Weight does not equate to level that is true, but when we are regarding top level boxing, the skills may differ but they are all world ranked so size plays a major factor. And statistically it turns out that weight differences play the most important part historically in who the winner is, the greater the weight difference being the greater the chances of the heftier guy winning. Weight can sometimes trump skills. Of course this is not always the case (duh) otherwise there'd be no point in boxing. And it's a no-brainer really because that is the reason why there are no "speed-divisions" or "height-divisions" or "footwork-divisions" but there are "weight-divisions".

"Quality of opposition" in my opinion is determined by assessing the opponents record with respect not just to the weights of their opponents, but their records as well.

That is why I not only delete CW's off the records of old timers to make a fair comparison, I delete BUMS as well. (I define CW as being sub200lbs and BUM as being a guy who's lost a quarter or more of his fights) and also greens (who had less than 10 fights).

Otherwise MArciano and Butterbean are the best boxers in history, even though Rocky barely fought a real HW and Eric barely fought a decent opponent. That's why the records MUST be "un-padded".

Marciano's "HW" record, sans, bums and cruisers... is not 49-0... it's 0-0! Fact!