In no particular order, who do you think the 5 best all-around fighters were since 1940 ?

arrgh

Willie Pep;
Ali;
Sugar Ray R
Sugar Ray Leonard
Lennox Lewis

Surprisingly I had Willie Pep before reading your choice or the other guy there! I reckoned you’d have Eder Jofre too!

I only ‘knew’ him at the tail end of his career when he lost, I think, to Pone Kingpetch (?) around 65 or so?

6 – 10: Hagler, Duran, Monzon, Arguello, and Jofre for you, Ted!
Reserves: Foster, Griffith, Napoles, Spinks, Holyfield.

add archie moore not easy being hit all those years and living to tell about it.

I’m no historian, so this is just what I’d say as of right now in my development as a boxing fan:

Sugar Ray Robinson
Willie Pep
Archie Moore
Joe Louis
…someone for a fifth, there are so many guys. I’m comfortable with my four, though.

Jimmy Wilde would be my shoe-in.

Archie Moore, Ray Robinson, Willie Pep, Hank Armstrong, Ezzard Charles (in no particular order.)

armstrong
robinson
marciano
pep
archie moore

its very very difficult to rank the best of any era let along best in the past 70 years.

Ted the interesting thing from making my list and reading yours and others is that, if we were to freeze out the 40’s and the 50’s, our lists would all likely look very, very, very different. It’s almost unfair to include those freakish monsters. Talk about “they don’t make’em like they used to.” Sheesh.

Sadly, few videos of Jofre fights exist, and his fights with Harada and a complete version of his first win over Jose Medel on August 18, 1960, in Los Angeles are apparently the only complete fights known to exist. Thus, historic accounts and word of mouth are the only means of learning about this fighter’s greatness. However, there is a documentary entitled O Grande Campeão with film highlights, though most near the end of his career. It can be ordered through the Web. Dan Cuoco, director of the International Boxing Research Organization, is the best authority I know on Eder Jofre.

Thanks my friend!
 原始邮件 发件人收件人主题：日期

I know,only 14 KO in 40 wins indicates a lack of power, thus diminishing a claim for him to be “all-around,” but his body of work is legit from 135-147 lbs.

Sugar Ray Robinson, Henry Armstrong, Ali, Pep, Duran, in no particular order.

Jones Jr.
Duran
Robinson
Pacquiao
Hagler

To be fair, I’ve not seen enough footage of a lot of the guys mentioned here to put them in. I really want to see more of Moore, Armstrong, Sanchez, Monzon….. the list goes on…..

I’ll be honest and say I’m surprised that not one other person has mentioned Pacquaio. I think we’re looking at a genuine ATG right there, and his body of work is better than anyone else in recent memory, especially since he isn’t just facing these guys, he’s beating them all soundly too.

I had him 14yth in my Top 100 which I did in my first book. Now, I would rate Manny ahead of him and climbing fast.

What about Midget Smith.

1 Robinson . 2 Pep . 3 Louis . 4 and 5 would be a toss up between SRL , Ali , Armstrong , Jones , Duran and maybe one or two others depending on my mood .
Ask me next week and I may give a slighty different answer , apart from no.1 which will be Robinson , this week , next week and every other week .

Rating greatness is extremely difficult . Do you go for longevity? How good they were in their prime? Versatility? Quality of opposition ? I cant rate Armstrong as he was at his best in the 30s . In Chronological Order I’d go 1. Ezzard Charles 2. Sugar Ray Robinson 3 . Muhammad Ali 4. Roberto Duran 5 . Sugar Ray Leonard . I couldnt put Whitaker or Pep on the list because neither of them had the offensive abilities of the blokes I rated in front of them . My next top 5 would be 6. Willie Pep 7 . Pernell Whitaker 8 . Michael Spinks ( underrated , great 175 pounder and ended the reign of Larry Holmes ) 9. Roy Jones jr 10. Bernard Hopkins . Joe Louis , Archie Moore , Fighting Harada , Eder Jofre , Carlos Monzon ,Alexis Arguello , Larry Holmes were other favourites of mine . Cheers Ted , Fellas.

