Bert Sugar's Top 10 greatest fighters !!

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 10:24

First topic message reminder :

1. Robbo
2. Armstrong
3. Pep ??
4. Louis ???
5. Greb
6. B Leonard
7. Ali ???
8. Duran
9 Dempsey ??
10 Johnson ??

He's an expert by the way.................Guess beating Benitez, Hearns, Duran, Hagler, Kalule pales into insignificance compared to Firpo, Carpentier types........

Consensus tends to have Duran close to top 10 or in it so I didn't question that....You know how I stand on that one..........

Louis three spaces above Ali............

Personally have Ali number 1 but am happy enough to have Robbo and Armstrong up there.......Pep is never a number 3........

Just clarifies for me all this Expert bullcrap..

Heavy wise he has..........Tunney at 5 and Holmes at 10..........interesting..No sign of Lennox..........or Holy or Tyson..

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:15

Even without facing DM and Pacquiao respectively they still have had brilliant careers facing more quality than Louis did. Nobody else is judged on who they didn't face so I don't think it's fair to judge either of them on that.

by azania Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:16

If Conn at 170 could give Louis fits, what would RJJ do to him? It's not inconceivable to suggest that RJJ could have beaten Louis. After all he has lost to slower and smaller guys.

by **88Chris05** Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:20

Fair enough, Haz. Can agree to disagree with regards to Louis / Mayweather / Jones.

What about Louis compared to Ray Leonard, though? Seems that many of the old-hand pundits and writers tend to have Leonard outside their top ten these days. Suffice to say I'd disagree.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:20

To be honest I think Chris has it spot and has put it more eloquently than I ever could, a placing of around 25 seems about right to me.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:21

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Even without facing DM and Pacquiao respectively they still have had brilliant careers facing more quality than Louis did. Nobody else is judged on who they didn't face so I don't think it's fair to judge either of them on that.

Of course fighters are judged on who they didn't face - if they were a viable rival in their era.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:22

Who else is judged on they didn't face then Haz, Robinson isn't, Leonard isn't, Hagler isn't, Hearns isn't.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:25

88Chris05 wrote:Fair enough, Haz. Can agree to disagree with regards to Louis / Mayweather / Jones.

What about Louis compared to Ray Leonard, though? Seems that many of the old-hand pundits and writers tend to have Leonard outside their top ten these days. Suffice to say I'd disagree.

I flip and flop with Leonard. I was cheered to see him ranked fairly high in the BN poll recently, however, revisiting his career after the 30 for 30 No Mas doc. knocked some polish off the Duran rematch and Hagler fight.

I wouldn't argue with anyone having him top ten - sometimes I think he belongs, other times I feel he's just outside.

Benitez, Duran (first fight) and Hearns, though. Wow.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:26

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Who else is judged on they didn't face then Haz, Robinson isn't, Leonard isn't, Hagler isn't, Hearns isn't.

Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney -- heap of others. Rowley was talking about Johnson today.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:27

azania wrote:If Conn at 170 could give Louis fits, what would RJJ do to him? It's not inconceivable to suggest that RJJ could have beaten Louis. After all he has lost to slower and smaller guys.

Likewise -- if Tarver and Johnson could kayo Jones, Louis would punch holes in him.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:28

Doesn't seem to harm any of them considering two of them are in many top ten lists. If Mayweather can't be in the top ten for not facing Pacquiao how can Demspey be for not facing Wills or Johnson for not facing Langford as champion?

by azania Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:28

But Bert has no problem putting them in his top 10. It seems Floyd and RJJ are treated differently.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:30

hazharrison wrote:
azania wrote:If Conn at 170 could give Louis fits, what would RJJ do to him? It's not inconceivable to suggest that RJJ could have beaten Louis. After all he has lost to slower and smaller guys.
Likewise -- if Tarver and Johnson could kayo Jones, Louis would punch holes in him.

