first, this isn't supposed to come across all confrontational so please don't take it that way.SaadOffTheDeck wrote: Somebody that was completely owned by Frankie Randall, really has some short comings.
do we have to say of a fighter that he struggled with absolutely noone, had everyone's style for breakfast, otherwise he is not an ATG?
Randall was a fine boxer with great skills, great jab, decent speed, toughness. he was something of a wreck by way of drugs by the time JCC fought him, but then the effects of 90-odd fights had taken their toll on JCC too. randall could have ended up doing a lot more with his career and he treated the Chavez fights very seriously.
FWIW i think on his best night Randall gives plenty of HOF lightweights something to think about and maybe beats a couple of em.
i don't think struggling with him necessarily precludes greatness, myself. all fighters can struggle with someone who has just the right style to make them look poor, and for me thats at least half of what went on between Randall and JCC.
it seems to me the conclusion of what you're saying is, noone who has ever struggled with a fighter who himself was not an ATG'er, should themselves be considered an ATG?
to me thats the kind of criteria that would mean excluding a LOT of fighters from the HOF
i agree with your placing of Chavez at around 30-50 or whatever it was, by the way. I guess i just think that + his record is slightly more impressive than you do..