You are correct. That’s why I said “all-around.” Man, you put up some contraversial stuff there. Whew! Spinks, IMO, got at least one gift against Holmes. SRL beat Duran 2 out of 3. He also went 4-1-1 in the unofficial round robin with Duran, Hagler, and Hearns. Pep had 65 KOs which is more than anyone’s total fights these days. I have a friend, Jimmy Connors, who went 10 rounds with him and he swears he hit hard..

But all in all, the ones you mentioned were excellent.

My bad.

While my handspeed and legs are shot i still have a big fat boofhead and a good beard . I can take it mate ;-)

Then I’m calling you out!

I’d actually rate Leonard over Duran if I had to pick one Ted . I agree that the second Holmes v Spinks fight was a gyp but it was a funny fight that like Hearns Duran 1 showed up the anomalies of the 10 point must system . Spinks won as many rounds as Larry in that fight but the rounds Holmes won were far more dominant . Hearns v Leonard 1 was the same . A bloke gets a 10 – 9 result in a round that is uber close . A bloke still only gets a round 10 – 9 if he completely dominates the round .

But a hard one to fix. When I was a kid I remember they often used the 5 point must system with more use of the 5- 3 type round . What deserves more points , basically losing a round but scoring a controversial Wepner v Ali or Roldan v Hagler type knockdown or landing 30 hard jabs and a few rights while not being touched ala Holmes v Tex Cobb?

Take it easy Ted The Boss is waiting ……..

When I hear/read of “best all-around,” I immediately think of the following: mastery of craft + exceptional physical attributes + excellence in overall accomplishment. If a fighter meets all three, does this mean he is great? That much seems obvious. But how about if a fighter doesn’t meet all three?

An easy example of a fighter who, for me, achieved greatness without meeting all three points is Muhammad Ali insert audible gasp of disbelief here. Did Muhammad possess physical gifts that made him a “special” fighter? Of course he did — a man who stood 6’3" but glided over the ring with the fluidity and grace of a middleweight, with possibly the greatest handspeed for a heavyweight fighter and, to top it all off also happened to be one tough s.o.b. is a glorious specimen. Accomplishment? I believe he has one of the greatest resumes in the sport’s history, and, among the heavyweights past and present, remains peerless in this area. No other heavyweight comes close. But was he a “craftsman?” To be strict about it, I don’t think I can say he was. As great as Muhammad was, he was, in my view, far from technically perfect. Among his glaring deficiencies was his seemingly complete disdain for body-punching as well as, as we found it in later years, his failure to develop a defensive skill set that wasn’t dependent on his uncanny “punch-radar” and inhuman reflexes. Less glaring was his average punching power. Ali wasn’t feather-fisted by any means, but opponents knew that he simply wasn’t a huge threat in this area.

Umm, just my opinion of course

So, here are my Top 5, best overall fighters:

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Roberto Duran
3. Sugar Ray Leonard
4. Eder Jofre
5. Salvador Sanchez

Each guy mentioned above are standouts in terms of accomplishment, all great athletes (Chava the least among them, probably), and most importantly (in my opinion), could do just about everything in the squared circle — box, brawl, fight inside, outside… etc…

hmm…I may change 4 and 5, but I think 1-3 are a lock.

Good topic, Ted.

Ray Robinson – Easy choice.
Ezzard Charles – The mid to late 40’s, light-heavyweight version of Ezzard may have been as good as any fighter ever.
Willie Pep – Could punch a bit too when he felt like it.
Roberto Duran – Never a fan, and he was fairly inconsistent as he aged, but was almost unstoppable at his best.
Archie Moore – This was a tough decision, because I think there were fighters that at their very best were better than Archie, but it’s hard to overlook his longevity and success against naturally bigger men.

Next 5:
Eder Jofre – Technically perfect.
Charley Burley – As far as pure skills, even Robinson may not have been better.
Ray Leonard – In terms of ring smarts and overall skills, it’s hard not to include him
Pernell Whitaker – The modern day Pep.
Muhammad Ali – The most complete heavy.

Honorable mentions – Jose Napoles, Michael Spinks, Ike Williams, Emile Griffith & Roy Jones… You could make an argument for placing any of these guys in the top 10.

