I don't even bother with all time greats lists. Too many factors would have to go into it and I'm not gonna spend that much time on that exercise.

If I were to take on the endeavor I would have to break down into universal terms how good the opposition was, by that I mean I would have to have a system that quantified how good the heavyweights of the late 1800's were in comparison to today and every era in between. I would have to take into account activity (fights per year), accolades (titles, awards etc.). I would consider ATG's as the elite of the elite throughout history, and without a system to quantify that it's simply opinion much like a p4p list.

Certainly there are the obvious choices like Jimmy Wilde, SRR etc. but I don't have a good criteria to base it on, just opinion. The problem with counting titles in THIS era compared to prior eras is the fractionalization of the sanctioning bodies, they are so deluded they are really nothing more than marketing tools. While it's true that lineal titles carry more weight even the lineage comes into question with all of the weight class jumping nowadays.