Your Top Ten - EVER!

Posted a top ten Brits ever thread a bit ago so thought as that was such a roaring success (it hit double figures, some of us set the bar a little lower than most) thought I would continue the theme and ask for everyone’s top ten ever. I know this has been done countless times but it has been a while and is always nice to get our newer users opinions.

If we could resist the temptation to avoid turning this into the oft repeated and in no way tired or dull old vs new debate that would be much appreciated, although I won’t hold my breath on that one. Will do mine to get the ball roling.

1 Robinson
2 Armstrong
3 Greb
4 Ali
5 Langford
6 Charles
7 Fitzsimmons
8 Leonard (Ray)
9 Duran
10 Leonard (Benny)

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. Ali
4. Louis
5. Duran
6. Pep
7. Leonard (Benny)
8. Greb
9. Johnson
10. Leonard (Ray)

Johnson Haz, can only hope that is Harold and not Jack!

With me being a new member of the boxing community (my first live fight being Frank Brunos win against McCall in 95), i will struggle. These may seem like odd choices as i do not recall back as far as Johnson/Robinson etc etc.

1. Robinson (always on ESPN US and voted as greatest ever - seen some brilliant stuff)
2. Ali
3. Louis
4. Leonard
5. Mayweather
6. Duran
7. Langford
8. Fitzsimmons
9. Hagler
10. Hopkins

1. Ali
2. Robinson
3. Leonard
4. Armstrong
5. Pep
6. Mayweather
7. Benny Leonard
8. Greb
9. Fitzsimmons
10. Jones jr.........

Boris.

No, Jack mate. Not a fan?

Jeff, I'm just wondering what the theory is behind having Ali 4th and then no place for in the Top 10 for Louis.

Rate Louis as the second best heavy strongy but just don’t see the level of opposition faced as sufficient to justify a top ten stop, longevity, consistency and ability count highly for him but every other fighter in the list has wins over other great fighters that I just don’t see in Louis’ record.

Haz, dislike Johnson immensely. Pioneer of the sport and hugely talented guy but his opposition during his reign was god awful. Could perhaps forgive that if they were the best available as the talent pool is often not that deep at heavy but when you are picking those guys over eminently more capable and available opponents it sticks in my craw personally.

1) Armstrong
2) Robinson
3) Greb
4) Charles
5) Ali
6) Fitzsimmons
7) Langford
8) Ray Leonard
9) Duran
10) Whitaker

With me being a new member of the boxing community (my first live fight being Frank Brunos win against McCall in 95), i will struggle. These may seem like odd choices as i do not recall back as far as Johnson/Robinson etc etc.

1. Robinson (always on ESPN US and voted as greatest ever - seen some brilliant stuff)
2. Ali
3. Louis
4. Leonard
5. Mayweather
6. Duran
7. Langford
8. Fitzsimmons
9. Hagler
10. Hopkins

1. Robinson
2.Greb
3. Ali
4. Charles
5. Armstrong
6. Fitzsimmons
7. Duran
8. Langford
9. Flintoff
10. Pep

is this who you rate who or who you like to watch?

Either Way, Tyson Fury is topping the list....

John Bloody Wayne wrote:
9. Flintoff

Nice John, you are going to love the next top ten, is pundits.

"His lips parted, revealing two rows of steel crushing teeth in a smile that softened the whole world. His huge, awesome face lit up and the sun glinted off his seemingly ubiquitous dome. 'My name is Ronald' he said."

That's the opening paragraph of the novel I'm writing. People keep telling me I won't get published if I write in crayon but I think the love scenes will convert any critics.

Why was his dome ubiquitous?

Other than that. Beautiful.

I’d buy it John, but I bought No Ordinary Joe so I would not take that as any guarantee of the books success.

"Your Top Ten - Ever"

Was that line aimed at me..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:"Your Top Ten - Ever"

Was that line aimed at me..

If you had written it, it would have been:

Your Top Ten..............Ever.........

Spend long enough on a forum with the same people your writing style will start to be influenced by them Truss, glad I deleted the additional four exclamation marks now.

1.Robinson
2.Ali
3.Louis
4.Pep
5.Duran
6.Ray Leonard
7.Johnson
8.Armstrong
9.Marciano
10.Hagler

"And if you gaze long enough into Ronald's dome, Ronald's dome gazes also into you." - Nietzsche

Haz, when confronted by it, it seems to be everywhere.

