Quote Originally Posted by CutMeMick View Post
One thing about me is that I won't bother listing guys whom I've not seen enough footage of to comment. I can't call you an ATG just based on what I can only read.
It's a known fact that writers back in the days were known to stretch things out.

I've also mentioned this before but I also remember reading a report on a SRR fight by 2 different writers during his career in the 1940s and the 2 writers told almost 2 different fights it was like they both had seen 2 different fights, now mind you this was in the 40s now imagine articles/reports from the 1800's & early 1900's? These guys could exaggerate and write just about anything. I don't argue the fact that they werent great fighters like Greb, Loughran, McVea you name them but how do we REALLY know these writters didn't exaggerate? I'm sure they would have a field day depicting fights and fighters. Til this day, what sells? Big stories. Lies. It was 10x worst then, that's how you sell something on paper. You put a huge headline and fill in a great story even if means lying.

Which is why I would just rather stick to fighters I've seen fights of or at least enough footage to be able to rate them. It's just my opinion and how I rate fighters. I can't compare a fighter I've seen vs. A fighter I've only read about. That to me is impossible and I refuse to go by someone elses words. I'd rather let my own eyes and mind decide.
With that being said;

SRR
Armstrong
Ali
Duran
Monzon
JCC
Alexis
Ezzard
Canzoneri
Harada
Emile
Carlos Ortiz
SRL
Hagler
Hearns
Lopez
Napoles
Ike Williams
Pep
Louis
Lennox
Dempsey
Kid Gavilan
Kid Chocolate
Sanchez
Olivares
Pernell
Holmes
Marciano
Moore
Jofre
Bob Foster
Dick Tiger
Canto
Galaxy
Oba
Nelson
Gomez
Trinidad
Pedroza

- A guy that often get's a bit overlooked for my likings Hilario Zapata this dude fought some of the best names available won multiple titles and losing didn't mean a thing. He would come back and win again. I think he got the short end of the stick in the rematch with Bassa and the Laciar fight was a coin toss for me it could have gone either way. Even with that though I think he's an ATG.

More recent names who are still active somewhat... ODLH, RJJ, Hopkins, Holyfield, MAB and Erik...
You REALLY need to understand the newspaper world of pre-television. New York alone had over a dozen daily newspapers. The competition was fierce and boxing was one of only two major sports. The idea that a sports writer in that era could have just manufactured stuff and survived is lunacy. In addition, the notion that all we have is are newspaper accounts is also very, very wrong. We have interviews with trainers, judges, referees and fighters that give one an awfully good comprehensive pictures. We have well researched books as well. The idea that the above can't be critically compared and cross referenced to get near the truth is insupportable I think. And finally the idea we don't have extensive footage is just wrong. I own over a thousand fights that pre-date 1950.

Let me ask you a question. When you read military history do you refuse to think about Cesar or Alexander or Robert E Lee because there is no footage? Do you reject studying Shakespear because you can't see the plays as they were performed in the author's day? Are you unwilling to form an opinion on Lincoln's political acument because you can't see him delivering the Gettysburrg Address or the Second Inaugural?

It's up to you of course, but your starting point puzzles me.