What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

davie
Cruiserweight
Posts: 6763
Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 00:45

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by davie »

Ambling Alp II wrote:Don't see why Mayweather is important. Made a ton of money, but what did he do for the sport?
There are probably some guys that we are overlooking.
Floyd Patterson was the first to to win the heavyweight title twice and was a great guy.
How about Archie Moore? Maybe some more of those middleweights who were involved in all those great middleweight fights in the 1950s and 1960s.
Great fighters

but the thread isn't about great fighters it's more the impact they had, the buzz they created, the other people they inspired.

I think a good gauge of that is public opinion. Ask the man on the street who Floyd Patterson or Archie Moore were you'll get a blank stare
Ask about Muhammad Ali/SRR/SRL/FMJr/Tyson and the recognition will be instant
Same for Marciano and probably Pacquiao/Duran/JCCJnr/Klitschko

Admittedly many of those names are more recent, which makes them more recognisable to guy on the street today.

but I feel those guys had a greater and more lasting impact on the sport.
Even if the achievements of the 2 you mentioned may be greater than some of the other listed and they could have ranked higher on an ATG list.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15109
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Ambling Alp II »

As some random people on the street who Floyd Mayweather is. You may be surprised by how many blank stares you get.
Syntax Error
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9007
Joined: 22 Apr 2005, 08:00

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Syntax Error »

Ambling Alp II wrote:Don't see why Mayweather is important. Made a ton of money, but what did he do for the sport?
There are probably some guys that we are overlooking.
Floyd Patterson was the first to to win the heavyweight title twice and was a great guy.
How about Archie Moore? Maybe some more of those middleweights who were involved in all those great middleweight fights in the 1950s and 1960s.
You're right, there's a lot of guys you could reasonably put in the top 5.

I think Mayweather Jr belongs, because his fame/notoriety extends beyond the sport.

He was a long reigning & successful world champion & p4p king & he is known by many people who don't follow the sport, although I don't believe he quite matches the likes of Tyson, Ali or even Leonard in that respect.
Syntax Error
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9007
Joined: 22 Apr 2005, 08:00

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Syntax Error »

The Revival wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:Muhammad Ali - No brainer: the most influential boxer of all-time & arguably the biggest sports person in history.

Sugar Ray Robinson - So influential that he inspired many of the greats of boxing, Muhammad Ali included.

Sugar Ray Leonard - He was boxing in the 80s (at least until Tyson emerged & then he had to share top billing) & the ultimate golden goose of his era

Floyd Mayweather Jr - Ditto as SRL, but two decades later.

Mike Tyson - At one point in his career, his fame was arguably greater than Ali's due to a latter day media age. Even now, most lay people know who he is & will say things like, "I feel like I've been 12 rounds with Mike Tyson"! Quite remarkable when you consider he hasn't been in his prime in around a quarter of a century & hasn't boxed in over ten years.
I would've went with the same 5 you did.
I hear you.

I myself could have chosen others to replace at least 3 of them on my list.

I think the only no-brainers I've picked are Mike Tyson & Muhammad Ali; the other 3 are down to my personal perception or bias, or whatever you want to call it. :TU:
Ezzard
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11172
Joined: 12 May 2005, 09:20

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Ezzard »

I think you have to have a Latino fighter on the list. I don't remember Olivares but I'm sure he had a huge impact on boxing as did Monzon and Jofre.

But Duran seems to be the most famous and infamous of them all. But I'm prepared to be proved wrong.
gilgamesh
Cruiserweight
Posts: 46293
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 16:21

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by gilgamesh »

Ezzard wrote:I think you have to have a Latino fighter on the list. I don't remember Olivares but I'm sure he had a huge impact on boxing as did Monzon and Jofre.

But Duran seems to be the most famous and infamous of them all. But I'm prepared to be proved wrong.
Duran, Chavez or Oscar De La Hoya definitely meant a great deal to the sport definitely.

