Two Questions

[marbleheadmaui]

How do you define an "all-time great" and what is your criteria?

In your opinion how many have there been since John L. Sullivan?

I'll do my answers later. I want to see the gang's opinion.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Great topic and great question.

The criteria I use and it’s by no means a fixed one is,

Actual performance in the squared circle.
Dominance
Outcomes and achievements
Historic comparison or how they would match up with others.

Post John L all time greats; well I suppose you will get more of my feelings on all time greats and what makes one from my list. Quite subjective as someone already mentioned. I’m going to forget some to be sure.

Since Sullivan and in somewhat chronological order and again this topic is about as
subjective as subjective can be. Others may differ and thats cool.

The man in your Av Jeffries even though he never had that many fights.
Dixon
Dempsey
Leonard
Walker
Greb
Gans
Langford
Villa
Wilde
Tunney
Carpentier
Firpo
Lynch
Levinsky
Kid Lewis
Britton
Tendler
Loughran
Wolgast
Rosenbloom
Kid Chocolate
Kid Berg
Armstrong
Conn
Pep
Ortiz
Ross
Baer
Zale
Arizmendi
Louis
Ambers
Escobar
Robinson
Walcott
Charles
Cerdan
Saddler
Gavilan
Maxim
Moore
Burley
Basilio
Elorde
Jofre
Patterson
Griffith
Ortiz C
Liston
Harada
Saldivar
Locche
Olivares
Buchanan
Monzon
Napoles
Foster
Duran
Cervantes
Benitez
Foreman
Ali
Gomez
Arguello
Hagler
Hearns
Leonard
Tyson
Rosario
Chavez
Spinks M
Fenech
Jones Jr. How he looks today is not relevant
Tito
Lewis
Calzaghe
Hopkins Still fighting but he’s an ATG.
Oscar
Mab? Still fighting
Morales? Ditto
Calderon Ditto he was pretty dominant but was stuck in the wrong weight class.

Nicely done! I'd quibble with Carpentier, Calderon, Calzaghe, Fenech, Rosario, Maxim, Levinksy and Firpo and I wonder if you didn't overlook Canzoneri, Attell, the other Dempsey, McGovern and a few others. But that was one impressive effort!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[IamInuit]

How do you define an "all-time great" and what is your criteria?

In your opinion how many have there been since John L. Sullivan?

I'll do my answers later. I want to see the gang's opinion.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Great topic and great question.

The criteria I use and it’s by no means a fixed one is,

Actual performance in the squared circle.
Dominance
Outcomes and achievements
Historic comparison or how they would match up with others.

Post John L all time greats; well I suppose you will get more of my feelings on all time greats and what makes one from my list. Quite subjective as someone already mentioned. I’m going to forget some to be sure.

Since Sullivan and in somewhat chronological order and again this topic is about as
subjective as subjective can be. Others may differ and thats cool.

The man in your Av Jeffries even though he never had that many fights.
Dixon
Dempsey
Leonard
Walker
Greb
Gans
Langford
Villa
Wilde
Tunney
Carpentier
Firpo
Lynch
Levinsky
Kid Lewis
Britton
Tendler
Loughran
Wolgast
Rosenbloom
Kid Chocolate
Kid Berg
Armstrong
Conn
Pep
Ortiz
Ross
Baer
Zale
Arizmendi
Louis
Ambers
Escobar
Robinson
Walcott
Charles
Cerdan
Saddler
Gavilan
Maxim
Moore
Burley
Basilio
Elorde
Jofre
Patterson
Griffith
Ortiz C
Liston
Harada
Saldivar
Locche
Olivares
Buchanan
Monzon
Napoles
Foster
Duran
Cervantes
Benitez
Foreman
Ali
Gomez
Arguello
Hagler
Hearns
Leonard
Tyson
Rosario
Chavez
Spinks M
Fenech
Jones Jr. How he looks today is not relevant
Tito
Lewis
Calzaghe
Hopkins Still fighting but he’s an ATG.
Oscar
Mab? Still fighting
Morales? Ditto
Calderon Ditto he was pretty dominant but was stuck in the wrong weight class.

Nicely done! I'd quibble with Carpentier, Calderon, Calzaghe, Fenech, Rosario, Maxim, Levinksy and Firpo and I wonder if you didn't overlook Canzoneri, Attell, the other Dempsey, McGovern and a few others. But that was one impressive effort!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thats cool and I did overlook them and like I said its really subjective. I second guessed myself several times while compiling the list.

[Violent Demise]

Thats your opinion and you are welcome to it. I guess I'm out of my mind. Brilliant response.

Some of them have been discussed in countless debates. I don't need to go over them again. So how about you be kind enough and tell what makes Jeff Fenech an ATG

I said from the the start that this topic is subjective and people might disagree. So I'll just leave it at that. He's in the hall of fame and is a three division champion. Again like I said I made my list and never expected it to be perfect.