Using that logic Charles and Robinson have no place being greats if we judge them past their bests which you're doing with Jones but not with Louis with regards to Charles and Marciano.

by azania Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:30

hazharrison wrote:
azania wrote:If Conn at 170 could give Louis fits, what would RJJ do to him? It's not inconceivable to suggest that RJJ could have beaten Louis. After all he has lost to slower and smaller guys.
Likewise -- if Tarver and Johnson could kayo Jones, Louis would punch holes in him.

Jones was old. Like Louis was old when rocky tore him a new one. Or was that the peak RJJ?

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:31

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Doesn't seem to harm any of them considering two of them are in many top ten lists. If Mayweather can't be in the top ten for not facing Pacquiao how can Demspey be for not facing Wills or Johnson for not facing Langford as champion?

I don't think Dempsey belongs that high either. Dempsey is somewhat romanticised - he was a colossus in his time and that appears to have skewed his placing. That McGrain guy's list is pretty impressive and I think he has Jack way down the pecking order.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:33

azania wrote:
hazharrison wrote:
azania wrote:If Conn at 170 could give Louis fits, what would RJJ do to him? It's not inconceivable to suggest that RJJ could have beaten Louis. After all he has lost to slower and smaller guys.
Likewise -- if Tarver and Johnson could kayo Jones, Louis would punch holes in him.
Jones was old. Like Louis was old when rocky tore him a new one. Or was that the peak RJJ?

One fight removed from the Ruiz win? Old?

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:33

I would say Louis is being romanticised just as much as Dempsey, just as much as every heavyweight is really.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:35

Or what about Louis being one fight removed from his impressive win over Bivins when he lost to Marciano Haz?

The thing is you are using different criteria dependent on what era a boxer is from, if they're from years ago you are far more willing to let them off for ducking, performing poorly or losing.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:36

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
hazharrison wrote:
azania wrote:If Conn at 170 could give Louis fits, what would RJJ do to him? It's not inconceivable to suggest that RJJ could have beaten Louis. After all he has lost to slower and smaller guys.
Likewise -- if Tarver and Johnson could kayo Jones, Louis would punch holes in him.
Using that logic Charles and Robinson have no place being greats if we judge them past their bests which you're doing with Jones but not with Louis with regards to Charles and Marciano.

Was Jones really over the hill or was Tarver just the best guy he'd faced in years? Bit of both I suspect but I still wouldn't fancy his chances with Louis -- as great as he was.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:39

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Or what about Louis being one fight removed from his impressive win over Bivins when he lost to Marciano Haz?

The thing is you are using different criteria dependent on what era a boxer is from, if they're from years ago you are far more willing to let them off for ducking, performing poorly or losing.

The win over Bivins was not impressive -- have you read the report? Louis was way over the hill in '51.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:39

You can say exactly the same of Louis and Charles Haz but you'll undoubtably come up with excuses of retirement for that loss as well as being past his best.

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:40

hazharrison wrote:
Hammersmith harrier wrote:Or what about Louis being one fight removed from his impressive win over Bivins when he lost to Marciano Haz?

The thing is you are using different criteria dependent on what era a boxer is from, if they're from years ago you are far more willing to let them off for ducking, performing poorly or losing.
The win over Bivins was not impressive -- have you read the report? Louis was way over the hill in '51.

You yourself Haz were using Bivins as an example of the quality Louis had beaten, personally think Louis was past it by the time of the Walcott fights but likewise Jones was past it before he even faced Ruiz.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:43

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You can say exactly the same of Louis and Charles Haz but you'll undoubtably come up with excuses of retirement for that loss as well as being past his best.

It's not an excuse if it's reality!!

Jones has one win at heavyweight over John Ruiz (and I'd question how he packed on so much muscle so quickly and remained ripped -- but that's another story) and you expect me to believe he could contend with Louis? One of the hardest punchers in history? A guy knocked cold twice at 175?

by azania Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:45

Theo or Jersey Joe

by Hammersmith harrier Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:47

Again on the flipside to that I can say if Conn gives Louis hell then Jones could too, Louis would win more often than not but it's not a foregone conclusion using the Conn fight as primary evidence.

by Strongback Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:49

88Chris05 wrote:
Strongback wrote:I think you are vastly underrating Louis' ability. He also started fighting 80 years ago, training and techniques have moved on. There were also no steroids, epo or HGH around when Louis fought. The rumours or evidence around fighters like Jones, Hopkins and Mayweather using performance enhancers are rife.

