The 20 greatest fighters of all time imo

His resume is 95% tomato cans. People make a big deal of him having so many fights, but who were most of those guys? He beat Tunney once but does Tunney really rate that high for anyone? Who else did he beat? Loughran? No one that a dozen other guys also beat.

Aside from sheer volume of opponents, his resume is not that great.
Walker
Loughran
Tunney
McTigue
Levinsky
Miske
Norfolk
Johnny Wilson (middleweight champ)
Rosenbloom
Slattery
Flowers
Gibbons
Moody
Jeff Smith


i gotta say i think that’s a damn fine resume
 
Hopkins-- no, for the already stated reasons. His most resounding top wins were against guys who were 2 weight classes below him. And Canzoneri def belongs in the top 20 not just for his resume and the eye test, but for his influence.

And not to derail the thread but: I rewatched Floyd v. DLH last night... Floyd won that fight but it was close, and left me thoroughly unimpressed. I'd flip Duran above Floyd, cause idgaf what anybody says, the Big 4 (Hearns, Hagler, Leonard, Duran) would have wiped the floor with either Floyd or Oscar.

Oscar had no ideas, no initiative, and Floyd had no ambition, no killer instinct. Floyd/De La Hoya has to be one of the most overrated big fights ever.
Again it kinda depends on how you define resounding wins

he dominated pavlik and tarver. He humiliated oscar and tito

and tbh. If we look at the old timers. You get a lot of welterweight vs middleweight matchups as there was no 154

so i am not gonma dock him for that in this discussion
 
Again it kinda depends on how you define resounding wins

he dominated pavlik and tarver. He humiliated oscar and tito

and tbh. If we look at the old timers. You get a lot of welterweight vs middleweight matchups as there was no 154

so i am not gonma dock him for that in this discussion

Fairplay. Forgot about the Tarver win. That's a very good win. Only thing i'd say to the contrary is that besides that all his other quality wins were against much smaller guys and B level guys... a HOF resume for sure, but top the 20 all-time is the creme de la creme. I think Bhop is short of that.
 
Honestly think Greb is pretty overrated by everyone.

I am not trying to be insulting but you are not an aficionado of the sport if you do not understand the quality of his resume. Your failure to recognize the many names he fought from MW to HW does not mean they are not there.

Or you are trolling?

Let's look at just the guys that were contender or champ status (and not the rest of his resume):

Tiger Flowers
Jimmy Delaney
Maxie Rosenbloom
Mickey Walker
Gene Tunney
Tommy Loughran
Jimmy Slattery
Kid Norfolk
Tommy Gibbons
Gunboat Smith
Mike McTigue
Battling Levinsky
Bill Brennan
Mike Gibbons
Billy Miske
Willie Meehan
Jack Dillon
Jack Blackburn

Jesus Christ, the more I read his resume, the more impressed I am he doesn't have more losses. He fought some of them five times, four times, three times. It's insane how often he routinely rematched top 5 guys or contenders (in an era with ONE belt) in three different weight classes.

If you factor in the number of times he fought each of the above guys, he has as many or more fights than the entire resume of many pros of today, AND his record is better. Nobody, and I mean nobody walks through that list undefeated in boxing. Ever.

He has literally ZERO ducks on his resume in two weight classes (against fighters that would become champs or contenders at HW).

Cans?

Are you half-blind?

Oh, no, sorry, Harry Greb was blind in ONE EYE and still fought killers from the second Norfolk fight in 1921 to his death in '26. He only lost to Tunney 3x, Loughran 1x, Norfolk 1x, and Flowers 2x (both which many saw as wins for him) in that time. That makes him with 90 fights and only 7 losses when he was half blind. Those losses during the half blind years of his life are against guys that campaigned at heavyweight and Greb was a natural middleweight and he BEAT those guys on other nights in the same time period.

All he fought was cans? Read a book.
 
Fairplay. Forgot about the Tarver win. That's a very good win. Only thing i'd say to the contrary is that besides that all his other quality wins were against much smaller guys and B level guys... a HOF resume for sure, but top the 20 all-time is the creme de la creme. I think Bhop is short of that.
that's fair

who would you replace him with?
 
Hopkin’s best wins were against two welterweights

True two of his best wins were against WW's, but not ALL. Remember also, he was a 3 to 1 underdog against Tito. At the time many people wrote off Hopkins, but he turned in a dominating performance.
 
that's fair

who would you replace him with?

