The 20 greatest fighters of all time imo

[deucesarewild]

Everyone excluding the likely no.1 fighter of his era ..sam langford

Greb had time to fight tunney multiple times but like jack johnson, dempsey, tunney and co

When it came to fighting Langford, those fights are still marinating or something.

Some guys were worse offenders than others, but whilst the 20's gave some great entertainment, it could be considered the asterick era.

Naw man, too much going on. Anyway, Langford was routinely fighting at HW near the end of his career while Greb was still fighting at MW routinely during that time or trying to fight the LHW champ for the belt he won, or fighting contenders to get back at it (of which Langford was not one). You literally can't fight everyone. It would be like criticizing Hagler for not fighting Mike McCallum.

Langford might be one of my favourite fighters ever but you pick one name and don't flip it for some reason. Why didn't Langford fight Greb? One started their career a decade later. Greb was routinely a 168 LHW at most by then. Langford was already fighting at higher weights.

Would I have loved to know those two fought? Yes. Did it happen? No. Was Greb ducking? Just as much as Langford. And since neither guy avoided fighters and always pursued tough fights it's one of those matches that didn't line up due to different career dates and when they fought and in what weight classes.

 

[deucesarewild]

All I know is that much of Grebs notoriety is tied to that win over Tunney. I think it gets more attention than Tunneys wins over Dempsey.

All you know is nothing then because you can't accept when you are wrong, and yet you say you've read everything on Greb (you say you've read everything I've read, but you haven't). You can't even read and thorough post full of accurate information. In this case you are an overconfident poster of content to which you are ignorant. You peddle nonsense to others and you won't learn. Just be calm down about it, bro.

 

[kenji goh]

It seems we are really unlucky not being able to watch him fight.

 

[Ivancho]

Just saw this list...
I’ll have to examine in detail more later this evening.
Not so sure, at first glance.
What ya’ll think?

that list is garbage! lennox lewis 17? lol the same guy who got KTFO by a bum like rahman, holmes should be ahead, marciano has better record than frazier, joe louis should be on top 3..Where the f-- is james toney?

 

[Seano]

Naw man, too much going on. Anyway, Langford was routinely fighting at HW near the end of his career while Greb was still fighting at MW routinely during that time or trying to fight the LHW champ for the belt he won, or fighting contenders to get back at it (of which Langford was not one). You literally can't fight everyone. It would be like criticizing Hagler for not fighting Mike McCallum.

Langford might be one of my favourite fighters ever but you pick one name and don't flip it for some reason. Why didn't Langford fight Greb? One started their career a decade later. Greb was routinely a 168 LHW at most by then. Langford was already fighting at higher weights.

Would I have loved to know those two fought? Yes. Did it happen? No. Was Greb ducking? Just as much as Langford. And since neither guy avoided fighters and always pursued tough fights it's one of those matches that didn't line up due to different career dates and when they fought and in what weight classes.

Greb could have fought Langford at any point from 1921 on. There's a lot of fluff opponents on his resume where he could have fought a bigger name.

 

[Seano]

All you know is nothing then because you can't accept when you are wrong, and yet you say you've read everything on Greb (you say you've read everything I've read, but you haven't). You can't even read and thorough post full of accurate information. In this case you are an overconfident poster of content to which you are ignorant. You peddle nonsense to others and you won't learn. Just be calm down about it, bro.

I don't hold that era in as high regard as you. Stop being a baby.

 

[XThe GreatestX]

I am trying to now think of who the next 5 would be since this thread seems popular.

and I think it's pretty hard actually lol.

i'd imagine Julio Cesar Chavez is somewhere in there. Marvin Hagler is probably in there. Holmes, Foreman, Emile, Napoles, Tunney probably

would be in there

 

[Jonny Ninja]

Greb lost two "up in the air" decisions that could have gone either way to a guy he beat when he had ONE eye.

In a one belt, 8 division era most fighters won't get the spotlight you are used to seeing. Charlos would be your Mike McTigues (MAYBE). Danny Jacobs would be a Jimmy Slattery (MAYBE). If this were 100 years ago, GGG and Danny would have fought 4 times by now. Canelo wouldn't have clenbuterol, and the long breaks between fights to matchmake. It's the same sport but very different. Tommy Loughran and Tunney would be champs today at LHW, and, if they had modern sports science, they would both be champs, maybe avoiding each other in order to keep undefeated records in this douchebag era. Sam Langford would demolish anyone from 154 to 175 in today's divisions. Today we have 16 divisions and at least 4 major titles in each, several of which have diamond and interim status. This is the reason you are diminishing so many legitimate boxers from over a century ago. They constantly fought without any champ recognition, so even really good fighters would get overlooked by casuals today. If you quadruple the chances that all those names get belts, just going from 1 to 4, then multiply further by doubling weight divisions, you see that there were fewer opportunities for so many of these guys back in the 20's who would be champs by today's standards.