Tito Trinidad as well.
keithmoonhangover
Cruiserweight
Posts: 16790
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by keithmoonhangover »

Ambling Alp II wrote:Don't see why Mayweather is important. Made a ton of money, but what did he do for the sport?
There are probably some guys that we are overlooking.
Floyd Patterson was the first to to win the heavyweight title twice and was a great guy.
How about Archie Moore? Maybe some more of those middleweights who were involved in all those great middleweight fights in the 1950s and 1960s.
Just to play devil's advocate, What did Duran do for the sport that Mayweather didn't?
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Ambling Alp II wrote:Don't see why Mayweather is important. Made a ton of money, but what did he do for the sport?
There are probably some guys that we are overlooking.
Floyd Patterson was the first to to win the heavyweight title twice and was a great guy.
How about Archie Moore? Maybe some more of those middleweights who were involved in all those great middleweight fights in the 1950s and 1960s.
Just to play devil's advocate, What did Duran do for the sport that Mayweather didn't?
Duran was UNBELIEVABLE
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15109
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Ambling Alp II »

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Ambling Alp II wrote:Don't see why Mayweather is important. Made a ton of money, but what did he do for the sport?
There are probably some guys that we are overlooking.
Floyd Patterson was the first to to win the heavyweight title twice and was a great guy.
How about Archie Moore? Maybe some more of those middleweights who were involved in all those great middleweight fights in the 1950s and 1960s.
Just to play devil's advocate, What did Duran do for the sport that Mayweather didn't?
They were both pieces of scum. However, at least Duran was willing to take on the best when they had something left. He gave us some memorable fights. Mayweather didn't. Mayweather waited until they were pretty much shot before taking them on.

I personally didn't list Duran either.
I would put in Archie Moore before either of them. People are going way overboard with his importance. He didn't really add much to the sport. Moore gave us great fights and was quite a character. He was much better known when he was fighting that Mayweather ever was.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

Floyd Mayweather is a great fighter. Probably a top 10, 15 or top 20 atg when we start to evaluate his career, but, he was TOO DAMN BORING to meant something for the sport of boxing.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

Ambling Alp II wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
Ambling Alp II wrote:Don't see why Mayweather is important. Made a ton of money, but what did he do for the sport?
There are probably some guys that we are overlooking.
Floyd Patterson was the first to to win the heavyweight title twice and was a great guy.
How about Archie Moore? Maybe some more of those middleweights who were involved in all those great middleweight fights in the 1950s and 1960s.
Just to play devil's advocate, What did Duran do for the sport that Mayweather didn't?
They were both pieces of scum. However, at least Duran was willing to take on the best when they had something left. He gave us some memorable fights. Mayweather didn't. Mayweather waited until they were pretty much shot before taking them on.

I personally didn't list Duran either.
I would put in Archie Moore before either of them. People are going way overboard with his importance. He didn't really add much to the sport. Moore gave us great fights and was quite a character. He was much better known when he was fighting that Mayweather ever was.
You're calling the great Roberto Duran a scum? Wasn't the great Sugar Ray Leonard a wife beater?
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by BoxBuzz »

And when it mattered, at the top of their games......(sort of like Ali,Frazier) Duran beat him.
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by BoxBuzz »

Ambling Alp II wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
Ambling Alp II wrote:Don't see why Mayweather is important. Made a ton of money, but what did he do for the sport?
There are probably some guys that we are overlooking.
Floyd Patterson was the first to to win the heavyweight title twice and was a great guy.
How about Archie Moore? Maybe some more of those middleweights who were involved in all those great middleweight fights in the 1950s and 1960s.
Just to play devil's advocate, What did Duran do for the sport that Mayweather didn't?
They were both pieces of scum. However, at least Duran was willing to take on the best when they had something left. He gave us some memorable fights. Mayweather didn't. Mayweather waited until they were pretty much shot before taking them on.

I personally didn't list Duran either.
I would put in Archie Moore before either of them. People are going way overboard with his importance. He didn't really add much to the sport. Moore gave us great fights and was quite a character. He was much better known when he was fighting that Mayweather ever was.

Archie's definitely a contender and my personal favorite. But Duran was known all over the world in a way that Moorer was not. So his importance is just edged by Duran in my opinion.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15109
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Ambling Alp II »

BoxBuzz wrote:And when it mattered, at the top of their games......(sort of like Ali,Frazier) Duran beat him.
TKO8 trumps W15.

As for Moore and Duran:
Duran did a lot to hurt the sport. Moore did not. Moore was actually a great guy who was a great ambassador for the sport.
Being better known doesn't mean you are more important. Besides, Moore may have been better known. He had many, many fights on TV throughout the 1950s and early 1960s. He may have been better known than Duran.
Ezzard
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11172
Joined: 12 May 2005, 09:20

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Ezzard »

The US is the capital of boxing. But you can't just list 5 fighters who were on US TV. Or popular in America.

