The Ring's Top 10 greatest title reigns

[Ezzard]

as of 2005...

1. Joe Louis
2. Bernard Hopkins
3. Abe Attell
4. Carlos Monzon
5. Henry Armstrong
6. Ricardo Lopez
7. Marvin Hagler
8. Eusebio Pedroza
9. Larry Holmes
10. Archie Moore

[Ezzard]

I'd argue that Monzon has the best title reign at 160.

The number 1 spot is a dead cert though.

[elmersalsa]

Felix "Tito" Trinidad, Wilfredo Gomez and Roberto Duran's title reigns were far better reigns than Archie Moore's and Marvin Hagler's

[Goodnight, Irene]

Hopkins at number two!? C'mon, really

[raylawpc]

Once again, the great bantamweight champion Manuel Ortiz is overlooked and forgotten . . .

[My2Sense]

Hopkins at number two!? C'mon, really

Seriously.

Was this list done before or after DeLaHoya bought The Ring?

[My2Sense]

Felix "Tito" Trinidad, Wilfredo Gomez and Roberto Duran's title reigns were far better reigns than Archie Moore's and Marvin Hagler's

Disagree about Moore.

Moore has multiple wins over HOFers as champion - Maxim (three times), Johnson, Olson. His reign was at least as impressive as those other guys, if not moreso.

[dempseyfire]

Trinidads' reign better than Moores? No way in hell!

Gomez?? Arguable

I agree about Duran.

About the Ring list, Bernard is way too high, and Armstrong is too low.

[jaclem2]

..by "greatest" does the ring mean length of time?

[dajuggernaut]

..by "greatest" does the ring mean length of time?

No, then Calzaghe would of be up there.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

as of 2005...

1. Joe Louis
2. Bernard Hopkins
3. Abe Attell
4. Carlos Monzon
5. Henry Armstrong
6. Ricardo Lopez
7. Marvin Hagler
8. Eusebio Pedroza
9. Larry Holmes
10. Archie Moore

- Glad to remember the original Super Joe is still regarded highly.

Of course his selection a no-brainer, but given the sorry spectacle of current boxing analysis, it's a boost to common sense over the misplaced egos of the typical writers who vote in this nonsense.

Have to wonder why the mice are mixed in with the big cats. Popkins, Lopez, Pedroza, and Holmes have no business on this list. Looks like there is an unstated bias towards consecutive title bouts which weights the poll in favor of modern fighters who are able to schedule more ABC title fights than in days of yore.

I'd put Duran's lightweight reign with most. Then you have the much maligned Modern SuperJoe who avenged his slights by Popkins and Jones late in his career in a big way. Always fond of Sal Sanchez's stellar reign cut short. Where's JCChavez's huge streak? Roy? Jeffries anyone, the first active big man champ? Too many to fully honour

I could go on, but why bother when the Ring will come out with another list in 2015 with noob klones of Kellerman touting the latest flavour. As long as the original Super Joe is on it, the universe is safe from alien attack.

[HomicideHenry]

The only knock against Moore that you can make is that he 'froze out' guys like Harold Johnson when he was the Light Heavyweight champ, asking for too much money, and instead took on safer matches for big purses [do I need to mention Sterling Davis?], until finally the comissions had enough of Moore's antics and stripped him.

[Goodnight, Irene]

I'd still take Moore's reign over Holmes', who's placed above him --- I don't think that one's even especially arguable. Hopkins at number two absolutely stinks, though.

[My2Sense]

I'd still take Moore's reign over Holmes', who's placed above him --- I don't think that one's even especially arguable. Hopkins at number two absolutely stinks, though.

Agreed on both counts.

[scartissue]

as of 2005...

1. Joe Louis
2. Bernard Hopkins
3. Abe Attell
4. Carlos Monzon
5. Henry Armstrong
6. Ricardo Lopez
7. Marvin Hagler
8. Eusebio Pedroza
9. Larry Holmes
10. Archie Moore

Ez, there is no way I would even consider Bernard Hopkins as having a great reign. His tenure as champ was over fighters who wouldn't even be considered clubfighters in the '70s. Not his fault, there just wasn't anybody out there. And to make a great reign you have to have somebody in the other corner with a pulse, not just pointless defenses to make up numbers. For my money you should consider the reigns of Joe Brown, Carlos Ortiz and Antonio Cervantes. They defended against outstanding talent.

