10 best boxers of all time named..

https://www.news.com.au/sport/boxing...92f45551599f8f

That Oscar and Bernard made the list shows how shit it is.. PBF above SRR.... WTF!






1 FLOYD MAYWEATHER
‘MONEY’ held multiple world titles in five weight classes and is not only regarded as one of the greatest defensive boxers ever but the most accurate. Forbes listed the champion as the highest earning athlete in the world from 2012 to 2015.

2 MANNY PACQUIAO
The only active boxer on the list, Pacquiao, 40, is the only eight-division world champion in the history of boxing.
A current senator in his native Philippines, Pacquiao demolished Oscar De La Hoya into retirement in December 2008, obliterated Ricky Hatton in May 2009 … but lost to Mayweather in the Fight of the Century in 2015.

3 CARLOS MONZON
Argentine playboy who died in 1995 held the undisputed middleweight championship for seven years and recorded 59 knockouts during his career.
However, he has been largely banished from the annals of boxing after he was sentenced to 11 years in prison for killing his wife Alicia Muniz in 1988.


4 MUHAMMAD ALI
No one touches ‘The Greatest’ for cultural, social and political impact — and his boxing record may well have been even better had he not lost three years of his career after refusing to fight in the Vietnam War from 1967 to 1970.
The image of Ali standing over a battered Sonny Liston is one of sport’s most iconic and his Thrilla in Manila win over Joe Frazier in 1975 the most famous boxing fight ever.

5 SUGAR RAY ROBINSON
Robinson’s performances at lightweight, welterweight, middleweight and light heavyweight were so seminal that they prompted journalists to create the “pound for pound” rankings.
He only lost 19 of his incredible 174 fights and was the first boxer ever to win a belt five times. He died in 1989.

6 BERNARD HOPKINS
‘The Executioner’, 54, was famed for his power and ability to pick opponents off on the counter.
He held multiple world championships at middleweight and light heavyweight and credited his mastery of the fundamentals as a reason for his career lasting 28 years.

7 JOE LOUIS
The “Brown Bomber” was heavyweight champion from 1937 to 1949 — a period in which he defended his title 25 times.
More than that, he is widely regarded as one of the first black athletes to achieve the status of national hero in the US. He died in 1981.

8 ARCHIE MOORE
“Mongoose” is the longest reigning world light heavyweight champion of all time.
He held the crown from December 1952 to May 1962 and though he had a great chin which could take a pounding, he was respected as a highly strategic and defensive pugilist. Died in 1998.

9 OSCAR DE LA HOYA
At the time of his retirement in April 2009, De La Hoya, now 46, was the most popular boxer in the world.
He won ten world titles in six divisions and started boxing at the age of five, but is now a successful businessman having founded Golden Boy Promotions.

10 JULIO CESAR CHAVEZ
Mexican competed from 1980 to 2005 and was a multiple world champion in three weight divisions: super featherweight, lightweight and light welterweight.
Chavez, 57, holds the record for the most successful defences of world titles at 27 and, before his first professional loss to Frankie Randall in 1994, had gone on an 87-fight win streak.



.

The list is worthless. No mention of SRL or Duran. Fishnets shouldn't be within sniffing distance of a top 10 list. Whoever wrote the list is a casual fan and DKSAB.

Isn’t this the all time list from boxrec?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerpuncher

Isn’t this the all time list from boxrec?

---

Apparently.
This quote from The Sun:

"The retired 50-0 king [Floyd] is ranked miles ahead of second-placed Manny Pacquiao in the table from respected boxing site BoxRec."



Well..... they just lost MY respect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

The list is worthless. No mention of SRL or Duran. Fishnets shouldn't be within sniffing distance of a top 10 list. Whoever wrote the list is a casual fan and DKSAB.

---

Even worse the author mentions Duran and just blows over it, oops Roberto maybe next time but we have to make room for Monzon and Canelos chauffer. Isn't Morgan some mma dude? Sometimes I think 'all time' really just means ones own lifetime.

i rank carlos monzon pretty high. maybe not that high.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yuzo

i rank carlos monzon pretty high. maybe not that high.

