How do you define the term 'elite'?

Instead of throwing out names and arguing about whether or not they are elite, let's first define the word.

So, when is a fighter 'elite', IYO

Is being a champion/contender enough? Do you need to be one of the best of your era, a p4per? Do you need to be an ATG fighter to be elite? Is it about being very good for a moment or more about your all-time ranking? Or is being elite something else, do you need a certain skillset, popularity or longevity to be considered 'elite'?

How do you see it

 

elite (definition): a select part of a group that is superior to the rest in terms of ability or qualities

 

Right. So how large a part are we talking about?

 

A separate thread didn't need to be made for this. Anyway, here's my definition from the other thread.

 

"Elite"- liked by Americans and-or makes a lot of money, pushes networks around, appeals to the sense of the great in people who have themselves no authority or power.

 

Elite: the few ones in power ruling over the sheep

 

The Cornucopia of "World Champions", PER Weight Class, has Resulted in the Gray Area that IS the "Elite" Fighter Discussion...

Even in the Mid 80's, Just PRIOR to the IBF being Formed, You Could SAFELY ASSume the WBC and WBA "World Champions" were ELITE Fighters, 85-90% of the Time...Sure, You had Your Art Frias' and Mike Weaver's who Finagled their Way to Belts, but they were EXCEPTIONS to the Rule...

In TODAY's Boxing Climate, REED Would Characterize LEGIT Top 5-10, Perhaps Even Top 12-15 Lb for Lb Guys as Truly "Elite" Fighters...A SELECT Few, yet a Number that Can EASILY Be Manipulated, Given a Particular Era...




REED:mj:

 

Again, I think we`re over complicating the issue. This is one case where we are missing the forest for the trees. The more we try to define elite the greater the mess we create.

Let`s simplify it. Elite are the top fighters in any era...the ones that stand out, and have been the most dominant and or successful. We`re talking potential or realized ATGs. What`s an era you ask? I think a decade is a fair time frame to define an era.

Elite fighters today would be Mayweather and Pacquiao. In Eras just past it would be Hopkins, Jones, Trinidad, De La Hoya, Lennox Lewis, Evander Holyfield....with Barrera, Morales and Marquez being arguable. 80s would have Tyson, Fab 4, Holmes, Pryor, Chavez, Whitaker. Etc...

The cream of the crop for a given decade, may be the simplest explanation if people need a definition.

 

You are a smart guy and thus I do believe you know that language and especially adjectives are almost always relative. They mean slightly different things for different people, their meaning can change in different contexts and so on. Thus, to get anywhere in a discussion, we need some kind of a definition. Otherwise it is the same as asking if a five-floor building is tall. In Finland it is in New York it isn't


As for this definition, I agree more with REED's take. To me, elite isn't as strong a word as all-time greatness, which seems to be closer to your definition. I would count about the ten best guys of the moment to be in the 'elite'. Also, even though Rigondeaux for example has had a short pro career so far, his skill is so unique that IMO he definitely is an 'elite' fighter, even though so far he can't be called great

 

'elite' is a relatively new word that should be only used my computer nerds, and has no place in sports discussions...in boxing the word to use is 'great'

 

I would think "great" would be more exclusive than "elite"

 

If anything, I see it the other way around. For the most part, however I see the words as interchangeable in terms of caliber, only subtle difference is that elite can refer to contemporary fighters in their prime whereas great is typically a backwards looking word.

All in all Ugotabe Kidding is correct and I concede the point. It means different things to different people.....I had assumed we all had the same definition of the word and were therefore arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

Precisely. "Elite" is used by people to describe fighters they know are not great and whom it would be stupid to describe as great.

"Elite" means deserving praise and money and favour and interest now, rather than later.

Thus Chris Arreola being described as "Elite" at one point in time.

It used to be the expression "Hot Property" was used.

Ivan Robinson was "Hot Property" following two wins over Gatti, also Manfredy, and today the expression would be "Elite"......i.e. this man needs to be paid, this man needs a title shot, this man needs ppv exposure, this is a man who demands the big fights......rather than "this is a man who could have beaten any man any time" type of thing.


"Elite" just means that the fighters potential has been monetized at that point in time.

 

Great should be set aside for extreme exclusivity

Elite, to me, would seem to indicate top class relative to contemporaries

 

Absolutely...

It's Conceivable to have Been an "Elite" Fighter, w/Out EVER Being Considered "Great"...




REED:mj:

 

"Elite" means extreme , acute, current relevance.