Man... i'd have to really think about it. I took another look at your list, and i'd have to find a place for RJJ over Bhop. His prime didn't last as long and he'd fought much too long but in his prime he burned much brighter and reached far higher than Hopkins, which i think should count. I'd also consider Chavez sr, Sweet Pea... for what it's worth i'd probably have Hopkins no less than top 40 (p4p of course) if i really sat down and listed it. His skills were undeniable and would translate to any era.
 
I am not trying to be insulting but you are not an aficionado of the sport if you do not understand the quality of his resume. Your failure to recognize the many names he fought from MW to HW does not mean they are not there.

Or you are trolling?

Let's look at just the guys that were contender or champ status (and not the rest of his resume):

Tiger Flowers
Jimmy Delaney
Maxie Rosenbloom
Mickey Walker
Gene Tunney
Tommy Loughran
Jimmy Slattery
Kid Norfolk
Tommy Gibbons
Gunboat Smith
Mike McTigue
Battling Levinsky
Bill Brennan
Mike Gibbons
Billy Miske
Willie Meehan
Jack Dillon
Jack Blackburn

Jesus Christ, the more I read his resume, the more impressed I am he doesn't have more losses. He fought some of them five times, four times, three times. It's insane how often he routinely rematched top 5 guys or contenders (in an era with ONE belt) in three different weight classes.

If you factor in the number of times he fought each of the above guys, he has as many or more fights than the entire resume of many pros of today, AND his record is better. Nobody, and I mean nobody walks through that list undefeated in boxing. Ever.

He has literally ZERO ducks on his resume in two weight classes (against fighters that would become champs or contenders at HW).

Cans?

Are you half-blind?

Oh, no, sorry, Harry Greb was blind in ONE EYE and still fought killers from the second Norfolk fight in 1921 to his death in '26. He only lost to Tunney 3x, Loughran 1x, Norfolk 1x, and Flowers 2x (both which many saw as wins for him) in that time. That makes him with 90 fights and only 7 losses when he was half blind. Those losses during the half blind years of his life are against guys that campaigned at heavyweight and Greb was a natural middleweight and he BEAT those guys on other nights in the same time period.

All he fought was cans? Read a book.
Don't know if you've read Smokestack Lightning by Springs Toledo but it's a great account of Harry Greb and specifically his 1919 when he fought 45 times without a loss. It also goes into some good detail about Harry's relentlessly trying to get a fight with Jack Dempsey, beating the top Heavyweight contenders only for Dempsey to pick the men Greb had just beaten. Going so far as to challenge Dempsey to a series of fights in whatever gym he was in at the time
 
Don't know if you've read Smokestack Lightning by Springs Toledo but it's a great account of Harry Greb and specifically his 1919 when he fought 45 times without a loss. It also goes into some good detail about Harry's relentlessly trying to get a fight with Jack Dempsey, beating the top Heavyweight contenders only for Dempsey to pick the men Greb had just beaten. Going so far as to challenge Dempsey to a series of fights in whatever gym he was in at the time

I have the book, but I have to get through some Hemingway first, then I'll be reading Smokestack Lightning, and then A Tale of Two Fists which is Damon Runyon's writing on Dempsey.
 
So, why is it then that every historian across the board has Pep as a lock for the top 10 then? Nostalgia?
Quite a few do lists based on who they think was the most talented or skilled

Which pep is certainly a candidate for the top 10-15 on that sorta list
 
True two of his best wins were against WW's, but not ALL. Remember also, he was a 3 to 1 underdog against Tito. At the time many people wrote off Hopkins, but he turned in a dominating performance.
So now the question is, did the Trinidad and Oscar wins enhance Hopkins’ legacy??

I think so.

Most consecutive title defenses at middleweight and oldest boxing champ are enough to cement a legacy and a record that’s not going be broken anytime soon just shows that no one really cared for Hopkins before or after the Tito and Oscar wins, literally no one gave a damn about him, I’ll give him a big nod for the Pavlik schooling, the Tarver win not so much, the rest of his opposition were just above average guys or past their primes.
 
Walker
Loughran
Tunney
McTigue
Levinsky
Miske
Norfolk
Johnny Wilson (middleweight champ)
Rosenbloom
Slattery
Flowers
Gibbons
Moody
Jeff Smith


i gotta say i think that’s a damn fine resume
Meh, I think its been surpassed many times over. He's a great fighter but I don't really think he belongs in the top 10 anymore. Too much credit for volume on his resume, IMO. Some of those guys you listed are best known for losing to great fighters and Flowers won 2 out of 3 vs Greb. I think nostalgia plays too big a factor in rating some of those guys.
 
