Hearns only Knocked out Pipino CuevasIdisagree wrote:Floyd higher than Hearns at Welter is a joke. Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than any of Floyd's wins at welter.
Floyd never lost at welterweight. More time at the top. Better champion.
Hearns only Knocked out Pipino CuevasIdisagree wrote:Floyd higher than Hearns at Welter is a joke. Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than any of Floyd's wins at welter.
Floyd never lost at welterweight because he never face anyone worth mentioning at that weight other than a past his best Pac. His fight vs Maidana was as close as it get in their first fight. Floyd at welter wouldn't make my top 20. If we go by your logic, Tito was a champion for a lot longer than Floyd at welter and never lost at that weight. How come he is rated below Floyd?elmersalsa wrote:Hearns only Knocked out Pipino CuevasIdisagree wrote:Floyd higher than Hearns at Welter is a joke. Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than any of Floyd's wins at welter.
Floyd never lost at welterweight. More time at the top. Better champion.
Those are speculated opinions. Floyd was a phenomenal fighter. Had more important wins than the Hitman at WW. Hearns lost 2 of his biggest fights of his career, one of them was at 147. Floyd won every single fight at 147. Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.Idisagree wrote:Floyd never lost at welterweight because he never face anyone worth mentioning at that weight other than a past his best Pac. His fight vs Maidana was as close as it get in their first fight. Floyd at welter wouldn't make my top 20. If we go by your logic, Tito was a champion for a lot longer than Floyd at welter and never lost at that weight. How come he is rated below Floyd?elmersalsa wrote:Hearns only Knocked out Pipino CuevasIdisagree wrote:Floyd higher than Hearns at Welter is a joke. Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than any of Floyd's wins at welter.
Floyd never lost at welterweight. More time at the top. Better champion.
Has Floyd be fighting in Hearns era we would not be having this conversation. Hearns would have decapitated Floyd at welter. Leonard would have beaten him to pulp and so would have Duran. I even think he would have lost to Benitez too.
Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than all of Floyd's wins at welter.
so tito would jump from 17 to about 7elmersalsa wrote:Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.
It's not about, who beat who. It's also about the performance and the stakes that were behind it.man wrote:so tito would jump from 17 to about 7elmersalsa wrote:Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.
by beating a fighter that is not within
your top 25.
elmersalsa wrote:I would like to put Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith in there, but, it's hard, man. It's hard.
Explain to me, why you would rate Leonard over Kid Gavilan or Griffith at WWcampfire wrote:elmersalsa wrote:I would like to put Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith in there, but, it's hard, man. It's hard.
Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith :surprised: you said its hard man to put them in there even though you would like too I'm totally with you on this one it would be really hard to put some-one or two in the top 25 when they would be flat out making most people's top 50Kid Gavilan and Emile Griffith are better Welterweight's then Sugar Ray Leonard that's going out on a limb don't you think
![]()
![]()
please.elmersalsa wrote:It's not about, who beat who. It's also about the performance and the stakes that were behind it.man wrote:so tito would jump from 17 to about 7elmersalsa wrote:Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.
by beating a fighter that is not within
your top 25.
elmersalsa wrote:Explain to me, why you would rate Leonard over Kid Gavilan or Griffith at WWcampfire wrote:elmersalsa wrote:I would like to put Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith in there, but, it's hard, man. It's hard.
Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith :surprised: you said its hard man to put them in there even though you would like too I'm totally with you on this one it would be really hard to put some-one or two in the top 25 when they would be flat out making most people's top 50Kid Gavilan and Emile Griffith are better Welterweight's then Sugar Ray Leonard that's going out on a limb don't you think
![]()
![]()
It's elmer logic. It's not about making sense; it's about finding random things to favor guys he likes over those he doesn't.man wrote:so tito would jump from 17 to about 7elmersalsa wrote:Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.
by beating a fighter that is not within
your top 25.
Griffith won three split decisons against Rodriquez in fights that were all hotly disputed. He easily could have been 1-3 or even 0-4.Ezzard wrote:Jack Britton fought Kid Lewis 20 times...
I think the series ended 10-7-3 in Britton's favour (or something like that).
Leonard-Duran was 1-1 at welter.
Griffith-Rodriguez was 3-1.
the business had changed and these eraselmersalsa wrote:And it makes me laugh. Really. Like if the greats Thomas Hearns or Sugar Ray Leonard compete in the 50s or 60s era, they will bumrush the competition. Really?
