What makes an All Time Great?

[brocktonblockbust]

YOu dont have to be undefeated but I think there should be a win % . If you have 10 losses you probably cannot be an ATG, unless you have 140 wins. But if you are 57-10, there is NO WAY you can be an ATG. I think it goes first and foremost by losses. Marciano was an ATG. Foreman with only 4 losses in 70 fights---ATG. Joe Louis with only 2 losses---ATG. Ali only 5 losses----ATG. Frazier only 5 losses----ATG. Larry Holmes---ATG all the way---only a few losses---18 straight title defenses. No doubt about Larry. Mike Tyson----not sure. Not sure about Tyson.

An ATG is NOT a Buster Douglas who has 1 night of pure glory and then fades from all stardom. Leon Spinks is NOT, even though he beat the great Ali. Gene Tunney 's only claims to fame are his 2 wins over Dempsey. Tunney cannot be an ATG.

Number of losses, longevity, title defenses. That is it for me.

[IamInuit]

YOu dont have to be undefeated but I think there should be a win % . If you have 10 losses you probably cannot be an ATG, unless you have 140 wins. But if you are 57-10, there is NO WAY you can be an ATG. I think it goes first and foremost by losses. Marciano was an ATG. Foreman with only 4 losses in 70 fights---ATG. Joe Louis with only 2 losses---ATG. Ali only 5 losses----ATG. Frazier only 5 losses----ATG. Larry Holmes---ATG all the way---only a few losses---18 straight title defenses. No doubt about Larry. Mike Tyson----not sure. Not sure about Tyson.

An ATG is NOT a Buster Douglas who has 1 night of pure glory and then fades from all stardom. Leon Spinks is NOT, even though he beat the great Ali. Gene Tunney 's only claims to fame are his 2 wins over Dempsey. Tunney cannot be an ATG.

Number of losses, longevity, title defenses. That is it for me.

Is Fritzie Zivic an atg iyo? How about Carpentier?

Btw Tunney beat Harry Greb 4 times. Jack would not even fight the guy.

[palmerq]

being popular with the fans seems to be the biggest thing these days......

[mikeeod]

Historical accomplishments, more than anything else, qualify someone as an ATG. Sugar Ray Robinson beating numerous HOF fighters, being the greatest welter ever, and winning lineal MW titles multiple times. Henry Armstrong holding 3 of 8 available world championships at the same time and beating HOF fighters while doing it. Ray Leonard winning super fight after super fight and overcoming the odds to beat Hagler (although I feel ray lost that one). Joe Louis defending his title 23 times and cleaning out the division. Ali being the first to win the HW championship 3 times, overcome the odds to beat foreman, engage in the fight of the century and thrills in Manila, and beat the best heavyweights over 3 generations of the Holden era of heavies.

[Primo Carnera]

Good Thread in light of all the recent talk. IMO , to be an ATG, the 1st requirement is to be the best in your Division for a decent period of time, or to have beaten someone who is the the best in the division and then continued to show that form . It's a phrase that's banded around all too often nowadays and I don't necessarily see a correlation between HOF and ATG. The only other alternative is for unique achievement that defies belief.
I reckon an ATG should apply to very few , simply because we are talking about being one of the best of all time, not just the era they boxed in.
I honestly think that it applies to probably less than 5 current boxers.
if you pressed me for names , I would probably only say Mayweather and Pacman for their achievements, and Maybe Hopkins more for his unique Longevity and being a World Champ at 50 and not necessarily for his boxing prowess.

[Beanflicker]

I think it's a fine balance between in ring and accomplishment.

1) In ring ability - what did the fighter bring to the table? Were his skills elite-level? Skill/intelligence/physical attributes/ect. What did he do great? What was he not so good at? How did his skills/physical attributes/intelligence stack up with that of other established ATGs?

2) Accomplishment - Was the fighter ever THE guy in his division? How long? Was he ever THE guy in the sport of boxing? For how long? Did he fight a reasonable amount of top quality, top ranked opposition?

These are very subjective obviously, and of course allow human bias to skew them to make a fighter look good or shitty (depending on the bias).

For instance, take Marciano. A lot of people generally say his quality of opposition wasn't as great as other HW champs, that he fought in a weak division. There may be some validity to that, but he is undoubtedly an ATG because he was THE guy in the HW division for several years and fought the top guys of the time. Then there are people who take it the other way, and say "well 49-0 he retired undefeated so that means he's the greatest HW ever". So it's a fine balance.

[Beanflicker]

Good Thread in light of all the recent talk. IMO , to be an ATG, the 1st requirement is to be the best in your Division for a decent period of time, or to have beaten someone who is the the best in the division and then continued to show that form . It's a phrase that's banded around all too often nowadays and I don't necessarily see a correlation between HOF and ATG. The only other alternative is for unique achievement that defies belief.
I reckon an ATG should apply to very few , simply because we are talking about being one of the best of all time, not just the era they boxed in.
I honestly think that it applies to probably less than 5 current boxers.
if you pressed me for names , I would probably only say Mayweather and Pacman for their achievements, and Maybe Hopkins more for his unique Longevity and being a World Champ at 50 and not necessarily for his boxing prowess.