I have the book, but I have to get through some Hemingway first, then I'll be reading Smokestack Lightning, and then A Tale of Two Fists which is Damon Runyon's writing on Dempsey.

It's truly a great read, actually all 4 of his books are tremendous but none quite as good as the book covering Murderer's Row.

I also just picked up A Tale of Two Fists but haven't started it yet. I'm in the middle of a book on Cuban boxing.
 
Quite a few do lists based on who they think was the most talented or skilled

Which pep is certainly a candidate for the top 10-15 on that sorta list
All-time lists are rarely compiled just on résumé alone. It's usually a combination of résumé, dominance, longevity, quality performances, and so on. But, even if all you're comparing is résumé, quite a few fighters you have in your Top 20 don't have better résumés than Pep. I mean, many of them don't even have a signature win the quality of a Sandy Saddler on there. Again, Pep is rated as a consensus Top 10 ATG and his résumé is a major factor in why he's ranked so highly by historians and researchers (like the International Boxing Research Organization). Somehow Lewis and Hopkins made your list over Pep which makes no sense at all to me.
 
I am not trying to be insulting but you are not an aficionado of the sport if you do not understand the quality of his resume. Your failure to recognize the many names he fought from MW to HW does not mean they are not there.

Or you are trolling?

Let's look at just the guys that were contender or champ status (and not the rest of his resume):

Tiger Flowers
Jimmy Delaney
Maxie Rosenbloom
Mickey Walker
Gene Tunney
Tommy Loughran
Jimmy Slattery
Kid Norfolk
Tommy Gibbons
Gunboat Smith
Mike McTigue
Battling Levinsky
Bill Brennan
Mike Gibbons
Billy Miske
Willie Meehan
Jack Dillon
Jack Blackburn

Jesus Christ, the more I read his resume, the more impressed I am he doesn't have more losses. He fought some of them five times, four times, three times. It's insane how often he routinely rematched top 5 guys or contenders (in an era with ONE belt) in three different weight classes.

If you factor in the number of times he fought each of the above guys, he has as many or more fights than the entire resume of many pros of today, AND his record is better. Nobody, and I mean nobody walks through that list undefeated in boxing. Ever.

He has literally ZERO ducks on his resume in two weight classes (against fighters that would become champs or contenders at HW).

Cans?

Are you half-blind?

Oh, no, sorry, Harry Greb was blind in ONE EYE and still fought killers from the second Norfolk fight in 1921 to his death in '26. He only lost to Tunney 3x, Loughran 1x, Norfolk 1x, and Flowers 2x (both which many saw as wins for him) in that time. That makes him with 90 fights and only 7 losses when he was half blind. Those losses during the half blind years of his life are against guys that campaigned at heavyweight and Greb was a natural middleweight and he BEAT those guys on other nights in the same time period.

All he fought was cans? Read a book.
I've read all the literature one Greb, the exact same stuff you have. Get off your high horse. You literally never even saw him fight. I also never said "all he fought was cans." Save the hyperbole and hysterics for someone else. I said 90% of his resume is tomato cans because it is. He had nearly 120 fights.
I simply don't hold that era in high regard.
He lost 2 of 3 against Flowers,split a series with Tunney and I don't see anyone rating either of those guys that high. Does anyone really rate Billy Miske? You know why people rate Miske at all? Because he beat Greb. I don't care for how we rate guys like Greb. Losses mean nothing but the modern guys they get compared to are defined by them and they're place in history seems based on how many recognizable names are on their resume. Doesn't really matter if most of them were just punching bags to the greats.

Cool stories shouldn't really factor into an all time ranking either.
 
So, why is it then that every historian across the board has Pep as a lock for the top 10 then? Nostalgia?
Nostalgia is part of it. Not wanting to be the first guy to knock him off the list is another. There was a time when Pep had a legit claim as one of the top guys in history. I mean, he's still a great fighter but do you honestly believe no one has come along since he retired that beat more quality opponents and accomplished more overall?
If I were talking to a boxing historian and said say, Manny Pacquiao had done more he'd get all snide and tell me a story about how Pep fought with a broken back or won a round without punching. People believe these stories should factor into how great a guys resume is.
 
Back
Top