With more belts and divisions you would have more cherry picking, too. Also, fighters fought more back then. You're bound to have an off night. A guy like Floyd would have lost numerous times if he had their schedule and if there was only one belt. It' the way it goes. You will take more losses fighting more, especially with Greb's resume listed above.

One should not apply the 21st century boxing landscape to the 1920's. Not one of today's fighters would have a better resume if they fought in Greb's division or LHW back then.

wasn’t the SD and draw with Tunney hotly disputed? From accounts I’ve read the SD was a straight up robbery!
I’m not too clued up on the old timers. I certainly don't claim to be a boxing historian but Greb is one I’ve always been interested in. A natural WW fighting, and beating top fighters at lhw. Tunney was fckin huge in comparison and could’ve lost 3 of the five fights. And as you say, he had one eye. Incredible fighter

 

[Pecker123]

I have nothing to go on other than the fighters I have seen

SRR
SRL
DURAN
HEARNS
HAGLER
ALI
MANNY
FLOYD
ROY JJ
LENNOX
DEMPSEY
WALCOTT
ARMSTRONG

I don't know sit about Joe Flower Tiger in 1903. But I can see Dempseys record and he was a hell a fighter.

Based purely on what I have seen and heard these are my top 15. In no particular order.

 

[deucesarewild]

wasn’t the SD and draw with Tunney hotly disputed? From accounts I’ve read the SD was a straight up robbery!
I’m not too clued up on the old timers. I certainly don't claim to be a boxing historian but Greb is one I’ve always been interested in. A natural WW fighting, and beating top fighters at lhw. Tunney was fckin huge in comparison and could’ve lost 3 of the five fights. And as you say, he had one eye. Incredible fighter

You are right. Very close fights.
1 was for Greb easy.
2. Should have been a Greb win by accounts of a strong majority. There was the draw. The last seemed to be a clear Tunney win, but he was filled out at HW by then.

 

[burningspear]

awful. Floyd at 39 and Manny at 11? lmao. Hagler, JCC, Dempsey, Holmes, FRAIZER all about Floyd? One of the worst lists I have ever seen

https://www.ringnews24.com/2020/07/...eer-to-floyd-mayweather-jr-says-buddy-mcgirt/
Floyd is too low but he doesnt necessarily go ahead of Pac.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

https://www.ringnews24.com/2020/07/...eer-to-floyd-mayweather-jr-says-buddy-mcgirt/
Floyd is too low but he doesnt necessarily go ahead of Pac.

I don't see how Manny is higher, but I guess some to buy into any argument vs Floy.

Not only did Floyd beat him, but he aint dropping fights to Jeff Horn or Tim Bradley (yes I know people think he won both of them), or getting KTFO. Manny had a great run from 2003-2010, but even in that time he dropped a loss to Morales, drew with JMM, and had fights with JMM many thought he lost, eventually being KTFO. I guess you can say through 2011 if you give him a lot of credit for the Mosley win. Then he went 9-4, with one of those wins being a close fight with JMM that most thought JMM won.

Floyd fought only championship fights since 1998, outside of Augustus and Connah. Manny was getting stopped in the 3rd round by a no name in 1999.

I will admit that Manny MAYBE has a win or two on his resume that are better than Floyd's, but he also has 7 losses.

 

[deucesarewild]

I don't see how Manny is higher, but I guess some to buy into any argument vs Floy.

Not only did Floyd beat him, but he aint dropping fights to Jeff Horn or Tim Bradley (yes I know people think he won both of them), or getting KTFO. Manny had a great run from 2003-2010, but even in that time he dropped a loss to Morales, drew with JMM, and had fights with JMM many thought he lost, eventually being KTFO. I guess you can say through 2011 if you give him a lot of credit for the Mosley win. Then he went 9-4, with one of those wins being a close fight with JMM that most thought JMM won.

Floyd fought only championship fights since 1998, outside of Augustus and Connah. Manny was getting stopped in the 3rd round by a no name in 1999.

I will admit that Manny MAYBE has a win or two on his resume that are better than Floyd's, but he also has 7 losses.

I actually rate Floyd ahead of Manny only because he beat Manny. I think that Manny's resume is arguably a tougher one. Does that mean Floyd would have performed as Manny did? No, not necessarily. Floyd is great at adjusting to his opponent and his mental stamina and resilience to keep steady for 12 rounds are top notch. Also, Floyd also beat an old Manny. People say, "yeah well Floyd is older," but Floyd's style ages way better. Joe Frazier wasn't going to be re-winning HW titles at Foreman's age. Manny never looked the form he was in after that Margarito fight. There are many reasons that Floyd and Manny didn't fight until 2015, and Manny's style aging worse is definitely one of the reasons in the list. The win is a win though and that counts for something.

