Most Title Defenses Ever By Weight Division - Does Longevity Really matter?

First topic message reminder :

I saw this list the other day and thought it might be of interest.


Does longevity really matter anymore?

I get the feeling people don't place as much emphasis on it these days.

Seems to me to be less important when it comes to judging a fighter reading some posts.

Is it just the proliferation of belts? Many of these fighter were the man at their weight.



HW - Joe Louis - 25 Defenses - Lineal/WBA
CW - Johnny Nelson - 14 Defenses - WBO
LHW - Dariusz Michalczewski - 23 Defenses - WBO
SMW - Joe Calzaghe & Sven Ottke - 21 Defenses - WBO & IBF, respectively
MW - Bernard Hopkins - 20 Defenses - IBF
LMW - Gianfranco Rosi - 11 Defenses - IBF
WW - Henry Armstrong - 19 Defenses - Lineal
LWW - Julio Cesar Chavez - 11 Defenses - WBC
LW - Artur Grigorian - 17 Defenses - WBO
SFW - Tod Morgan - 12 Defenses - WBA
FW - Eusebio Pedroza - 19 Defenses - WBA mistake in list Abe Attell - 20 Defences - Lineal
SBW - Wilfredo Gomez - 17 Defenses - WBC
BW - Orlando Canizales - 16 Defenses - IBF
SFW - Khaosai Galaxy - 19 Defenses - WBA
FW - Pongsaklek Wonjongkam - 19 Defenses - WBC
LFW - Myong Woo-Yuh - 17 Defenses - WBA
MW - Ricardo Lopez - 21 Defenses - WBC 

horizontalhero wrote:

Strongback wrote:It's always the same, some people just can't handle the truth.


Some people hero worship Ali so much they can't stand Louis, or Sugar Ray Robinson for that matter,  being mentioned in the same breath.


Some people are massive fans of Tommy Hearns and can't get over the fact Hagler crushed him. Still butthurt all these years later.

It's not hero worship to point out that his longevity is what allowed him to face the likes of Liston, foreman, frazier etc- I merely used him as an example of why longevity is an important factor in greatness- if Mike Tyson had greater longevity he could have beaten the cream of the 90s crop, as well as clearing out the 80s, and as a result of this he'd he higher ranked.

That wasn't aimed at you mate.

88Chris05 wrote:There's nothing butthurt about saying that Ali's best wins read better than Louis'. Liston was better than Schmeling. Frazier was better than Walcott. Foreman was better than the Baers.

Outside of that, Joe's second tier kind of wins such as Conn, Braddock, Carnera, Sharkey, Farr etc ain't too far behind Ali's against Norton, Patterson, Terrell, Shavers etc, but they're still behind all the same. Worth noting that, if we take Ali's absolute peak years to be, say, 1964 to 1967, he was absolutely sailing through his title defences and dominating his opposition consistently. If we take a look at the absolute zenith years of Louis' career, so let's say 1937 to 1941, he was blitzing his way through some challengers (Schmeling II, Roper, John Henry 'only there for a payday' Lewis etc), but also having woes against others - Conn I, Godoy I etc, as well as tasting the canvas once or twice.

Louis was a great Heavy, but I've always struggled to see how anyone could have him as THE greatest of the lot. No denying his technical proficiency, but at the end of the day Ali beat better opposition and was more dominant in his peak years.

The butthurt comment was aimed at Truss and the fact he can't let go of the fact Hagler smashed up his boy Hearns.

We are coming up to 30 years since The War and he's still going around with a wedgie over it.

Does anyone else think that experts list of rankings are always thoroughly researched and definitive any more than your average enthusiastic fan? There are probably people on here that has spend longer coming up with lists. And could probably come up with a completely different list next year or even next week. The average joe now probably has better access to fight records and footage thanks to the internet that back in the days when there was no fight footage.

Ghosty wrote:Would first off like to know why I keep getting banned with no explanation?

Secondly I see no current relevance to the lists Haz posted as most of them are over ten years old. Callis' list for starters is shocking and using that as any sort of evidence is futile. Mayweather will be regarded higher than Hagler because he has a better record and more ability.

I posted them to illustrate that Louis is regularly rated a top ten fighter of all time. What difference does it make about them being 10 years out of date?

TopHat24/7 wrote:Imperial Ghosty??

Sadly the republicans won.