---

Top 15'ish maybe Yuzo? On dominance but still personally would notch Benny, Pep, Armstrong well above. Then again maybe I'm in error as I struggle to even rank Mayweather :-X.

I saw this list the other day. Some crappy points ranking system.

Floyd top sums it up for what it is.

Didn't know much about Carlos monzon and just looked at his record. Didn't recognise that many names on his resume and looking at their records when they fought him who did he beat in their prime.

I'm currently in Turkey where Wikipedia is blocked so can't look on there.....

I think it's quite interesting, far more so than any personal opinion of a P4P list, as it's based on an algorithm. The creators of the system will almost certainly have different personal opinions but those are what the figures threw up.

It looks stupid/mental, for sure. However, it's fascinating that throwing the same data at everyone produced that list.

The disparity between wins, losses and opposition is so vast, it would be interesting to know how the system works? Why did Monzon rate 3? Why is Floyd 1?

If it's based on algorithms, stats and numbers etc where's Marciano & Calzaghe ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smashup

If it's based on algorithms, stats and numbers etc where's Marciano & Calzaghe ?

---

Without fully knowing the intricacies of the system - the quality of opposition is a factor. Therefore, Floyd has beaten far more high scoring fighters than those two.

Floyd's no.1 position has nothing to do with being unbeaten.

Then it's a bit like the Elo system in chess, where your Elo points depend on how far up your opponents were when you beat them. But even so it's still a bit rubbish; the unbeaten Marciano, but also Whitaker, Roy Jones jr., James Toney, Tyson, etc.

Where's Willie Pep? Guy wins 229 fights and he can't make this list?!?!?! Where's Henry Armstrong? Guy wins 151 fights and he cant' make this list? 19 times defending his welterweight title and he doesn't make this list?!?!?!

Again, Joe Louis ranks below Ali, WHY? "No one touches ‘The Greatest’ for cultural, social and political impact" ....oh fuck off with that bullshit. Great fighter, yes no one doubts it, but again 25 in a row from 1938 to 1950 undefeated as champion JOE LOUIS the Greatest Heavyweight Champion of All-Time STATISTICALLY VERIFIED


Now I look at fighters and think "On any given day, MAYBE this guy beats that guy" and if I'm looking at that and ONLY that then maybe Ali rates higher, Holyfield and Foreman certainly rate higher looking at it that way, maybe Larry Holmes rates higher :dontknow: but in the ring in actual competition Joe Louis and Rocky Marciano accomplished a whole hell of a lot and it cannot be denied simply by saying "Well look who they fought" their eras were what their eras were and there's no controlling that they didn't duck guys the way Sven Ottke did or wait out opponents like Floyd has...they just fought who was there, no bullshit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Where's Willie Pep? Guy wins 229 fights and he can't make this list?!?!?! Where's Henry Armstrong? Guy wins 151 fights and he cant' make this list? 19 times defending his welterweight title and he doesn't make this list?!?!?!

Again, Joe Louis ranks below Ali, WHY? "No one touches ‘The Greatest’ for cultural, social and political impact" ....oh fuck off with that bullshit. Great fighter, yes no one doubts it, but again 25 in a row from 1938 to 1950 undefeated as champion JOE LOUIS the Greatest Heavyweight Champion of All-Time STATISTICALLY VERIFIED


Now I look at fighters and think "On any given day, MAYBE this guy beats that guy" and if I'm looking at that and ONLY that then maybe Ali rates higher, Holyfield and Foreman certainly rate higher looking at it that way, maybe Larry Holmes rates higher :dontknow: but in the ring in actual competition Joe Louis and Rocky Marciano accomplished a whole hell of a lot and it cannot be denied simply by saying "Well look who they fought" their eras were what their eras were and there's no controlling that they didn't duck guys the way Sven Ottke did or wait out opponents like Floyd has...they just fought who was there, no bullshit.

---

The algorithm can't produce what Lyle wants, it has NOTHING to do with personal bias, cultural, social or political impact.