 

[burningspear]

@cottagecheesefan Yeah the head to head probably tips it to Floyd but many of the greats have a number of losses and pac's career just seemed more spectacular, less micro managed. I was just saying I wouldn't be surprised if Pac was rated above Floyd as time goes by. Floyd is laughably low on this particular list though.

 

[Seano]

I don't see how Manny is higher, but I guess some to buy into any argument vs Floy.

Not only did Floyd beat him, but he aint dropping fights to Jeff Horn or Tim Bradley (yes I know people think he won both of them), or getting KTFO. Manny had a great run from 2003-2010, but even in that time he dropped a loss to Morales, drew with JMM, and had fights with JMM many thought he lost, eventually being KTFO. I guess you can say through 2011 if you give him a lot of credit for the Mosley win. Then he went 9-4, with one of those wins being a close fight with JMM that most thought JMM won.

Floyd fought only championship fights since 1998, outside of Augustus and Connah. Manny was getting stopped in the 3rd round by a no name in 1999.

I will admit that Manny MAYBE has a win or two on his resume that are better than Floyd's, but he also has 7 losses.

Agreed. People act like that 0 at the end of Floyds resume ain't shit but that was after a decade + of fighting championship caliber fighters.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

Agreed. People act like that 0 at the end of Floyds resume ain't shit but that was after a decade + of fighting championship caliber fighters.

Plus it isnt like Manny timed fights either or had some easy ones. Even like Morales, he BEAT Pac after going to war twice with Barrera. Then Morales had the war with pac (won), and then lost to Raheem.

There are so many ways to nit* pick a resume, but Floyd had championship fights for almost two decades.

Like manny didnt cherry pick? Clottey had just lost, Margarito had just got wrecked and the glove scandal, Oscar was at 147 and way past it, Hatton already broken and know drug addict, shane already lost to floyd. It goes on and on. Yet people act like Floyd is the only one who does this.

Plus MAB and Morales already had been in how many wars.

JMM got the draw, a brutal KO, and 2 super close DEC.

Like what about any of that is better than floyd? One close fight with Castillo? I think he won that anyways.

 

[XThe GreatestX]

Plus it isnt like Manny timed fights either or had some easy ones. Even like Morales, he BEAT Pac after going to war twice with Barrera. Then Morales had the war with pac (won), and then lost to Raheem.

There are so many ways to nit* pick a resume, but Floyd had championship fights for almost two decades.

Like manny didnt cherry pick? Clottey had just lost, Margarito had just got wrecked and the glove scandal, Oscar was at 147 and way past it, Hatton already broken and know drug addict, shane already lost to floyd. It goes on and on. Yet people act like Floyd is the only one who does this.

Plus MAB and Morales already had been in how many wars.

JMM got the draw, a brutal KO, and 2 super close DEC.

Like what about any of that is better than floyd? One close fight with Castillo? I think he won that anyways.

this is just my opinion

but I think Manny has better wins than Floyd

the reason I rank Floyd higher is Manny's losses

 

[cottagecheesefan]

this is just my opinion

but I think Manny has better wins than Floyd

the reason I rank Floyd higher is Manny's losses

This is similar to what I was saying that Manny might have better wins, but overall Floyd wins.

But I also think that Chico, Canelo, Hatton, and Mosley wins stand up to all of Pac's, considering timing, and the opposition's career in context.

Then be just has a dozen of other top tier wins over different opposition. Not just fighting the same competition in extended tri/quidlogies, dropping losses, or fighting gimmies/people coming off loses.

 

[XThe GreatestX]

This is similar to what I was saying that Manny might have better wins, but overall Floyd wins.

But I also think that Chico, Canelo, Hatton, and Mosley wins stand up to all of Pac's, considering timing, and the opposition's career in context.

Then be just has a dozen of other top tier wins over different opposition. Not just fighting the same competition in extended tri/quidlogies, dropping losses, or fighting gimmies/people coming off loses.

The only things I would disagree on is I am not as high on Chico Corrales as most

in addition, I actually thought Pac blasting Hatton at 140 as opposed to 147 where Hatton struggled with Collazo was also more impressive

And I think the Morales/Barrera wins for Pac are what pushes him over the edge imo wins wise

 

[cottagecheesefan]

The only things I would disagree on is I am not as high on Chico Corrales as most

in addition, I actually thought Pac blasting Hatton at 140 as opposed to 147 where Hatton struggled with Collazo was also more impressive

And I think the Morales/Barrera wins for Pac are what pushes him over the edge imo wins wise

True, that is why I give people the OK, I understand when they say Pac has better wins. But then, as we agree, the losses.