Louis is remembered as a knock out artist and there have been none better. In terms of punching ability he is miles ahead of Mayweather in technique as evidenced by his KO ratio. Mayweather is a defensive master while Louis is an offensive master. As fighters they are very hard to compare as their particular best strengths are so well developed they are off the scale and incomparable. Louis' combination punching and ability to land 3 left hooks in a row at speed is as good as anything Jones demonstrated. Remember Jones fought a lot of very average fighters, against his poorer opponents he ended up looking fantastic. These poorer opponents are weaker than Louis' worst. Nobody has fought more top contenders while defending a title than Louis.

I think a lot of people would say I'm underrating Louis' ability Strongback! But that's just me. As I've said before, my stance on this is clear - Louis was a great technician with a shed load of ability. But when you're talking about putting a fighter in an all-time top ten pound for pound, you have to be pretty thorough and it's my contention, simply from watching Louis, that he had more flaws to his all-round game than Mayweather did. You've have to believe that the struggles Louis had against some decent, but hardly outstanding opposition in his peak years were down to more than just a coincidence.

Ultimately I don't see how anyone can say that the first fights against Schmeling, Godoy and Conn didn't at least highlight some flaws in Louis' style. Seems to be an idea growing that if you point out some deficiencies in Louis, you'[re saying he didn't have great ability. All I'm saying is that he had some weaker points, hence why those fighters were able to either beat him or give him such a torrid time.

If Mayweather had been knocked out as a young pup by Hernandez when he first came on the big scene, struggled to a split decision against someone like Corley, needed a desperate late rally after being outboxed for much of the fight and down on the cards against a smaller man moving up in weight in Marquez and had been rocked badly and later put down by Gatti before getting his win, I suspect many people would be proclaiming that this was all evidence that he wasn't a great fighter and never could be one. That wouldn't be true, and nor is it true in Louis' case (if we swap those Floyd opponents for Schmeling, Godoy, Conn and Galento respectively), but it does serve to show how few holes there are to Mayweather's game from a technical view point.

As for your point regarding Jones. He has his fair share of fighters on his record who were nothing to shout home about. More than Louis, however? Not really, and they fought a similar number of world title fights, too. You're right in saying that Jones shone against those men who were there to make up the numbers as well. But unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure he shone against the very good fighters he faced n'all! His performances against Toney, Griffin (II), Hill and Johnson were outstanding, so it's not like he was found wanting when he did step up.

On the first point you made regarding Mayweather I would point to Louis having 61 fights up to his retirement. He won 60 of those fights knocking out 52 of his opponents. This included 25 title defences. He may have been knocked down numerous time but he was never in danger of being KO'd apart from Schmelling who hit him with the kitchen sink before the fight was stopped. The Galento knock down which is much quoted on here had Louis down for less than a second. He then went on to viciously beat Tony, the big man was being knocked around like a rag doll.

Heavyweight fighting is a different animal to the smaller weight classes because as we know with big men one punch can easily end a fight and often does. That's what the public finds so exciting about the heavies. You'll find it hard to pick out a top class heavyweight that hasn't tasted the canvas, obviously that includes Ali who was down 4 times.

Some people prefer the smaller weight classes, Captain Carrantouhill appears to be one. It seems to me that people who like the smaller fighters have less time for the heavies. Windy and Jimmy always seemed to me to be in the heavyweight camp.

Where do you have Ali in the P4P list? I remember in the distant past that you didn't see that much between Ali and Louis. Do you now have a big gulf between them now?

by **88Chris05** Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:53

hazharrison wrote:
88Chris05 wrote:Fair enough, Haz. Can agree to disagree with regards to Louis / Mayweather / Jones.