You don't know anything about Pep, Armstrong, Marciano's or Otkke's "opposition" apart from what you've read (the odd fight/clip doesn't count).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

The algorithm can't produce what Lyle wants, it has NOTHING to do with personal bias, cultural, social or political impact.

You don't know anything about Pep, Armstrong, Marciano's or Otkke's "opposition" apart from what you've read (the odd fight/clip doesn't count).

---

OK I guess Fenster will take my opinion personally, sorry :shrug03:

Ali was a great boxer...I don't think he's The Greatest of All Time, I know he professed that he was and told anyone who would listen. That's fine, I think quite a few boxers especially at the highest levels feel they are able to beat anyone on any given night, of course they should have that confidence going into the ring, but in the ring you've got to provide the results. Again Ali is a great boxer, but he DID lose a time or two I guess that is heresy to say, but it's the truth. People mention Ali losing years of his prime and yet there's 0 mention of Louis losing a similar amount of time in his prime....little is made mention of what Louis did in regards to cultural, social, and political impact and I find that appalling to be quite honest. I don't wish to pit Louis vs Ali in a "Who was the bigger star" as they were both giants of their day, but I do find that Louis is dismissed with ease and Ali not so much and that's not due to their work in ring either so yeah I call bullshit and if it hurts your feelings tough shit, I'll call it every time and you can expect it but I'm not going to back down from my belief on account of your feelings.


The algorithm :rolleyes: ....the algorithm apparently doesn't account for successful title defenses but quite clearly stated beside Ali's name is all about his impact outside the ring, why?


I know Willie Pep and won 10 days after suffering his first defeat, I know Pep fought 16 times winning all 16 in 1944, I know he was severely injured in a plane crash in 1947 but still fought and won 10 bouts that very year, I know he fought Sandy Saddler (record of 144 (103 KO)-16-2) who was an absolute stud of a boxer and went 1-3 against him....but hey I don't know anything of his opponents

I know Homicide Hank held the belts in the featherweight, lightweight, and welterweight divisions and if not for one Sugar Ray Robinson he might have held the middleweight title too. He beat Barney Ross (a great fighter) he beat Lou Ambers (a great fighter), he went 1-3 vs Fritzie Zivic (a great fighter), he beat Chalky Wright...anyone he ducked? Why wouldn't you consider him a great fighter?

Marciano beat everyone he ever fought which what more can a guy do? He won 49 knocked out 43. But it's more impressive when those on his record are Joe Louis, Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles, Jersey Joe Walcott...older versions of them? Sure, but they were still fighting and still competitive at the highest level (Does Joe Calzaghe not get full credit for beating Bernard Hopkins?) Roland LaStarza, Kid Matthews, Don Cockell, Lee Savold, Rex Layne...who should he have fought? Who did he duck?


Sven Ottke fought from 1997 to 2004 and notably absent on his record: RJJ, Toney, Hopkins, Calzaghe among others....so although he went 34 (6 KO)-0-0 we can't be saying he's the best or greatest as there WERE other folks for him to fight. Also when your opponent is penalized for punching you legitimately it's a bit of a problem. Credit to him for knocking out Mundine though.

Mundine was boxing Ottke ears off before the knock out. How the feather fisted Ottke did that is a miracle that I will never understand.

Some people just don’t like math, and that’s okay. Perhaps they are swell spellers, or are charming in a dim sort of way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yuzo

i rank carlos monzon pretty high. maybe not that high.

---

Top 15'ish maybe Yuzo?

---

spicoli, its all bullshit.

An algorithm can only use quantifiable evidence. It can’t take into account the eye test. I’m not sure how boxrec ranks its fighters, but even its rankings of current fighters is pretty bad. It also can’t account for off nights or losing to known cheaters. There are so many things that an algorithm can’t account for that it will never be a good list.

Although when we humans do it, we give completely different lists so maybe we are just as wrong.