The only fighter on the original list I would really disagree with is Louis, as much of his best work was done before 1940.

In most instances, the difference between these fighters was razor thin, but in order to validate my selctions (as much as validation is even possible) I used:

1. Still active

2) Was there a reasonable distribution regarding weight classifications? Too many heavyweights means something is very wrong.

2) Was there a reasonable distribution regarding era?

3) Did I know enough about each boxer to make a qualitative judgment? Have I ever seen Percy Bassett fight?

4) Did I benchmark? For example, if Joe Frazier is too far away from Rocky Marciano, something is probably amiss.

5) Did I avoid personal bias in making the selections? Was Bobby Chacon a valid choice?

6) Did Hall of Fame induction bias my selections?

I think the U.K. is about as intriguing as any area on the globe when it comes to boxing.It has a glorious history and produces a certian type of gritty fighter. There are few thing mor fun to watch than a “Brit Dust Up.”

It was avery difficult task, I just as soon not post it. Maybe in another fanpost.

I started talking about this on the trainer thread, but it’s probably more appropriate for discussion here.

Basically, boxrec’s ratings system is fairly screwy, but I have to determine how it is screwy. It’s a mechanical system that awards points based on criteria, but I’ve never seen a good breakdown of the various factors and weights the computer uses to produce the (occasionally bizzarre) results.

Someone (I think it was Brick) noted how, while the program is far from perfect, it yields decent “ballpark” results. I mostly agree with that, too. But when it comes to their “Top 100 P4P” all-time results, it’s mostly not even in the ballpark, and sometimes laugh-your-ass off crazy (such as Ray Leonard ranking about 50 spots behind Duran, Floyd Patterson and Jimmy Mclarnin in the top 10… Hell Jimmy actually moved UP a spot since I started talking about this yesterday).

We all have our own human systems for picking the top guys. I’m guessing a lot of us incorporate somewhat mathematical factors into our choices, but not to the degree that it would cause crazy results. That said, I am a little curious about what factors boxrec’s rating system uses to weigh their all-time rankings. Not because I want to make fun of it. I am genuinely curious what mechanical process results in a top 20 list like this:

1 Archie Moore
2 Sugar Ray Robinson
3 Muhammad Ali
4 Joe Louis
5 Tony Canzoneri
6 Carlos Ortiz
7 Floyd Patterson
8 Ezzard Charles
9 Carlos Monzon
10 Jimmy McLarnin
11 Dick Tiger
12 Harry Greb
13 Benny Leonard
14 Jack Britton
15 Sam Langford
16 Emile Griffith
17 Roberto Duran
18 Jose Napoles
19 Mickey Walker
20 Jimmy Bivins

Now, I see things in there right away that I can figure out. I can even see how the system ranked McLarnin that insanely, although that just opens another can of worms into Tony Canzoneri and Benny Leonard placements (particularly Leonard, who was by most accounts thrice shot by the time McLarnin faced him in his very last pro fight). And I’m not calling out any of these guys as not being great fighters, either. I’m just saying that this list is really unusual, and that based on what I am seeing I don’t believe that boxrec.com allowed their automated system to pick the top 4 fighters. I am almost %100 positive that they manually inserted/typed in Moore, Robinson, Ali and Louis, and perhaps somehow fudged the results for Ezzard Charles and Monzon as well so that their list wouldn’t look totally crackers. Or am I missing a key equation that would logically construct a llist that starts with Jimmy McLarnin at #10 and ends with Archie Moore at #1?

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Willie Pep
3.Joe Louis
4.Eder Jofre
5. Ali
6.Monzone
7. Sugar Ray Leonard
8. Rberto Duran
9. Sandy Sadler
10. Sanchez
11. Hagler
12. Aaron Pryor
13. Chavez
14. Galaxy
15. Roy Jones Jr
16. Larry Holmes
17. George Foreman
18. Marciano
19. Archie Moore
20. Hopkins
21.Luis Manuel "El Feo" Rodriguez
22.Nicolino "El Intocable" Locche
23. Marcel Cerdan
24.Jose "Mantequilla" Napoles
25.Ricardo "Finito "Lopez,