What about Louis compared to Ray Leonard, though? Seems that many of the old-hand pundits and writers tend to have Leonard outside their top ten these days. Suffice to say I'd disagree.
I flip and flop with Leonard. I was cheered to see him ranked fairly high in the BN poll recently, however, revisiting his career after the 30 for 30 No Mas doc. knocked some polish off the Duran rematch and Hagler fight.

I wouldn't argue with anyone having him top ten - sometimes I think he belongs, other times I feel he's just outside.

Benitez, Duran (first fight) and Hearns, though. Wow.

Personally, I think Leonard is the most versatile fighter I've seen. I don't just mean that he could beat fighters of all styles; he could turn himself in to that kind of fighter at the drop of a hat and win (and win well), that was the incredible thing about him.

The only knock you can really put against Leonard is his lack of fights. Understandable, I guess. But how many Ortiez, Guerrero, Judah and Baldomir types would Mayweather have to beat to collectively come up with something which is as impressive and significant as Leonard's win over a prime, undefeated and bookies favourite Hearns at Tommy's best weight, for example?

I used to be a little closer to your thinking on Leonard, but he's a permanent fixture in my top ten now.

by hazharrison Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:53

Strongback wrote:
88Chris05 wrote:
Strongback wrote:I think you are vastly underrating Louis' ability. He also started fighting 80 years ago, training and techniques have moved on. There were also no steroids, epo or HGH around when Louis fought. The rumours or evidence around fighters like Jones, Hopkins and Mayweather using performance enhancers are rife.

Louis is remembered as a knock out artist and there have been none better. In terms of punching ability he is miles ahead of Mayweather in technique as evidenced by his KO ratio. Mayweather is a defensive master while Louis is an offensive master. As fighters they are very hard to compare as their particular best strengths are so well developed they are off the scale and incomparable. Louis' combination punching and ability to land 3 left hooks in a row at speed is as good as anything Jones demonstrated. Remember Jones fought a lot of very average fighters, against his poorer opponents he ended up looking fantastic. These poorer opponents are weaker than Louis' worst. Nobody has fought more top contenders while defending a title than Louis.

I think a lot of people would say I'm underrating Louis' ability Strongback! But that's just me. As I've said before, my stance on this is clear - Louis was a great technician with a shed load of ability. But when you're talking about putting a fighter in an all-time top ten pound for pound, you have to be pretty thorough and it's my contention, simply from watching Louis, that he had more flaws to his all-round game than Mayweather did. You've have to believe that the struggles Louis had against some decent, but hardly outstanding opposition in his peak years were down to more than just a coincidence.

Ultimately I don't see how anyone can say that the first fights against Schmeling, Godoy and Conn didn't at least highlight some flaws in Louis' style. Seems to be an idea growing that if you point out some deficiencies in Louis, you'[re saying he didn't have great ability. All I'm saying is that he had some weaker points, hence why those fighters were able to either beat him or give him such a torrid time.

If Mayweather had been knocked out as a young pup by Hernandez when he first came on the big scene, struggled to a split decision against someone like Corley, needed a desperate late rally after being outboxed for much of the fight and down on the cards against a smaller man moving up in weight in Marquez and had been rocked badly and later put down by Gatti before getting his win, I suspect many people would be proclaiming that this was all evidence that he wasn't a great fighter and never could be one. That wouldn't be true, and nor is it true in Louis' case (if we swap those Floyd opponents for Schmeling, Godoy, Conn and Galento respectively), but it does serve to show how few holes there are to Mayweather's game from a technical view point.

As for your point regarding Jones. He has his fair share of fighters on his record who were nothing to shout home about. More than Louis, however? Not really, and they fought a similar number of world title fights, too. You're right in saying that Jones shone against those men who were there to make up the numbers as well. But unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure he shone against the very good fighters he faced n'all! His performances against Toney, Griffin (II), Hill and Johnson were outstanding, so it's not like he was found wanting when he did step up.
On the first point you made regarding Mayweather I would point to Louis having 61 fights up to his retirement. He won 60 of those fights knocking out 52 of his opponents. This included 25 title defences. He may have been knocked down numerous time but he was never in danger of being KO'd apart from Schmelling who hit him with the kitchen sink before the fight was stopped. The Galento knock down which is much quoted on here had Louis down for less than a second. He then went on to viciously beat Tony, the big man was being knocked around like a rag doll.