Thanks you!, OMG! I knew someone would know something about the great Kid Gavilan. Thank you, JAH for the post!dempseyfire wrote:Kid Gavilan's record sh^&s all over Leonards . . .seriously. Hearns was a great win and Benitez a very good win but after that it's pretty shallow. Gavilan beat tons of great fighters; sometimes over the span of a few months.
i would have pernell in the top ten and hearnsdempseyfire wrote:Floyd and Trinidad should not be nearly so high; this division is stacked and they beat no great welters (Floyd's best wins there are over two blown-up, past their prime lightweights in Mosley and Pacman). Tito got the horrible decision vs Oscar and who . .Carr? Vargas?
Burley hardly had any fights at welter, so not sure how he's ranked at there . . .
Walker is absent since I'm putting him at 160.
My list (subject to revision):
1) Ray Robinson
2) Kid Gavilan
3) Emile Griffith
4) Joe Walcott
5) Henry Armstrong
6) Jimmy McClarnin
7) Ray Leonard
8 ) Carmen Basilio
9) Luis Rodriguez
10) Jose Napoles
11) Jack Britton
12) Barney Ross
13) Virgil Akins (look at the complete record prior to the championship; I have no doubt he let Jordan beat him per orders from the Mob)
14) Young Corbett III
15) Jackie Fields
16) Roberto Duran
17) Curtis Cokes
18) Billy Graham
19) Tommy Hearns (I'm breaking my cardinal rule here and ranking more ability than resume)
20) Joe Dundee
21) Fritzie Zivic
22) Pernell Whitaker
23) Floyd Mayweather Jr
24) Ted 'Kid' Lewis
25) Lou Broulliard
Although Duran's stint was shorter I think the wins over Palomino and Leonard eclipse anything Hearns did at 147, by a large amount.man wrote:i would have pernell in the top ten and hearnsdempseyfire wrote:Floyd and Trinidad should not be nearly so high; this division is stacked and they beat no great welters (Floyd's best wins there are over two blown-up, past their prime lightweights in Mosley and Pacman). Tito got the horrible decision vs Oscar and who . .Carr? Vargas?
Burley hardly had any fights at welter, so not sure how he's ranked at there . . .
Walker is absent since I'm putting him at 160.
My list (subject to revision):
1) Ray Robinson
2) Kid Gavilan
3) Emile Griffith
4) Joe Walcott
5) Henry Armstrong
6) Jimmy McClarnin
7) Ray Leonard
8 ) Carmen Basilio
9) Luis Rodriguez
10) Jose Napoles
11) Jack Britton
12) Barney Ross
13) Virgil Akins (look at the complete record prior to the championship; I have no doubt he let Jordan beat him per orders from the Mob)
14) Young Corbett III
15) Jackie Fields
16) Roberto Duran
17) Curtis Cokes
18) Billy Graham
19) Tommy Hearns (I'm breaking my cardinal rule here and ranking more ability than resume)
20) Joe Dundee
21) Fritzie Zivic
22) Pernell Whitaker
23) Floyd Mayweather Jr
24) Ted 'Kid' Lewis
25) Lou Broulliard
ahead of duran (not only because of the direct
matchup, but for overall achievement at welter).
Ambling Alp II wrote:campfire said WHY :?? BECAUSE HE WAS A CLASS OR TWO ABOVE THEM IN FIGHTING ABILITY THERE IS NO OTHER ANSWER
I wasn't comparing the careers of ray and Emile. But good of you to jump in just in case I was.Ambling Alp II wrote:Griffith won three split decisons against Rodriquez in fights that were all hotly disputed. He easily could have been 1-3 or even 0-4.Ezzard wrote:Jack Britton fought Kid Lewis 20 times...
I think the series ended 10-7-3 in Britton's favour (or something like that).
Leonard-Duran was 1-1 at welter.
Griffith-Rodriguez was 3-1.
His next best opponent that he beat at welterweight is who? Denny Moyer? Benny Paret? Nobody close to Hearns and Benitez.
Griffith also lost to Paret once. Imagine if Leonard ever lost to someone like that. You would never hear the end of it.
Griffith's record was very good at welterweight. It is clearly not as good as Leonard's.