Greatest Middlweights by decade

[klompton]

Last time I checked California and Las Vegas were out west and Las Vegas (Nevada) is an inter-mountain state. Furthermore many of those fights, if not all, that you listed out west were controversial:

Fullmer bear Carmen Basilio in San Francisco in 1959. Ridiculously pointless stoppage
Fullmer beat Robinson in Las Vegas in 1961. Even Fullmer admitted that he and his manager had their own training ring imported for this fight and then conned Robinson, violating the fight contract, into fighting in that ring (which was smaller than the contracted ring, and had a thicker padded floor to limit robinsons movement).
Fullmer also had a draw against Robinson in LA in 1960. Robbery
Fullmer also had a daw against Dick Tiger in Las Vegas in 1963. Robbery
Fullmer lost a very close decision to Tiger in San Francisco in 1962. Close?? It was unanimous decision with Fullmer behind by 2 rounds, 4 rounds, and 9 rounds (all of which were closer scores than the actual fight).

His fight in New York against Robinson was a disgrace as well with Fullmer butting, elbowing, and tripping. In fact the ref who was criticized for letting fullmer get away with such tactics said he did so because Fullmer couldnt fight any other way. Thats a pretty pathetic excuse.

Underrated? I think not.

[Ambling Alp]

Yes California and Las Vegas are out west. They were also hundreds of miles from where Fullmer was from. That is not a hometown advantage at all.

Robinson fought many fights in New York City which is where he was living. He also fought in Massachusetts, Pennsylvannia, Rhode Island etc. Were those all hometown fights?

You don't think the Basilio fight should have been stopped? Well, I guess you are entitled to your opinion. I certainly would not call it ridiculaus. Basilio took quite a beating. More importantly, Fullmer would have won by decision anyway.

Never heard the story about the ring padding before. Robinson was a big boy. If he didn't want to fight in that ring, he did not have to. Robinson did not show a lot of movement at that stage of his career anyway.

I have never heard anyone call the draws against Robinson and Tiger robberies. You may not agree with the verdict, but they certainly were close fights. And neither were anywhere near Fullmer's hometown.

I don't know to say about your comment that even 9 points in the 2nd fight was closer than it was. I guess I will just say that I strongly disagree.

Was Fullmer a dirty fighter? Well, he was an inside fighter. Basilio, LaMotta, Giardello and others did the same kind of stuff. Besides the fight you are referring to was in New York, which was Robinson's hometown.

[Mr E]

1880-1889: 1-Charley Mitchell, 2-Jack Dempsey, "The Nonpariel"
1890-1899: 1-Bob Fitzsimmons, 2-Kid McCoy
1900-1909: 1-Stanley Ketchel, 2-Philadelphia Jack O'Brien
1910-1919: 1-Harry Greb, 2-Mike Gibbons
1920-1929: 1-Harry Greb, 2-Mickey Walker
1930-1939: 1-Freddie Steele, 2-Ken Overlin
1940-1949: 1-Charley Burley, 2-Marcel Cerdan
1950-1959: 1-Sugar Ray Robinson, 2-Gene Fullmer
1960-1969: 1-Dick Tiger, 2-Emile Griffith
1970-1979: 1-Carlos Monzon, 2-Marvin Hagler
1980-1989: 1-Marvin Hagler, 2-Mike McCallum
1990-1999: 1-Roy Jones, Jr., 2-James Toney
2000-2009: 1-Bernard Hopkins, 2-Kelly Pavlik??

[dempseyfire]

Tiger for me would take the 60s, Burley the 40s, and Yarosz edges the 1930s (although that's a tough decade to choose from)

For the 90s, I can see a rational argument for Toney as he had the best wins of anyone at 160 in the decade, but factoring in the Tiberi fight, the very close nature of some of those wins, plus his short stay at the weight, and I think you have to give it to mr. consistency Bernard Hopkins.

[Ambling Alp]

I would go with Tiger for the 60s as well, but it is extremely close with him and Griffith and Benvenuti.
I looked at their important wins and any losses at middleweight in the 1960s, and here is what I came up with:

Griffith was 2-0 vs Tiger and 1-2 vs Benvenuti. 0-2 vs Monzon but was more competitive vs Monzon than Benvenuti was. Beat contenders Joey Archer (twice) Joe Harris, Andy Heilman, Stan Heyward. Did lose to Stan Hayward and Don Fullmer.

Tiger was 0-2 vs Griffith and 1-0 vs Benvenuti. Beat Fullmer in a close fight, had a daw with Fullmer, and stopped Fullmer in 7 rounds. Was 1-1 vs Giardello. Beat contenders Hank Casey, Henry Hank, Florentino Fernandez, Rubin Carter. Did lose to Wilf Greaves and Joey Archer.

Benvenuti lost to Tiger in their only fight, but was 2-1 vs Griffith. Was 0-2 vs Monzon. Did beat contenders like Don Fullmer, Fraser Scott, and Don Baird as well as Luis Rodriguez. Never loss to a less than elite fighter at middleweight.

