Trinidad/DLH

[Ambling Alp II]

Sugar did not have Michael Spinks or Harold Johnson in his Top 100.
Yet he made room for Willie Ritchie, Rocky Graziano and Lew Jenkins in his top 100. Seriously.

However he was on TV and wore a cool hat. So was he a boxing expert? Tough call.

He knew more than you and I, Alp

I agree with part of your last statement.

[Bobbyptsd]

Sugar did not have Michael Spinks or Harold Johnson in his Top 100.
Yet he made room for Willie Ritchie, Rocky Graziano and Lew Jenkins in his top 100. Seriously.

However he was on TV and wore a cool hat. So was he a boxing expert? Tough call.

Indeed. If someone likes Sugar's views and respects them, that's one thing. But to automatically assume he's an "expert" as opposed to anyone else is odd, at the best of times.

[elmersalsa]

He, Bert Sugar, was qualified. We're not.

[man]

He, Bert Sugar, was qualified. We're not.

don't think that is the case for all board
members but it certainly is for me.

[Ambling Alp II]

Sugar did not have Michael Spinks or Harold Johnson in his Top 100.
Yet he made room for Willie Ritchie, Rocky Graziano and Lew Jenkins in his top 100. Seriously.

However he was on TV and wore a cool hat. So was he a boxing expert? Tough call.

Indeed. If someone likes Sugar's views and respects them, that's one thing. But to automatically assume he's an "expert" as opposed to anyone else is odd, at the best of times.

It is amazing isn't it? Someone has a large forum and some people assume that he knows more than others. I don't care if a person is famous or not.

I thought Sugar was a cool guy. He knew more about boxing than the average Joe who doesn't follow the sport. However, it's pretty obvious that he didn't know more than a serious fan who has a strong interest in the history of the sport, tries not to be biased, and has a solid ways to rate fighters.

[elmersalsa]

The guy, Bert Randolph Sugar, knew his boxing. Give credit where is due...Now, if you guys don't agree what the man has published or said, then, that's a different story. It don't make us that we know more than he does.

I agree with him that Oscar, nor Tito nor Lennox or may I say, The Golden Boy, Tito nor The Lion belong in the top 100, and I believe that that's accurate. Too many legendary champions and fighters that deserve a spot in the top 100 greats.

For example, I could never see those 3 better than The great Holman Williams. He never won a world title, but, his quality of work was phenomenal. To me, the great Mike Tyson was better than those three, too.

[palooka]

He, Bert Sugar, was qualified. We're not.

There's a degree in being a boxing fan?

[elmersalsa]

He, Bert Sugar, was qualified. We're not.

There's a degree in being a boxing fan?

No. But, let's leave like that. The guy knew more boxing than you and I. I don't have a problem with that.

I don't have a problem if all posters in this forum know more boxing than I. I know what I know. Let's leave it at that.

[palooka]

He, Bert Sugar, was qualified. We're not.

There's a degree in being a boxing fan?

No. But, let's leave like that. The guy knew more boxing than you and I. I don't have a problem with that.

I don't have a problem if all posters in this forum know more boxing than I. I know what I know. Let's leave it at that.

I get that he knew more about boxing but don't think he was correct about everything and also note he had certain vested interests whereas most of us on here do not.

[elmersalsa]

Fair call, palooka.

[palooka]

Fair call, palooka.

thanks, Elmer

[Ambling Alp II]

Some people have a lot of knowledge about certain eras and other people have more in another. Other people know a lot about the "x's and o's" but don't know a lot about the history of the sport.
Some know a lot about the history of the sport but don't really know how to rate fighters.
ie they overrate a fighter because he has a high win/loss record or has a lot of title defenses and overlook that he may have a fought weak competition.

Bert Sugar certainly knew more than many people. However, him rating people like Willie Richie, Rocky Graziano and Lew Jenkins in the top 100 and not rating someone like Michael Spinks and Harold Johnson shows he was far from great at rating fighters.

I do believe that Sugar knows more than elmer. I also believe that several people on this forum know more than Sugar; at least as far as rating fighters.

[elmersalsa]

Some people have a lot of knowledge about certain eras and other people have more in another. Other people know a lot about the "x's and o's" but don't know a lot about the history of the sport.
Some know a lot about the history of the sport but don't really know how to rate fighters.
ie they overrate a fighter because he has a high win/loss record or has a lot of title defenses and overlook that he may have a fought weak competition.

Bert Sugar certainly knew more than many people. However, him rating people like Willie Richie, Rocky Graziano and Lew Jenkins in the top 100 and not rating someone like Michael Spinks and Harold Johnson shows he was far from great at rating fighters.

I do believe that Sugar knows more than elmer. I also believe that several people on this forum know more than Sugar; at least as far as rating fighters.

I admitted that, Ambling Alp. And I really don't care. I know what I know, and I am satisfied at that. I have learned from every poster in this forum and also from Bert Randolph Sugar. But, I agree with him 100%, that Oscar DeLaHoya, Lennox Lewis nor Felix "Tito" Trinidad belong in the top 100 all time greats. He made my day on that statement.

[man]

i agree with lewis and trinidad, i disagree
with de la hoya. not top5o, but top1oo.
this is the nice thing about this section
here, people can have opinions and not
get ... disproven.

i admit i might be biased because of his
attitude to go for best opponent available,
which has become so rare in recent decades.

[Ambling Alp II]

If you have ever done a Top 100 list, you find a few things:

It gets harder as you go. Your first 50-55 guys or so you probably won't have any doubt that they deserve to be in the top 100. The next 20-25 or so you won't have too much doubt about whether or not they deserve to be in. Then it gets really tough. You have basically 70-80 guys going for the last 20-30 spots.


I don't really have too much problem with people not having say De La Hoya or Lewis in if it's actually based on something that makes sense. They at least have to be guys that almost put it. However, some people simply won't consider someone that they don't like. That is one thing I don't like.

Others don't have any set criteria; they are pretty much just winging it. If you aren't going to be put some like De La Hoya or Lewis in, then you better not be putting in people like Willie Ritchie, Rocky Graziano, and Lew Jenkins (which Sugar did) who were all clearly inferior.

Not putting Harold Johnson in is silly, and and not putting in Michael Spinks is absurd.

[palooka]

I think that part of the issue with Bert Sugars lists and inclusion/exclusion of certain boxers is that pre Internet some footage was very rare and difficult to see. Established boxing figures could view the footage and claim that the boxer was great - they could be very persuasive to people who had never seen the footage. Now many old time boxers are on YouTube it could be said that Sugar was a bit over generous toward some old timers and a bit stingy with praise for the modern boxers we could all see. I don't think Sugar was alone in doing this.

[Ambling Alp II]

This one came out in his book in 2006. Youtube had been around for a while by then. Even before that you could get videos of many fights by ordering them. There was also ESPN Classic. He also had access to records of anyone worth mentioning.

And he still made some awful picks. Not something that reasonable and knowledgeable people could disagree on. Truly awful picks. No brainers that didn't make it. Rocky Graziano and Lew Jenkins over Michael Spinks and Harold Johnson. That says enough.

[ironfish]

i thought delahoya won , but i won $150 because i picked trinidad