I rate Monzon very highly, but he's not Top 10. Ditto for Archie Moore. Fishnets disgraces the list. Way above Fishnets are both Wifredos (Gomez and Benitez). Not having SRL in there just proves the immense ignorance of whoever wrote that list. Even more ignorant for omitting Roberto Duran.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerpuncher

An algorithm can only use quantifiable evidence. It can’t take into account the eye test. I’m not sure how boxrec ranks its fighters, but even its rankings of current fighters is pretty bad. It also can’t account for off nights or losing to known cheaters. There are so many things that an algorithm can’t account for that it will never be a good list.

Although when we humans do it, we give completely different lists so maybe we are just as wrong.

---

A good algorithm will take in to account far more layers than any human is capable of taking into account. FE-opposition, oppositions opposition, oppositions oppositions opposition, etcetera, age, timing compared to prime, 800 other ways. But you can look at this list, I haven’t read about it, and you can tell it’s heavily weighted towards wins/losses and opposition. Unfortunately too weighted. I always say all that matters is who you fight, but I think it’s understood that isn’t all that matters. There’s 1000 layers and you can’t weigh them equally, some of it you have to see, you have to see SRL against Hearns to understand SRLs greatness. To see that a man can be better than they are. It’s not just that a man wins or losses but how they win or lose. And I don’t mean KO or decision, but did he try alternative tactics, did he dare to be great when losing or did he Broner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

The algorithm can't produce what Lyle wants, it has NOTHING to do with personal bias, cultural, social or political impact.

You don't know anything about Pep, Armstrong, Marciano's or Otkke's "opposition" apart from what you've read (the odd fight/clip doesn't count).

---

OK I guess Fenster will take my opinion personally, sorry :shrug03:

The algorithm :rolleyes: ....the algorithm apparently doesn't account for successful title defenses but quite clearly stated beside Ali's name is all about his impact outside the ring, why?

---

The algorithm wasn't created by the "writer" of those comments, Lyle. The "writer" stole the list from boxrec then added comments. The list is based on a points system not personal opinion.

I didn't take your opinion personally, I merely tried to answer your questions, that's all. You asked where's Pep? Louis? Ottke (the last one is a joke, dude, just some light-hearted irony)? I merely tried to explain they didn't score as highly as others due to the algorithm used. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

The algorithm wasn't created by the "writer" of those comments, Lyle. The "writer" stole the list from boxrec then added comments. The list is based on a points system not personal opinion.

I didn't take your opinion personally, I merely tried to answer your questions, that's all. You asked where's Pep? Louis? Ottke (the last one is a joke, dude, just some light-hearted irony)? I merely tried to explain they didn't score as highly as others due to the algorithm used. :)

---

Then I guess thanks for taking the time to address me personally seeing how I'm the only one with an issue regarding this list of 10 best boxers all time.

When I posted this thread I had no idea it was actually taken from a 'Boxrec' list! I also worried that 'top 10 greatest' has been done to death and I would get hammered for it. But now knowing this is actually a Boxrec list,....im fuc*ing astounded!


Algorithms don't take into account rigged scorecards, bad referees, or even chilli in the eyes...(Ali vs Liston) Ae all PBF wins all non controversial wins? Did the judges get ALL his winning rounds right? Does the algorithm take into account layoffs? Struggles to make weight and many other variables humans take into account that gives us our personal OPINIONS? Does an algorithm HAVE an opinion or is its verdict totally inflexible? Obviously so.

An algorithm cant know how hard a puncher is, or how hard a punch a fighter has taken and fights on. All an algorithm has is final results. Stats ultimately don't present the best evidence for valuing fighters. If they did, this top ten would be correct, and we know it isn't.

Stats leading up to Tyson vs Douglas has Tyson winning. Algorithms don't take into account human emotions, response to personal tragedy, determination or even lack of determination of a fighter that has been through an emotional state which changes a result, which changes the algorithm.

Fu*k robots. Give me human opinions and debate any day.

I see human intervention and opinion in the reasoning we see written under that list. Where did the thought of an algorithm come from? Something doesnt add up.

List is garbage :-\