Scartissue

[raylawpc]

as of 2005...

1. Joe Louis
2. Bernard Hopkins
3. Abe Attell
4. Carlos Monzon
5. Henry Armstrong
6. Ricardo Lopez
7. Marvin Hagler
8. Eusebio Pedroza
9. Larry Holmes
10. Archie Moore

Ez, there is no way I would even consider Bernard Hopkins as having a great reign. His tenure as champ was over fighters who wouldn't even be considered clubfighters in the '70s. Not his fault, there just wasn't anybody out there. And to make a great reign you have to have somebody in the other corner with a pulse, not just pointless defenses to make up numbers. For my money you should consider the reigns of Joe Brown, Carlos Ortiz and Antonio Cervantes. They defended against outstanding talent.

Scartissue

Don't blame Ezzard; its not his list. He's quoting The Ring magazine

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Huge thumbs down for Ricardo Lopez. Gushiken, Yuh & Chang were all better imo. That's just Jr Flyweights.

Glad to see Pedroza get some love. He has long been under appreciated.

[DoubleMM]

jack Dempsey anybody?? Firpo, brennan, miske and i count Dempsey as a two-time champ because of the long count against tunney.

[Adamj1987]

jack Dempsey anybody?? Firpo, brennan, miske and i count Dempsey as a two-time champ because of the long count against tunney.

not enough defences he took a long time off between firpo and tunny if anything jack johnson is more deserving than dempsey as he was active even if he wasnt fighting the best around

though i take nothing away from dempsey hes a great fighter

[I Feel Fine]

I am a big Bernard Hopkins fan, but that ranking is quite insane.

[DoubleMM]

jack Dempsey anybody?? Firpo, brennan, miske and i count Dempsey as a two-time champ because of the long count against tunney.

not enough defences he took a long time off between firpo and tunny if anything jack johnson is more deserving than dempsey as he was active even if he wasnt fighting the best around

though i take nothing away from dempsey hes a great fighter

Yeah but dempsey was fighting all the best fighters around. Johnson was fighting middleweights and old men, and none of the best black fighters

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Dempsey fought the great black fighters and jack didn't? Johnson couldn't defend against other black fighters, because it wasn't seen as marketable. At the time, nobody wanted to see two black men fight for the Heavyweight belt.

[Adamj1987]

jack Dempsey anybody?? Firpo, brennan, miske and i count Dempsey as a two-time champ because of the long count against tunney.

not enough defences he took a long time off between firpo and tunny if anything jack johnson is more deserving than dempsey as he was active even if he wasnt fighting the best around

though i take nothing away from dempsey hes a great fighter

Yeah but dempsey was fighting all the best fighters around. Johnson was fighting middleweights and old men, and none of the best black fighters

but he didnt

willard had been out of action for years and won against an old jack johnson ib a fight to the finish
Miske had leukemia i think it was and dempsey fought him to give his good friend a decent pay day
dracey was a journeyman
gibbons was a light heavy moving up
firpo was dangerous but seen as beatable

3 year break

loses to tunny

in short dempsey fought 1 good fighter in his title time that he won - firpo and a 3 year break doesnt enhance your title reign any he may have held it nearly 7 years but the 3 year break puts that down to 4

[DoubleMM]

Dempsey fought the great black fighters and jack didn't? Johnson couldn't defend against other black fighters, because it wasn't seen as marketable. At the time, nobody wanted to see two black men fight for the Heavyweight belt.

Yes but at the time there were no coloured men for dempsey to fight at the time aside from firpo and harry Wills which nearly became a reality. besides Tunney was better than either of those two but Jack was past it.

[DoubleMM]

but he didnt

willard had been out of action for years and won against an old jack johnson ib a fight to the finish
Miske had leukemia i think it was and dempsey fought him to give his good friend a decent pay day
dracey was a journeyman
gibbons was a light heavy moving up
firpo was dangerous but seen as beatable

3 year break

loses to tunny

in short dempsey fought 1 good fighter in his title time that he won - firpo and a 3 year break doesnt enhance your title reign any he may have held it nearly 7 years but the 3 year break puts that down to 4

oh but Joe Louis had a six year break from 42 and 48 but his title length is not cut down from 12 years is it?? maybe joe should just get a six year reign