What do you mean by "not for Hopkin's boxing prowess"? Like him or not, he's one of the greatest talents to ever enter the ring with one of the highest boxing IQ's of all time.

Mayweather, Pacman, Hopkins, Klitschko, and JMM at least should all have their ATG tickets punched.

Jesus, if Hopkins doesn't deserve ATG status than I don't know who does. The man has had an incredible career.

[Primo Carnera]

Good Thread in light of all the recent talk. IMO , to be an ATG, the 1st requirement is to be the best in your Division for a decent period of time, or to have beaten someone who is the the best in the division and then continued to show that form . It's a phrase that's banded around all too often nowadays and I don't necessarily see a correlation between HOF and ATG. The only other alternative is for unique achievement that defies belief.
I reckon an ATG should apply to very few , simply because we are talking about being one of the best of all time, not just the era they boxed in.
I honestly think that it applies to probably less than 5 current boxers.
if you pressed me for names , I would probably only say Mayweather and Pacman for their achievements, and Maybe Hopkins more for his unique Longevity and being a World Champ at 50 and not necessarily for his boxing prowess.

What do you mean by "not for Hopkin's boxing prowess"? Like him or not, he's one of the greatest talents to ever enter the ring with one of the highest boxing IQ's of all time.

Mayweather, Pacman, Hopkins, Klitschko, and JMM at least should all have their ATG tickets punched.

Jesus, if Hopkins doesn't deserve ATG status than I don't know who does. The man has had an incredible career.

Hey , I have no problem with Hopkins and I think he would be in for the achievement of being a World Champ at his age. He lost to guys like Jermain Taylor so wasn't the no.1 in the division or dominant. No doubt he had some fantastic results as well. As for the Klits, where do you put them in the all time HW's ? Are they above Ali,Frazier,Marciano, Louis, Holmes, Foreman, Tyson (for that period where he put fear in any boxer) and Lewis? If there above any of them, they are ATG's but that is 8 guys in one division alone and I haven't mentioned any HW's pre 50's out of sheer lack of knowledge. Multiply that by the amount of divisions and even though a lot are Multi weight champions , you still start getting to 100 odd people. I wouldn't include any more than that. Marquez? No doubt he's a great champion, but an ATG? Whatever happened in their last fight, Pac had the better of the series. Would he beat Barrera and Morales in their peak? Maybe, I'm not against JMM being an ATG. Somebody else mentioned Roy Jones Jr. For the period where he dominated the MW's he definitely would be in. The reason I never mentioned him is because I don't class him as a current fighter. The Roy Jones of now is NOT the Roy Jones in his prime.
I don't class many as ATG, because to me it should be ultra elite. There should only be 50, 100 maximum ever.

[Silkeyjoe]

Good Thread in light of all the recent talk. IMO , to be an ATG, the 1st requirement is to be the best in your Division for a decent period of time, or to have beaten someone who is the the best in the division and then continued to show that form . It's a phrase that's banded around all too often nowadays and I don't necessarily see a correlation between HOF and ATG. The only other alternative is for unique achievement that defies belief.
I reckon an ATG should apply to very few , simply because we are talking about being one of the best of all time, not just the era they boxed in.
I honestly think that it applies to probably less than 5 current boxers.
if you pressed me for names , I would probably only say Mayweather and Pacman for their achievements, and Maybe Hopkins more for his unique Longevity and being a World Champ at 50 and not necessarily for his boxing prowess.

What do you mean by "not for Hopkin's boxing prowess"? Like him or not, he's one of the greatest talents to ever enter the ring with one of the highest boxing IQ's of all time.

Mayweather, Pacman, Hopkins, Klitschko, and JMM at least should all have their ATG tickets punched.

Jesus, if Hopkins doesn't deserve ATG status than I don't know who does. The man has had an incredible career.

Hey , I have no problem with Hopkins and I think he would be in for the achievement of being a World Champ at his age. He lost to guys like Jermain Taylor so wasn't the no.1 in the division or dominant. No doubt he had some fantastic results as well. As for the Klits, where do you put them in the all time HW's ? Are they above Ali,Frazier,Marciano, Louis, Holmes, Foreman, Tyson (for that period where he put fear in any boxer) and Lewis? If there above any of them, they are ATG's but that is 8 guys in one division alone and I haven't mentioned any HW's pre 50's out of sheer lack of knowledge. Multiply that by the amount of divisions and even though a lot are Multi weight champions , you still start getting to 100 odd people. I wouldn't include any more than that. Marquez? No doubt he's a great champion, but an ATG? Whatever happened in their last fight, Pac had the better of the series. Would he beat Barrera and Morales in their peak? Maybe, I'm not against JMM being an ATG. Somebody else mentioned Roy Jones Jr. For the period where he dominated the MW's he definitely would be in. The reason I never mentioned him is because I don't class him as a current fighter. The Roy Jones of now is NOT the Roy Jones in his prime.
I don't class many as ATG, because to me it should be ultra elite. There should only be 50, 100 maximum ever.

