The DEFINITIVE top 20 all time P4P list!

the notable ommission of HARD HITTIN Henry makes sly's list a joke in the minds of all knowledgable afficianados of pugilism

 

Surprise surprise..the sheep of the forum quotes a post of anyone..even someone like the author of "Immortal beloved" (who said Roberto Duran is among the great MIDDLEWeights of all time ::)...that disagrees with me.

get your own thoughts Mythical Matchups king...

 

look at hopkins opponents' rating when he fought them.

tito - rated #1 p4p by the ring, top 3/4 by most fans/experts. rated #2 middleweight after beating joppy. hopkins entered as 3-1 underdog

winky - rated #3 or 4 p4p by the ring. top 5 by most people. opened up as a 2-1 favorite to beat hopkins

pavlik - top 5, 6 p4p. entered the ring as a 5-1 favorite.

tarver - light heavyweight champ, 3-1 favorite. most picked him to knock hopkins out.

calzaghe - #1 p4p fighter coming off the most impressive win of his career. wins a split decision and somehow drops in p4p rankings.

so most people picked hopkins to lose these fights and he won 4 out of 5 in a relatively easy fashion, but of course, doesn't get the credit for whatever reasons.

 

Thanks blood.

From a distinguished historian such as yourself..that's high praise indeed.

You may be right about Monzon. I'll reconsider...

 

Exactly...

I didn't expect anyone to agree with the list fully...but I expect people to offer their own lists..if they are "courageous" enough to attack mine.

People may think my list is "new fighter" heavy. I happen to think that most people's all time lists are "old timer" heavy.

And I agree, that Pacquaio has proven to be a great fighter already...maybe top 20 is a bit optimistic (it can be argued) but I think that he's accomplished as much as any former flyweight has ever aaccomplished..

 

Judging from this list, HBO deserves more credit for Building Legends than they already do.

 

Actually, Einstein...I'm pretty sure I disagree with Jaws much more often than I agree with him. And I've disagreed with him regarding Duran as well. But when I think he is right I will say so. In this case I happen to agree, so I said so.

As long I have been posting on the same board as you, your opinions of fighters are slanted toward your biases...for or against them. It's not exactly a state secret.

 

Word.

 

:: nice!

Seriously though...aren't you SICK of Bert Sugar style all time lists that have the top 10 innundated with black and white TV era fighters just for the sake of sounding more knowledgeable..and being more acceptable to the boxing elitists?

I'm calling it as I see it.

With the exception of Ali and Robinson (and Leonard)....Hopkins, Jones and Mayweather are the best fighters I have seen and their cumulative accomplishments are staggering!!

 

Well, I wouldn't try to come up with an all-time list. I'd focus on one during the time I've followed the sport (or going back to the era where I'd feel comfortable talking about).

Even doing that, I'd be giving myself too much credit to compile one I think is actually legitimate.

But in the era that I've watched, I think Whitaker is certainly above Mayweather and Hopkins. I'd have Holyfield over Hopkins, as well.

 

Three, four and five are ridiculously high. Those guys are outside the top ten for sure. Top 15 arguably.

I wouldn't rank Mayweather over Whitaker at welterweight let alone lightweight or all-time.

I'll tell you this...

If Manny beats DLH decisively and let's say he knocks him out...you're talking a Duran type career and I think Duran is top 5 P4P.

Manny could shutdown his career and still be worthy of a top 10 mention. Definitely above Jones, Hopkins and Mayweather.

 

It's funny sly thinks a DEFINITE list exists here, more funny he thinks HE could post a definite one... ::



that being said - the list sounds about okay. I'd put Jones on 1 and maybe Hagler a bit higher but i really have not a big clue about the old timers...

 

I have a copy of my article on a hard drive, perhaps I should forward it to you for future reference, so that you don't make things up in this way.

Your list would suck by any standard, let alone an objective standard.