Ali, Dempsey, Tyson were the biggest international sports stars of their eras. Mayweather clearly isn't.

The Latino nations are a big part of boxing; maybe the biggest now. The list is incomplete without at least one guy from that geographical area.
man
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3197
Joined: 09 Jul 2007, 10:38

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by man »

SRR
ali
SRL
tyson
floyd
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

I believe that the greats Archie Moore or Rocky Marciano should be in the list. Especially of what they meant in the American boxing scene in the last 65 years.

But, if we talk what fighters meant in boxing throughout the world since 1950, my pics would be Muhammad Ali, Sugar Ray Robinson, Roberto Duran, Sugar Ray Leonard and Mike Tyson for the great contributions they made for boxing all around the world. Oscar De La Hoya, Floyd Mayweather, Jr and Roy Jones, Jr., may had made more money than those five, but, didn't had a bigger impact.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

Ezzard wrote:The US is the capital of boxing. But you can't just list 5 fighters who were on US TV. Or popular in America.

Ali, Dempsey, Tyson were the biggest international sports stars of their eras. Mayweather clearly isn't.

The Latino nations are a big part of boxing; maybe the biggest now. The list is incomplete without at least one guy from that geographical area.
You're right about that. Every fighter wants to make money in America because that's where the money is and the boxing media is the most powerful in the world. Even great Mexican fighters had to travel to Los Angeles or Inglewood, CA to make the money.

The heavyweight division is by far, the most glamorous division for any fighter. But, look at the Klitschkos brothers: They are white, they have been champions in this division for a long time and they are big and somewhat talented

What is the problem with them that they are not known all over the world? Well, they are not Americans. They have terrible accents when speaking English, and their fights are mostly in Europe.

If they were Americans, right now, they would have been compared to the great Rocky Marciano and many Americans would believe that.
Right now, The Kiltschkos probably will have the same syndrome of the greats Eder Jofre, Carlos Monzon or Georges Carpentier. Great fighters that didn't receive American media exposure
Ezzard
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11172
Joined: 12 May 2005, 09:20

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Ezzard »

I think like or loathe the Klitschkos have had a huge impact on boxing. The crowds they draw in Europe have meant that they don't need the US.

Just think about that for a moment. That's a huge statement. Who would have thought that could ever be possible?

Eastern Europe is now pumping out plenty of talent. The K brothers have been a big influence...far more than Mayweather.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

Ezzard wrote:I think like or loathe the Klitschkos have had a huge impact on boxing. The crowds they draw in Europe have meant that they don't need the US.

Just think about that for a moment. That's a huge statement. Who would have thought that could ever be possible?

Eastern Europe is now pumping out plenty of talent. The K brothers have been a big influence...far more than Mayweather.

You are right, Ezzard. You're absolutely right. The ONLY THING IS, that, it doesn't matter to the average American boxing fan.

How the great Roberto Duran broke into American consciousness? Lots of factors came into play, including "The No Mas" fight, which was a negative thing for the sport, but, somehow it stucked in the annals of boxing lore. I think the "No Mas" fight made Duran more famous than what he already was. In a way, it was a blessing in disguise for him.
Ezzard
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11172
Joined: 12 May 2005, 09:20

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Ezzard »

It's not as bad as biting someone's ear but it was a poor show.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

Ezzard wrote:It's not as bad as biting someone's ear but it was a poor show.
You're right again.

See, Iron Mike and Manos de Piedra, no matter what, when someone thinks about boxing, they enter into someone's consciousness whether be good or bad. They captured our imagination forever, just like the great Jack Dempsey in The Long Count Fight with the great Gene Tunney. It seems that after all these years, Dempsey has become still, larger than life. A blessing in disguise for Tyson, Duran and Dempsey? It probably was/is.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15109
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by Ambling Alp II »

If the Klitschkos and Mayweather made such an impact to the sport, interest the sport wouldn't have declined nearly as much as it has since the time that the started.
Unless the argument is that they made a negative impact.
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

The Klitshkos problem is that they are not Americans
elmersalsa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15666
Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50

Re: What 5 Boxers meant the most to the sport (since 1950)

Post by elmersalsa »

BoxBuzz wrote:And when it mattered, at the top of their games......(sort of like Ali,Frazier) Duran beat him.
:TU: :TU: :TU:
Post Reply