It's a pretty good list in it's own right, but entirely omits almost all modern fighters. I mean you did say the very best of all time could compete with each other in any era. Don't think there have been any other great fighters recently?? I mean to not have Lewis or Holyfield under HW is a stretch imo. I guess it's not too bad if you want to define greatness as simply accomplishments on paper or stature, looking at it that way though the problem is that it is basically impossible for modern fighters to compete against ranked opposition as often as used to be the norm. The way fights are sanctioned and promoted these days just doesn't allow that kind of crazy activity that so many of those guys had, therefore it's not possible to rack up as MANY wins against good fighters these days. Noone will even have 100 fights aside from the most obscure journeyman these days, let alone more. Still, the only two fighters I spotted on any of those lists who have been active in the last fifteen years were Roy Jones and Pernell Whittaker, pretty obvious picks those. The pound for pound list is especially flawed in this sense, imo. It looks as though it was taken from a 1952 issue of Ring Magazines top 10 All time p4p list. It's very hard to even find any footage of the majority of those fighters. I mean guys like Jones Jr, Mayweather, Whittaker, could easily be LIGHTYEARS ahead of say, Charley Mitchell, and Stanley Ketchel in any feasable measure of ability. And I don't doubt they are. I mean would you like to tell me you think Jack Dempsey was a better pound for pound fighter than Roy Jones?