Hagler over Monzon..........in most lists..

John Bloody Wayne wrote:"And if you gaze long enough into Ronald's dome, Ronald's dome gazes also into you." - Nietzsche

Haz, when confronted by it, it seems to be everywhere.

Gonna have to be one hell of a pair of big stepladders to get up there[b]

Rowley wrote:Rate Louis as the second best heavy strongy but just don’t see the level of opposition faced as sufficient to justify a top ten stop, longevity, consistency and ability count highly for him but every other fighter in the list has wins over other great fighters that I just don’t see in Louis’ record.

I would see it that there is more to a fighters legacy than victories on a ledger. It's a bit too bookish for me. When I watch Louis I can see with my own eyes he was exceptional and in my opinion in the same bracket as Ali. Most ATG P4P lists don't separate Ali and Louis and I can see why. Louis was the biggest name in the whole of sports in his day, he didn't need controversy to get peoples attention.

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. Greb
4. Charles
5. Ali
6. Fitzsimmons
7. Tunney
8. Duran
9. B. Leonard
10. Mayweather

Thing is though Strongy when we are talking about the best of all time we have to apply fairly tough criteria and whilst I can watch Louis and see he has a skill set that would cause anybody problems and in my opinion see him prevail against most unless we see him prove it that is what it will remain, my opinion.

Is harsh as Joe did not duck anyone and was as dominant in his era as you would hope to see but he has to rank below a guy who has proven it against a higher caliber of opposition than himself and for me in besting Foreman, Frazier and Liston Ali most assuredly proved his greatness against a better class of opponent than was the case for Joe.

Leonard
Robinson
Ali
Armstrong
-------------------------------
The rest are a mixed bag of usual suspects without Greb as no one has seen him fight. I've seen him jump rope which was hilarious.

I think Louis had the best economy of movement i've ever seen in a fighter as well as having the best timing so on an ability based level he's right up there but visually someone like Armstrong may appear less able but his record suggests otherwise.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:"And if you gaze long enough into Ronald's dome, Ronald's dome gazes also into you." - Nietzsche

Haz, when confronted by it, it seems to be everywhere.

Rowley wrote:Thing is though Strongy when we are talking about the best of all time we have to apply fairly tough criteria and whilst I can watch Louis and see he has a skill set that would cause anybody problems and in my opinion see him prevail against most unless we see him prove it that is what it will remain, my opinion.

Is harsh as Joe did not duck anyone and was as dominant in his era as you would hope to see but he has to rank below a guy who has proven it against a higher caliber of opposition than himself and for me in besting Foreman, Frazier and Liston Ali most assuredly proved his greatness against a better class of opponent than was the case for Joe.

Not aimed at you in particular Rowley but it almost seems as though Louis is being penalised for having a long, single reign as champ. If he had been stripped for not going into WW2 and then someone else had won the title, defended it a couple of times and then Louis had comeback and fought them would we then be rating Louis's opponents better? If Ali hadn't been stripped in 67, would Frazier even be rated as anything special now? Would Foreman have become champ in 73?

One more thing, both Frazier and Foreman were not that much bigger in the 70's than Louis was in his pomp. Louis might have flattened them both with ease.

Ali fought in a tougher era of heavyweights whatever way you slice it I think. His list of wins really blows Louis out the water in my opinion.

Rowley wrote:Thing is though Strongy when we are talking about the best of all time we have to apply fairly tough criteria and whilst I can watch Louis and see he has a skill set that would cause anybody problems and in my opinion see him prevail against most unless we see him prove it that is what it will remain, my opinion.

Is harsh as Joe did not duck anyone and was as dominant in his era as you would hope to see but he has to rank below a guy who has proven it against a higher caliber of opposition than himself and for me in besting Foreman, Frazier and Liston Ali most assuredly proved his greatness against a better class of opponent than was the case for Joe.

Why put Robinson and Armstrong above Greb. Greb must have the best resume over the long haul when it comes to the level of opposition he defeated.

Why is Robinson No.1.


Personally I have SRR at No.1 for the style and manner he totally dominated fighters, surely he can't be No.1 for the quality of fighters he beat.

Don't recall saying it was my only criteria Strongy, it is one amongst any number, it is certainly for me the criteria that sets Ali apart from Louis though

manos de piedra wrote:Ali fought in a tougher era of heavyweights whatever way you slice it I think. His list of wins really blows Louis out the water in my opinion.