So who are the other ATG's since Sullivan iyo? Run down your list since 1879.

You got most of them them. So there's no need to repeat them. I already stated I would exclude Patterson, Buchanan, Rosario, Fenech, Calzaghe and Calderon from your list. And it really that's not hard to do. While they may be HOF I can't for the life of me make a case for any of them being ATG's. And that bothers me saying that about Rosario. But it is what it is. A couple of fighters absent from your list that I feel are without a doubt ATG's are Pernell Whitaker, Ricardo Lopez, Juan Manuel Marquez, Ike Williams, Eusebio Pedroza, Carlos Zarate and Bob Foster. I understand Boxings had many great fighters. And there's always gonna be some left out of some lists. But really I'm always shocked when I see Whitaker and Lopez left off.

[IamInuit]

Thats your opinion and you are welcome to it. I guess I'm out of my mind. Brilliant response.

Some of them have been discussed in countless debates. I don't need to go over them again. So how about you be kind enough and tell what makes Jeff Fenech an ATG

I said from the the start that this topic is subjective and people might disagree. So I'll just leave it at that. He's in the hall of fame and is a three division champion. Again like I said I made my list and never expected it to be perfect.

So who are the other ATG's since Sullivan iyo? Run down your list since 1879.

You got most of them them. So there's no need to repeat them. I already stated I would exclude Patterson, Buchanan, Rosario, Fenech, Calzaghe and Calderon from your list. And it really that's not hard to do. While they may be HOF I can't for the life of me make a case for any of them being ATG's. And that bothers me saying that about Rosario. But it is what it is. A couple of fighters absent from your list that I feel are without a doubt ATG's are Pernell Whitaker, Ricardo Lopez, Juan Manuel Marquez, Ike Williams, Eusebio Pedroza, Carlos Zarate and Bob Foster. I understand Boxings had many great fighters. And there's always gonna be some left out of some lists. But really I'm always shocked when I see Whitaker and Lopez left off.

Fair enough.

[Mr140]

Atg list are hard I mean to me Ali should be rated above Robinson. I said this before and say it again if you are heavyweight champion of the world means he could beat pretty much anybody. Since Ali is probably rated best heavyweight in the history of sport then I think he is greatest not Robinson. I have few other things i look at when trying to figure who i consider a atg but i will have to get back to you.

[rjj tszyu]

Not in any particular order

-Titles, particularly lineal ones
-resume
-dominance
-how good were the opponents? And did they have something left at the time? And the conditions.
-Accomplishments

For instance I do not consider Aaron Pryor an all time great. Why? Resume. I see it as weak with just a faded Arguello fighting a few divisions from his very best weight. I don't consider Kostya Tszyu an atg another long reigning 140 champ either with just a past prime JCC on his record. I also don't consider Wlad an atg also even if he reigns the division another 2 years. Resume is very important. Now I consider all 3 as hall of famers but not atgs. That's just a different class, imo.

I believe if all 5 of the criteria are met then they are an atg in my eyes. It's just very subjective. Although someone like Roy Jones does not have a lineal title but he is an atg in my eyes because of the other factors he's met.

Roy Jones was THE man and Lineal champion at 175. He held and defended 6 different alphabet titles at the same time. Now that is what I call unification. The only reason he didn't get the WBO is because Michalczewski wouldn't leave Germany and Roy wouldn't leave the U.S. But he would have easily beaten him.

Let's not forget he was at the Hill v RJJ fight sitting ringside...

I didn't know that. No wonder the fight never happened then, Roy hit Hill that hard it sounded like a shot gun had gone off and if I remember correctly I think that shot broke 2 of Hills ribs! Awesome power.

[JonesJrMayweather]

Not in any particular order

-Titles, particularly lineal ones
-resume
-dominance
-how good were the opponents? And did they have something left at the time? And the conditions.
-Accomplishments

For instance I do not consider Aaron Pryor an all time great. Why? Resume. I see it as weak with just a faded Arguello fighting a few divisions from his very best weight. I don't consider Kostya Tszyu an atg another long reigning 140 champ either with just a past prime JCC on his record. I also don't consider Wlad an atg also even if he reigns the division another 2 years. Resume is very important. Now I consider all 3 as hall of famers but not atgs. That's just a different class, imo.

I believe if all 5 of the criteria are met then they are an atg in my eyes. It's just very subjective. Although someone like Roy Jones does not have a lineal title but he is an atg in my eyes because of the other factors he's met.

Roy Jones was THE man and Lineal champion at 175. He held and defended 6 different alphabet titles at the same time. Now that is what I call unification. The only reason he didn't get the WBO is because Michalczewski wouldn't leave Germany and Roy wouldn't leave the U.S. But he would have easily beaten him.