Heavyweight fighting is a different animal to the smaller weight classes because as we know with big men one punch can easily end a fight and often does. That's what the public finds so exciting about the heavies. You'll find it hard to pick out a top class heavyweight that hasn't tasted the canvas, obviously that includes Ali who was down 4 times.

Some people prefer the smaller weight classes, Captain Carrantouhill appears to be one. It seems to me that people who like the smaller fighters have less time for the heavies. Windy and Jimmy always seemed to me to be in the heavyweight camp.

Where do you have Ali in the P4P list? I remember in the distant past that you didn't see that much between Ali and Louis. Do you now have a big gulf between them now?

Nice post.

by **88Chris05** Tue 12 Nov 2013 - 23:57

Always had Ali with a very healthy edge over Louis personally, Strongback. I have conceded that I can see why people may have them closer than I do, which is perhaps what you're getting mixed up with. But to me it's never really been a close run thing between them.

Appreciate that the knockdown against Galento was a flash one, but he was also hurt pretty badly in the first round of that one too, for instance. Nobody should really read too much in to me bringing this up, as I'm not trying to say that Galento took Louis to the brink. I merely mentioned it to put in to context how remarkable it is that Mayweather has managed to almost completely avoid such things right throughout his career.

As for your Ali question, somewhere between five and seven, pound for pound.

by Hammersmith harrier Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 0:05

Mainly because it could sort out a few little issues with have with regards to this whole p4p nonsense, I shall set up an update to the V2 p4p top 15. From a personal point of view will be interesting to see how views have changed in the past two years.

by Strongback Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 0:18

88Chris05 wrote:Always had Ali with a very healthy edge over Louis personally, Strongback. I have conceded that I can see why people may have them closer than I do, which is perhaps what you're getting mixed up with. But to me it's never really been a close run thing between them.

Appreciate that the knockdown against Galento was a flash one, but he was also hurt pretty badly in the first round of that one too, for instance. Nobody should really read too much in to me bringing this up, as I'm not trying to say that Galento took Louis to the brink. I merely mentioned it to put in to context how remarkable it is that Mayweather has managed to almost completely avoid such things right throughout his career.

As for your Ali question, somewhere between five and seven, pound for pound.

The main point of my previous post was heavyweights get knocked down a lot more. It goes with territory in the land of the giants. Every top heavy has been knocked down including Ali.

Personally I would be with the consensus opinion that Ali is level or slightly ahead of Louis but there is "less than a cigarette paper" between them as fighters.

I don't know if you remember the Fight Doctor that posted on the old board. He was a pro trainer and really knowledgeable in terms of the art and technique of boxing. I used to find his analysis of Louis fascinating. Very similar to Freddie Roach's actually. He used to teach his fighters to punch like Louis. Even 80 years later its hard to find better punching technique than Louis.

by Lumbering_Jack Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 8:34

When comparing the records of Ali, Louis and Floyd I think most would rank them in that order. The reason Louis cannot rank above Ali for me is the struggles he had with some of the fighters he faced. Whilst Ali himself also struggled, he has a higher quality of opponent than Louis to fall back on, and I also think he would win in a fight between the two.

Louis and Floyd is an interesting one. Louis clearly has fought the better men, with Floyd having far less problems with opponents throughout is career. Not having the calibre of opponent needn't be a reason for Floyd to rank below Louis alone, but for me what cannot be overlooked is the reason Floyd's record missing the huge names is his own doing. Louis took on everyone available to him, Floyd did not. I agree with Haz that a fighter who retires when his division at his most challenging and avoids the biggest fight (in money terms at least) in boxing history cannot legitimately be ranked top 10. Floyd is an unquestionable talent, but it was his choosing to avoid the big fights and this must be held against him. Maybe his handlers knew something we didn't, they are shrewd businessmen after all.