I wouldn't disagree with you. But from documentaries that I've watched and from books I've read, Louis had a good list of names on his record for that time. Sharkey, Baer, Carnera, Schmeling and Braddock were all on his ledger early on in Joe's career. Then he went on and fought Walcott, Charles and Marciano. That's 8 men who all at some point in their careers had been the heavyweight champ.

Atila wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Ali fought in a tougher era of heavyweights whatever way you slice it I think. His list of wins really blows Louis out the water in my opinion.

I wouldn't disagree with you. But from documentaries that I've watched and from books I've read, Louis had a good list of names on his record for that time. Sharkey, Baer, Carnera, Schmeling and Braddock were all on his ledger early on in Joe's career. Then he went on and fought Walcott, Charles and Marciano. That's 8 men who all at some point in their careers had been the heavyweight champ.

Arguably the names Ali beat would all have beaten Louis. Certainly Liston would have. Foreman would have gotten rid of him quickly and Frazier would have tortured his body before ending it with a left hook.

Why have Robinson No.1? He doesn't have the greatest resume in boxing at Welter or Middle yet he can be No.1. Louis though can be seen as not ranking in an all time Top 10 because of lack of opposition. I think Louis is getting a raw deal. I'll leave it there and stop running around the circle.

Robinson has Gavilan, Angott, Fullmer and that performance against Maxim across four weights, so would disagree that he doesn't haven't the resume to back up his ability.

Am by no means running Joe's opposition down, but genuinely don't think the likes of Baer, Carnera, Schmeling Bradock and Conn compare to Angott, Gavilan, La Motta and Graziano amongst others.

Would not take huge issue with anyone who had Joe in their top ten but the very nature of a top ten is you can only have ten guys in it and personally I feel I would be giving any of the names I have mentioned a rawer deal was I to exclude them than I am currently giving Joe.

Atila wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Ali fought in a tougher era of heavyweights whatever way you slice it I think. His list of wins really blows Louis out the water in my opinion.

I wouldn't disagree with you. But from documentaries that I've watched and from books I've read, Louis had a good list of names on his record for that time. Sharkey, Baer, Carnera, Schmeling and Braddock were all on his ledger early on in Joe's career. Then he went on and fought Walcott, Charles and Marciano. That's 8 men who all at some point in their careers had been the heavyweight champ.

Its a good record for sure, as heavyweights go but I think its substantially inferior to Alis. Id dispute that Carnera or Braddock were any great shakes really. Even Baer, Sharkey and Schemling werent particularly consistent and I would personally rate them below the fighters like Norton or Young in ability nevermind Frazier, Foreman or Liston.

I think the post Dempsey/Tunney era was largely seen as a weakish doldrum era rather than a competitve era between top fighters before Louis came along and cleaned it up.

Strongback wrote:Why have Robinson No.1? He doesn't have the greatest resume in boxing at Welter or Middle yet he can be No.1. Louis though can be seen as not ranking in an all time Top 10 because of lack of opposition. I think Louis is getting a raw deal. I'll leave it there and stop running around the circle.

Strongback, I agree with you, I think Louis gets a raw deal too. However, take solace in the fact that outside this forum, Louis is rated as an all time top 10 fighter, generally more often than Ray Leonard is that's for sure.

It's all about opinions.

[quote="Atila"]

Strongback wrote:, take solace in the fact that outside this forum, Louis is rated as an all time top 10 fighter, generally more often than Ray Leonard is that's for sure.

Not like you to choose Ray as your example Atila!

Calzaghe gets a rough deal then..

Stick him in at 1.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Calzaghe gets a rough deal then..

Stick him in at 1.

Not like you to stick the boot into Louis.

Always said he was overrated...

Lost to the best fighters he fought...albeit in his later years..

Some technician it has to be said. Technically the greatest heavyweight of all time. Not as good on his feet as Ali but as a puncher does he have many rivals at any weight.

Technically the best Heavyweight of alltime.....

Do you make this stuff up..............Billy Conn boxed his ears off..

Maybe Louis was having a bad night like Bellew

Louis did what he needed to do.

Like he did against Schmelling...Braddock....Galento and anyone else that decked him..

Strongback wrote:Some technician it has to be said. Technically the greatest heavyweight of all time. Not as good on his feet as Ali but as a puncher does he have many rivals at any weight.

Holmes had better footwork and jab. Holmes would beat him without much fuss.