's legacy should be diminished as well.