Let's not forget he was at the Hill v RJJ fight sitting ringside...

I didn't know that. No wonder the fight never happened then, Roy hit Hill that hard it sounded like a shot gun had gone off and if I remember correctly I think that shot broke 2 of Hills ribs! Awesome power.

Roy said "He came to see me stop Virgil Hill, why couldn't he come to fight me? He saw that body shot then hauled ass back over there".....

I remember the broadcast when they showed DM in the crowd before the fight. Which is why I don't give any credit to the "roy dodged DM" argument. In fact, i think what DM saw is the same thing Eubank, JC, Collins, Benn, all saw. The only one i think was truly willing to face Jones was Benn and he would have been game but obliterated by RJJ.

[marbleheadmaui]

Atg list are hard I mean to me Ali should be rated above Robinson. I said this before and say it again if you are heavyweight champion of the world means he could beat pretty much anybody. Since Ali is probably rated best heavyweight in the history of sport then I think he is greatest not Robinson. I have few other things i look at when trying to figure who i consider a atg but i will have to get back to you.

Yeah but if we do it that way? Robinson isn't second, he's more like 100th. I mean does Ray beat Wladimir Klitschko? Well maybe he does but is THAT the comparisons we want to make? Where size is everything?

Boxing has been broken into divisions for 150 years for a reason hasn't it?

[Mr140]

Yea i not saying every heavyweight but i mean the elite Heavys to me i would rank higher then other weight classes. I mean thats why pound for pound for me is kinda stupid thing to do as well.

[marbleheadmaui]

Yea i not saying every heavyweight but i mean the elite Heavys to me i would rank higher then other weight classes. I mean thats why pound for pound for me is kinda stupid thing to do as well.

No that's exactly why p4p makes any sense at all. Because otherwise size alone (or nearly) governs.

Let me try it another way. Who is stronger? 340 pound Hossein Reza Zadeh who can put 1.8x his bodyweight over his head or 132 pound Naseem Souleymanolou who can put 3x his weight over his head?

Doesn't that latter deserve at some kind of recognition?

[Mr140]

Got a point Robinson and Ali is the only one that never really sat right with me. The greatest Heavyweight of all time is not the greatest fighter of all time just sounds silly to me when i think about it.

[marbleheadmaui]

Got a point Robinson and Ali is the only one that never really sat right with me. The greatest Heavyweight of all time is not the greatest fighter of all time just sounds silly to me when i think about it.

In his autobiography Ray Robinson tells a great story about he and Joe Louis when both were serving in the Army during WWII. I don't recall what caused the spat but Robinson got so angry he was ready to throw hands with Louis. And then he says reason overtook him

[fan johnny]

The test of time!

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

My take on ATG's is almost entirely resume driven. I think there are basically two paths

1) Take on great fighters, fight them repeatedly, and beat them more than they beat you. That's how men like Greb and Robinson and Ali and Gans and Ray and Benny Leonard earned it.

2) But if there is a dearth of great fighters in or around your division? You find every conceivable challenge, take it on and lose very, very rarely. That's how Joe Louis, Marvin Hagler, Miguel Canto and Ricardo Lopez earned it.

Things that I think add weight to a given fighter's case are long, high quality, title reigns as THE MAN, multiple title reigns as THE MAN, overall number of wins and activity level and limited bad losses.

Now I almost always only consider a fighter's extended prime. From when he faced his first contender until when he could no longer compete there. A long prime, measured in fights, says a lot. A short one does too.

The last factor for me is really intangible. I want to see the man tested, how he responds to great adversity. That means daring matchmaking and a vibrant struggle in the face of what seems to be a losing battle.

Three things for me count little, if at all. Fighting style, alphabet stuff and early or late losses.

FWIW

I'm guessing by your criteria a fighter like Mike Tyson does not qualify for atg? Because many hardcore boxing fans considers him one of the greats. So what's your take on him?

Tyson was youngest champion, 9 defences and had world wide appeal for his speed and brutal punching. Yes probably does not qualitfy for ATG but neither does Holmes and I would consider him to be an ATG.

Mike is definitely an ATG Heavyweight, but I'm not sure if he is an ATG boxer... I mean, if I had to make a list of 100 boxers, he probably wouldn't make my list.

But Mike did some great things for Heavyweight boxing man. I mean, he was a Saviour in a way that no one has/ had ever been before.

[CutMeMick]

That I can think of in no particular order;

- Titles
- Reign
- Opposition
- Longevity

These of course stretch into other things Titles> Lineal> Ring...
Also Opposition> Era/Competion available> Champions he fought...

Again you can break a shit load of these into different one. But for me these 4 pretty much cover it all. The more you dig the more you'll cover.