When Rating Fighters................

[Put Em' Up]

I rank quality of opponents over quantity, Joe Louis a great champion had quite a few defenses of his belt but he also had the bum of the month club. We can name the quality fighters Joe Louis faced. We can't name any bum of the month members.

Ray Leonard retired with 40 bouts. Most guys who retire with 40 fights champion or not only have a few big names from that era or the division they fought in on their resume, Ray Leonard had all time greats from welterweight to middleweight.. So I would rate him higher then a guy like Joe Calzaghe lets say who has more bouts but less stellar opposition. No disrespect to Calzaghe he is a great champion I am just using him as an example.

[killersheep]

Quality over Quantity any day.

Of course when fighters take a long time off I start to lose interest in them.

[Lance Uppercut]

Quality over Quantity any day.

Of course when fighters take a long time off I start to lose interest in them.

Exactly, quality is much more important. Joe Frazier and Sonny Liston also made under 4 defenses. BUt they had some huge wins

[Spicoli]

Have to echo Lance and Killersheep.....Quality over quantity.Quality on a fight per fight basis, performance In the bouts and Quality of opposition.

You can beat a top p4p fighter after some sub par matches....that does not automatically warrant p4p inclusion Imo.

[Mikkel_K]

Quality over Quantity any day.

I agree. But longevity is a quality in itself, and a fighter should get credit for that also.

To go with RozzySean's example - on his best night Bowe was better than Holyfield has ever been, but for Holyfield to stay at the top so long and continuously facing the very best in the world, I would rate Holyfield above Bowe. I would also rank Calzaghe above Roy Jones, if we were ranking Super Middleweights, even though a prime Roy Jones at SMW could put a beatdown on Calzaghe and still be able to play another game of basketball the same night.