Thus..................Wilder is "Elite". He is a title holder, won a big fight, is undefeated and has huge potential fights on the horizon.

 

agREED...

The Term Can Be Used in a DIVISIONAL Sense as Well...Say What You Will about the Division Itself, but Chris Arreola WAS an "Elite" Level Heavyweight at One Point in Time...Ditto for John Ruiz...

Maurice Hope and Ayub Kalule were "Elite" Level Jr. Middleweights at One Point in Time, Despite NEVER Approaching "Greatness" or Lb for Lb Status...

A Fighter Could Be Elite in the Grand Scheme of Things (Lb for Lb) OR he Could Just Be Elite within his Own Division...




REED:mj:

 

Nice to agREE for once..........thus....GGG is currently an Elite 160lb fighter, if not anywhere near a top 20 of all time.

 

:like:

 

Irish makes a point which underscores the difficulties... Wilder is currently an "Elite" heavyweight... So if we ask if Felix Trinidad was an elite fighter, the obvious reaction would be of course he is... If Wilder is elite and Trinidad was obviously a better fighter, it stands that he must have been at least elite ... but are we comfortable with putting these two in the same bucket? That's where it gets tricky

 

I do not see it that way AT ALL. That`s not the way "elite" is used in everyday life. The elite are the 1%...the very top. I don`t know where you guys get this mediocre definition of that word.

Ugotabe Kidding has been vindicated in seeing that there is a need for this discussion.

 

Wilder is ONLY "Elite" within the Confines of his DIVISION...He's an "Elite" HEAVYWEIGHT, Whereas, Felix Trinidad was an "Elite" FIGHTER, Given the Fact he was Almost Universally Regarded as No Worse than a Top 10 Fighter, Lb for Lb, for his Era...

From the Heavyweight Division ONLY Wlad Klit Warrants Mention as an "Elite" FIGHTER...




REED:mj:

 

It's NOT Complicated @ All, Unless You WANT to Complicate the Matter or Argue for the Mere SAKE of It...

Where EXACTLY is the Number "1%" Used in the Definition of "Elite"???...

You Can Be AT or NEAR the Very Top of your SPORT (Lb for Lb'ders) OR Be AT or NEAR the Very Top of your DIVISION...Either Way, the Word "Elite" Would Apply...




REED:mj:

 

Of course, but..........we simply bring in the very easy to understand, and argument-free, concept of pfp...................:scared2: ::

 

Bullshit Mr Han Man!

I just threw the number out there to make the point that I`ve been saying all along..about it being the cream of the crop. That`s the way we use the term in everyday life, why must we change it for boxing?

This topic first came up regarding Trinidad. Trinidad is NOT contemporary. He`s a past fighter. The topic was addressed in the spirit of all time greatness, or to put it another way....his prowess over his peers in his generation. It was never a term to refer to a snapshot in time...nor to be limited to merely the way the governing bodies or magazines rank the fighters at a point in time.

Anyway...we must agree to disagree.

 

Sugar Ray Robinson is an elite MW, of all time, and in the 1950's.

GGG is currently an elite MW.

Using common blarney, Ray Robinson was better and ranks higher.

But.........we would all happily agree that RR vs GGG would be no mismatch but Ray would be favourite.

 

The Mythical Matchups warriors here (wont mention names) would call it a mismatch just based on the fact that Robinson is Robinson and GGG is a contemporary white boy (with Asian mother) who hasn`t fought anyone. That`s the way some of these simpletons evaluate matchups.

I tend to agree with you about it being a competitive fight.

Anyway...elite CAN refer to a contemporary fighter who hasn`t yet proven himself great by the passing of time. But Elite and great should be viewed as interchangeable expressions when referring to the proven abilities of fighters.

 

Exactly ::

 

Technically, the Topic was Created to KILL the Noise Brother MWS Talked, about Trinidad NOT Being an "Elite" Fighter...Hopefully, the 16-2 Vote AGAINST his Opinion has FULLY Illustrated Trinidad's Worth...

Anyways, it's NOT a Difficult Concept to Grasp, as the Term "Elite" is Pliable..."Elite" in the Lb for Lb Sense is what YOU'RE Subscribing To...But a Fighter Can Also Be "Elite" Within his Division, w/Out EVER Garnering "Lb for Lb" or "All Time Great" Recognition...




REED:mj:

 

We seem to see this the same way.

Also I think a fighter can have 'elite' skills or attributes even if he wasn't 'elite' overall