Ali > Louis > Floyd. Ali comfortably in the top 10, Louis doesn't make it in mine with Mayweather a few spots behind him.

by azania Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 8:50

Strong the concensus is not that Ali is level or slightly ahead, but that Ali is miles ahead (on v2).

by Hammersmith harrier Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 11:45

LJ I don't see how you can say Louis has fought better opponents, is Schmeling better than Corrales, Walcott better than Hernandez, Baer better than Castillo? Not me they aren't.

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 11:53

Just don't bother asking stupid questions.......Hammer.

by azania Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 11:56

He's just guessing.

by azania Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 11:58

He's just guessing.

by Rodney Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:12

Walcott is far technically proficient than Hernandez it isn't even close , what automatically makes you believe Corralles and Castillo were stronger foes than Baer or Schmeling, if Mayweather fought an opponent who outweighed him by 20 pounds at the weigh in, 606v2 would be in meltdown.

Cheers Rodders

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:24

Walcott was proficient.....That's why he schooled Louis .........

by Lumbering_Jack Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:25

Hammersmith harrier wrote:LJ I don't see how you can say Louis has fought better opponents, is Schmeling better than Corrales, Walcott better than Hernandez, Baer better than Castillo? Not me they aren't.

Well it's a matter of opinion, but I don't really rate Floyd's opponents as highly as others do. Hernandez for example is often thrown around as a great win but I just don't see it. Good yes, great no.

by Lumbering_Jack Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:26

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Just don't bother asking stupid questions.......Hammer.

Be quiet tubs...

Don't want to get you in a bad mood, you might 'knock out' your son later.

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:27

I rate Oscar, Canelo, Cotto and Jmm..............Better fighters than Louis ever fought.......

by Rodney Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:28

A questionable decision is now classed as schooled ?
Are you happy to say Castillo schooled Mayweather then?

Cheers Rodders

by Lumbering_Jack Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:29

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I rate Oscar, Canelo, Cotto and Jmm..............Better fighters than Louis ever fought.......

Context Truss.

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:33

Walcott ws winning on the cards in the second Louis fight as well it has to be remembered...Before the pay off punch

Whilst Walcott was his only top class victory.......

Not really fights to point out how great Louis was.....He lost one and had to pull the other out of the fire.......

One could assume the best Man lost.........

by hazharrison Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:33

Lumbering_Jack wrote:
Hammersmith harrier wrote:LJ I don't see how you can say Louis has fought better opponents, is Schmeling better than Corrales, Walcott better than Hernandez, Baer better than Castillo? Not me they aren't.
Well it's a matter of opinion, but I don't really rate Floyd's opponents as highly as others do. Hernandez for example is often thrown around as a great win but I just don't see it. Good yes, great no.

A decent win over a fine titlist but Hernandez was at the end of the road (that was his last fight).

by Lumbering_Jack Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:36

The best man won. Him being behind isn't relevant. He won.

Louis took on every available challenger, something Floyd simply cannot boast, no matter have much you love him. For this reason he will never be ranked above Louis. After the hype dies down over his career he will settle in most lists outside the top 10, and behind Louis.

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:37

I'm not interested in what you think.........

by hazharrison Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:38

Lumbering_Jack wrote:The best man won. Him being behind isn't relevant. He won.

Louis took on every available challenger, something Floyd simply cannot boast, no matter have much you love him. For this reason he will never be ranked above Louis. After the hype dies down over his career he will settle in most lists outside the top 10, and behind Louis.

Correct.

He could of course change that by taking on a challenge. What's that? Amir Khan? Oh well.......

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:39

Ain't It funny how the guys who hold Castillo against Floyd are saying......It doesn't matter If walcott deserved to win.......

What a joke........

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 13 Nov 2013 - 12:42

Welcome to Haz world.......

Where Mayweather is kept down because he didn't fight Manny.....

and Jack Johnson is top 10........

by Sponsored content