I guess there are a couple of other things to consider:
-Both tiger and Benvenuti were several pounds higher than the middleweight limit when they fought. (Tiger was 166 and Benvenuti was at 164) If you thow out that fight it would help Benvenuti and take away one of Tiger's biggest wins.
-The 2nd Griffth-Tiger fight was actually not in the 1960s. It was in 1970. If you thow that out it would help Tiger and take away a big win for Griffith.

It would be hard to find three more even fighters who all fought each other.

[Mr E]

I would go with Tiger for the 60s as well, but it is extremely close with him and Griffith and Benvenuti.
I looked at their important wins and any losses at middleweight in the 1960s, and here is what I came up with:

Griffith was 2-0 vs Tiger and 1-2 vs Benvenuti. 0-2 vs Monzon but was more competitive vs Monzon than Benvenuti was. Beat contenders Joey Archer (twice) Joe Harris, Andy Heilman, Stan Heyward. Did lose to Stan Hayward and Don Fullmer.

Tiger was 0-2 vs Griffith and 1-0 vs Benvenuti. Beat Fullmer in a close fight, had a daw with Fullmer, and stopped Fullmer in 7 rounds. Was 1-1 vs Giardello. Beat contenders Hank Casey, Henry Hank, Florentino Fernandez, Rubin Carter. Did lose to Wilf Greaves and Joey Archer.

Benvenuti lost to Tiger in their only fight, but was 2-1 vs Griffith. Was 0-2 vs Monzon. Did beat contenders like Don Fullmer, Fraser Scott, and Don Baird as well as Luis Rodriguez. Never loss to a less than elite fighter at middleweight.

I guess there are a couple of other things to consider:
-Both tiger and Benvenuti were several pounds higher than the middleweight limit when they fought. (Tiger was 166 and Benvenuti was at 164) If you thow out that fight it would help Benvenuti and take away one of Tiger's biggest wins.
-The 2nd Griffth-Tiger fight was actually not in the 1960s. It was in 1970. If you thow that out it would help Tiger and take away a big win for Griffith.

It would be hard to find three more even fighters who all fought each other.

I think Tiger takes it. Against Griffith, he was robbed the 1st time and sick the 2nd time. Actually, "robbed" might be too strong a word, as the fight was close, but most observers agreed that Tiger deserved the nod. He also deserved the nod in the draw against Fullmer -- and the decision he won against Fullmer, though far from a wax-job, wasn't really all that close.

[Ambling Alp]

Fullmer also claimed he was sick in the first Tiger fight. Who knows, fighters usually seem to have to their excuses.
A lot of people thought Fullmer should have got the decison in the 2nd fight against Tiger. Naturally Fullmer himself thought he won.

I do think that Benvenuti often gets overlooked; unlike Griffith and Tiger he never to lost to a fighter that was not an ATG at middleweight.

btw-I just realized that none monzon fights vs Benvenuti and Griffth were in the 1960s. So techinically I guess we aren't supposed to consider them on this topic.

Anyway, I do agree that Tiger gets the slight edge. All 3 were great middleweights and a bit underrated.

[Mr E]

Fullmer also claimed he was sick in the first Tiger fight. Who knows, fighters usually seem to have to their excuses.
A lot of people thought Fullmer should have got the decison in the 2nd fight against Tiger. Naturally Fullmer himself thought he won.

I do think that Benvenuti often gets overlooked; unlike Griffith and Tiger he never to lost to a fighter that was not an ATG at middleweight.

btw-I just realized that none monzon fights vs Benvenuti and Griffth were in the 1960s. So techinically I guess we aren't supposed to consider them on this topic.

Anyway, I do agree that Tiger gets the slight edge. All 3 were great middleweights and a bit underrated.

When I wrote Tiger was "sick" for the Griffith rematch, I didn't mean he had a cold. That was his last fight before cancer caused first his retirement and then his death.

I met Fullmer at his restaurant once when I was a kid. He spoke very highly of Tiger and happily conceded that Tiger was too good for him, which of course he clearly was.

[King Carlos]

1880-1889: 1-Charley Mitchell, 2-Jack Dempsey, "The Nonpariel"
1890-1899: 1-Bob Fitzsimmons, 2-Kid McCoy
1900-1909: 1-Stanley Ketchel, 2-Philadelphia Jack O'Brien
1910-1919: 1-Harry Greb, 2-Mike Gibbons
1920-1929: 1-Harry Greb, 2-Mickey Walker
1930-1939: 1-Freddie Steele, 2-Ken Overlin
1940-1949: 1-Charley Burley, 2-Marcel Cerdan
1950-1959: 1-Sugar Ray Robinson, 2-Gene Fullmer
1960-1969: 1-Dick Tiger, 2-Emile Griffith
1970-1979: 1-Carlos Monzon, 2-Marvin Hagler
1980-1989: 1-Marvin Hagler, 2-Mike McCallum
1990-1999: 1-Roy Jones, Jr., 2-James Toney
2000-2009: 1-Bernard Hopkins, 2-Kelly Pavlik??

Not bad, although it'd hard to split Ryan and McCoy. Steele takes the #1 spot for the 30's for me as well, but the #2 spot is just teeming with contenders. Difficult one. I'd also take either Williams, Marshall, or Booker over Cerdan, among others.

[zdream]

2000-2009
I Think Its Hopkins And Felix Sturm