What gave you the balls to rank Floyd Mayweather higher than SRL.

just explain that one to me, like I'm your species even

 

Pacquiao has arguably more claim to be in the top twenty than Floyd at this point. Hopkins as well.

People think your list sucks because of the slick black dick love that goes on in the first 5 names.

The rest of your list isn't bad, its just a hideous ordering from 1-5

 

dude...what's wrong with you? :notallthere:

 

Some people want me to justify Floyd being an all timer? ::

ok...peep this:

Undefeated!! 39-0 (25)

Won titles at 130, 135, 140, 147, 154..that's titles at FIVE WEIGHTS!!!


Dominated previously undefeated champions in Ricky Hatton and Diego Corrales

Fought and defeated great names/talents including: Oscar De La Hoya, Diego Corrales, Ricky Hatton, Jose Luis Castillo, Genaro Hernandez


According to Punch stats has the greatest disparity between connect percentage and connect percentage against of any fighter in the history of compubox....meaning he's a living personification of the old adage "hit and not get hit".

Only offical KD of his career occured when he touch his own glove down because of pain caused by a broken hand. Never been close to getting stopped or losing.

That, my firend, is sheer DOMINANCE. If he fought in the black and white era and had the quivalent record of that era and the equivalent names on his resume this wouldn't even be a discussion.

 

if this were the black and white era, Floyd would have three times as many fights and several losses on his record.

of the guys you've listed as his best opponents only one is Hall of Fame material and that's Oscar.

Not to mention, Floyd wasn't the undisputed champion at any of those weights. The best win on his ledger is the Castillo victory and some thought he lost that first fight.

 

If they fought back in tha day...the rest mentioned would have been HOF materia as well. lest you forget the truly MEDIOCRE fighters that have made it into the HOF from eras past JUST on the basis that they fought guys like Robinson, Armstrong or Pep.

Hell Ken Norton is in the HOF...is he a better fighter, objectively speaking, than Corrales, Castillo or Hatton?

 

Also in this day of fractured Championships....we cannot knock a fighter for not being undisputed. We have to evaluate them in the day that they are in.

 

about sums it up.

 

Ken Norton is better than the majority of the guys who have been champ the past few years. The 1970's was one of the best eras for heavyweights.

 

:laughing::laughing:Bernard Hopinks at 4. Wow, Bernard Hopkins should be called the illusionist.

 

Perhaps you have terrible reading comprehension. The question was, how did you place Floyd ahead of Sugar Ray Leonard.

That is ridiculous.

And claiming punchstats, and details that other fighters dont have because they actually fought into their 30s against great fighters, not hand picked names...etc.

Point is, you're an idiot. Its not that the names are bad, its the ordering thats fucking nonsense

 

Tough words from a guy that doesn't have the cajones to post his own list.

 

How many times has this thread been done. After the research you did to find the one time in life you've been right, surely you could research Tam's thread of the same title from months ago.

 

I'm not bothered making my own one just now, but i'll re-order yours.

1. Ray Robinson
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Ray Leonard
4. Roberto Duran
5. Roy Jones Jr
6. Pernell Whitaker
7. Willie Pep
8. Armstrong
9. Hagler
10. Monzon
11. Charles
12. Hopkins
13. Hearns
14. Chavez
15. Louis
16. Mayweather
17. Holyfield
18. Pacquaio
19. Foster
20. Greb

Didn't put too much thought into this, but i like my one more. :kidcool:

 

On reflection i'll take Charles and Hopkins up to 9 + 10, bumping Hagler and Monzon down to 11 + 12.

 

1. Roy Jones Jr

Then you can place whoever the fuck you want after that. Naw. These list don't mean shit. It's all on a persons perception of certain fighters. Personally I think that todays athletes are way better athletes then yesterdays. But that's me. I'll Holla 5000

 

I actually liked the fact that Sly had the guts to rank some modern guys over the ones whose place usually is undenied.

 

That's for sure,...and I agree with that, you tense racist.