Both Klits are ATGs. They were dominant for so long. Hopkins is clearly an ATG. Besides what he did in his later years, he won the IBF Middleweight title in 1995 and defended it until 2005.

Tommy Hearns lost to Leonard at light middle and Hagler at middle other ATG. Losing to an ATG doesnt rule out your chance to be an ATG.

[Beanflicker]

Hey , I have no problem with Hopkins and I think he would be in for the achievement of being a World Champ at his age. He lost to guys like Jermain Taylor so wasn't the no.1 in the division or dominant.

....you do realize that before he lost to Jermain Taylor (which was a controversial result, btw), he was THE man at MW for about 10 years prior, with 17 or 18 title defenses?

Are we talking about the same guy?

[Silkeyjoe]

The greatest was given to Ali by Ali. If course the greatest can change as new come along.

[Silkeyjoe]

Good Thread in light of all the recent talk. IMO , to be an ATG, the 1st requirement is to be the best in your Division for a decent period of time, or to have beaten someone who is the the best in the division and then continued to show that form . It's a phrase that's banded around all too often nowadays and I don't necessarily see a correlation between HOF and ATG. The only other alternative is for unique achievement that defies belief.
I reckon an ATG should apply to very few , simply because we are talking about being one of the best of all time, not just the era they boxed in.
I honestly think that it applies to probably less than 5 current boxers.
if you pressed me for names , I would probably only say Mayweather and Pacman for their achievements, and Maybe Hopkins more for his unique Longevity and being a World Champ at 50 and not necessarily for his boxing prowess.

Is Pacquiao an ATG? To me he is but I dont think he is or ever has been better then Floyd despite bein gin the same division for a lot of their prime careers? I agree it should be a select few considered ATGs. From this generation I have Floyd, Pac, Wlad, Viatali, Jones Jr, Hopkins but cant think of much others. I certainly dont have Hatton, Cotto, Froch etc despite all being great fighters and future HOFrs

[IamInuit]

Good Thread in light of all the recent talk. IMO , to be an ATG, the 1st requirement is to be the best in your Division for a decent period of time, or to have beaten someone who is the the best in the division and then continued to show that form . It's a phrase that's banded around all too often nowadays and I don't necessarily see a correlation between HOF and ATG. The only other alternative is for unique achievement that defies belief.
I reckon an ATG should apply to very few , simply because we are talking about being one of the best of all time, not just the era they boxed in.
I honestly think that it applies to probably less than 5 current boxers.
if you pressed me for names , I would probably only say Mayweather and Pacman for their achievements, and Maybe Hopkins more for his unique Longevity and being a World Champ at 50 and not necessarily for his boxing prowess.

Is Pacquiao an ATG? To me he is but I dont think he is or ever has been better then Floyd despite bein gin the same division for a lot of their prime careers? I agree it should be a select few considered ATGs. From this generation I have Floyd, Pac, Wlad, Viatali, Jones Jr, Hopkins but cant think of much others. I certainly dont have Hatton, Cotto, Froch etc despite all being great fighters and future HOFrs

I suppose the criteria can be as narrow or as broad as one wants to make it however imo they have to have certain attributes and I'm not sure we can attach all that much to titles in about a 15 title era.
Plenty of all time greats(those that could compete in the top of any era) never got a belt. That was the reasoning for it fragmenting from the NBA. The line up for the title was just to long. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Now of course we have about 10 guys in every division claiming to be some kind of world champion. Same with winning records, scrutiny is needed.

You can find these attributes in one way or another in countless boxing books by both trainers and historians.

INPO

1-Smarts. The ability to think ahead of the action and stay focused under adversity.
2-Speed. To execute ones thoughts.
3-Defense
4-Accuracy. Get the most out of the above
5-Power. Exclamation point but not necessary.
6-Conditioning.
7-A set of Balls
8-Motive and discipline
9-Chin. Not an absolute necessity but desirable.
10-A trainer and good cut man.

=Success

[Beanflicker]

Pacquiao for sure is an ATG.

And if we consider Roy Jones as an active figher, he is also undisputedly an ATG.

[beenKOed]

YOu dont have to be undefeated but I think there should be a win % . If you have 10 losses you probably cannot be an ATG, unless you have 140 wins. But if you are 57-10, there is NO WAY you can be an ATG. I think it goes first and foremost by losses. Marciano was an ATG. Foreman with only 4 losses in 70 fights---ATG. Joe Louis with only 2 losses---ATG. Ali only 5 losses----ATG. Frazier only 5 losses----ATG. Larry Holmes---ATG all the way---only a few losses---18 straight title defenses. No doubt about Larry. Mike Tyson----not sure. Not sure about Tyson.

An ATG is NOT a Buster Douglas who has 1 night of pure glory and then fades from all stardom. Leon Spinks is NOT, even though he beat the great Ali. Gene Tunney 's only claims to fame are his 2 wins over Dempsey. Tunney cannot be an ATG.

Number of losses, longevity, title defenses. That is it for me.

Where does Lennox Lewis stand?