The WELTERWEIGHT game: *CLOSED*

[elmersalsa]

Like the great Dick Tiger at middleweight, the great Emile Griffith doesn't get much respect at 147lbs. The things he did at welterweight and how he fought, he should have been in many people's minds as a true top 5 welterweight. The same I gotta say about the great Kid Gavilan. Those two were great boxers at welterweight. It's a shame.

[jezzamundo]

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. gavilan
4. Leonard
5. Griffith
6. Rodriguez
7. Napoles
8. McClarnin
9. Ross
10. Paul Williams- I know he doesn't belong here, but it's 1 point and I was struggling to find someone. Probably the last fighter I'll have a real attachment too. Real throwback, would fight anyone and all heart. I asked him one time ifhe could fight any fighter ever who would it be..."Sugar Ray Robinson, because he was the best."

No room for Hearns?

[Ambling Alp II]

TO: Ambling Alp & Keko (no problem on the language, best I can do is curse in another language - you are light years ahead of me.)

If people like a particular fighter they will BS themselves into believing whatever is necessary regardless of the rules; in reference to this problem I give myself one slot for a pure heart choice and then try to put away my bias. (In my MDW list it was Nino; this time it was Hearns. I can make a better argument for Hearns than Nino.)

But what I think we have here is the classic: 'What defines greatness?' question - we should have a discussion about that before we try to set criteria for listing. (I would like to have that discussion anyway, list or no list.)

There seems to be two basic schools of thought: head to head & longevity - both with their advantages and qualifications - I go with head to head because I think about it from a gamblers POV

Taking the head to head in its purist form I ran into a problem Rocky Garziano (back in the MDW) - I believed that there was an 18 month period where Garziano (on one of his good nights) could have taken half the guys on my list, but I couldn't bring myself to put him on my list, because 18 months doesn't denote a great career. And there you go, suddenly I am back to longevity, where I claimed I wasn't going. LOL - I go round and round with these stupid lists.

I can't put my finger on what greatness' is suppose to be.

My problem with head to head is the way people sometimes use it. They say that so and so would have beaten so and so, therefore he should be rated ahead of him.
To me, that is not true head to head. True head to head, is if the two fighters actually fought each other. If they didn't fight each other , then you can't do head to head.

Don't like longevity either. Doesn't matter how long a fighter's career was. It's what he did in whatever time he had that counts.

Basically weigh the big wins vs the losses/bad performances. Take into the consideration of a fighter's career, and stage of the career of his opponents.

Wouldn't that give the Rocky's and Bowe's of the world an advantage? All wins....short runs.... It's an interesting take. If Wilt would have beaten Ali would that short career be the definition of greatness?

No. If a fighter only has one big win, others will rate ahead of him even if they have some losses.

And to a certain extent, Marciano and Bowe should get penalized for umipressive performances in fights that they won. Marciano got an iffy decison against ls Starza and a stiff named Ted Lowry. He also shold get penalized for dirt tactics, (rabbitt punch against Charles, elbow against Walcott, hitting Cockell when he was down.)
Bowe should not get ripped for his only loss (very close decison against a prime Holyfield) but he had some other unimpressive performances in he fights that he won.

[davie]

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Emile Griffith
4. Sugar Ray Leonard
5. Jack Britton
6. Ted Kid Lewis
7. Jose Napoles
8. Barney Ross
9. Floyd Mayweather
10. Jimmy McLarnin

I've re-wrote that list about 5 times this month, The following have been in and out more than once (don't ask me why they don't make the final list, I might cry)
Manny Pacquiao, Pernell Whittaker, Roberto Duran, Tommy Hearns, Kid Gavilan, Carmen Basillio, Joe Walcott

[SaadOffTheDeck]

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. gavilan
4. Leonard
5. Griffith
6. Rodriguez
7. Napoles
8. McClarnin
9. Ross
10. Paul Williams- I know he doesn't belong here, but it's 1 point and I was struggling to find someone. Probably the last fighter I'll have a real attachment too. Real throwback, would fight anyone and all heart. I asked him one time ifhe could fight any fighter ever who would it be..."Sugar Ray Robinson, because he was the best."

No room for Hearns?

I wish. He doesn't have the resume.

[Ezzard]

Very hard to compile... Sticking to any set of criteria can leas you to an odd list...

[Ambling Alp II]

If the criteria is solid, then the list will be.

[davie]

If the criteria is solid, then the list will be.

Not if it's not applied correctly or judged properly

I'm going to include the fighters who I think win head to head..... Tim Bradley beats them all IMO
I'm going to include fighter with the best resume....Danny Garcia has faced a real who's who of welterweight greats, he's in too

Your criteria could be flawless, but if you are a moron, then you'll populate your list with nonsense, thankfully, I do not judge you or Ezzard to fit that criteria

Where's Kalan?

[BoxBuzz]

I'd rather have a posted list to pick from. It's more difficult to figure "who" qualifies.....than rating the names in front of you.

For example....Where do I rate Tommy Hearns? I think his best was Jr Middle, so he'll never get any credit for falling between weight classes.

And I have made a rule for myself NOT to enter the same fighter in more than one weight class. So by my arbitrary approach some fighters just don't get credit.


Show me the buffet and I'll pick you a great main course.....show me an empty table, and you may have to settle for hash.

[davie]

I'd rather have a posted list to pick from. It's more difficult to figure "who" qualifies.....than rating the names in front of you.

For example....Where do I rate Tommy Hearns? I think his best was Jr Middle, so he'll never get any credit for falling between weight classes.

And I have made a rule for myself NOT to enter the same fighter in more than one weight class. So by my arbitrary approach some fighters just don't get credit.


Show me the buffet and I'll pick you a great main course.....show me an empty table, and you may have to settle for hash.

Don't take it too seriously Buzz, just do what feels right

[Keko]

Whoever has will make update that we see the result?

[Ezzard]

It's a weighting issue. Hearns looks like a top 10 welter but does not have a record that is particularly close.

If I go by their bets night at the weight then Duran is right up there...but I don't think he's a top 10 welter either...

[Ambling Alp II]

I put in Hearns mainly because his only loss was to Leonard, and he had some good positives. He didn't beat any legends, but did score the crushing KO2 win over Cuevas, and beat several good ones. He also did it very convincingly most of the time.

Having said that, I had him at #7, and there are several guys right behind him that are very close; so I can no problem if someone didn't quite have him in the Top 10.

[Keko]

It is possible as 9 or 10 but it is clear why someone is not in the top 10. It's a tough choice in this category.

[Tomasino]

I put in Hearns mainly because his only loss was to Leonard, and he had some good positives. He didn't beat any legends, but did score the crushing KO2 win over Cuevas, and beat several good ones. He also did it very convincingly most of the time.

Having said that, I had him at #7, and there are several guys right behind him that are very close; so I can no problem if someone didn't quite have him in the Top 10.

I had Hearns in because he was so close with Leonard and also I see him able to beat anyone at Welter on his best night. He was a beast. Many guys beat his resume though.

[Keko]

For example....Where do I rate Tommy Hearns? I think his best was Jr Middle

It would be great to make the top 5 junior categories!

[Ezzard]

I put in Hearns mainly because his only loss was to Leonard, and he had some good positives. He didn't beat any legends, but did score the crushing KO2 win over Cuevas, and beat several good ones. He also did it very convincingly most of the time.

Having said that, I had him at #7, and there are several guys right behind him that are very close; so I can no problem if someone didn't quite have him in the Top 10.

I had Hearns in because he was so close with Leonard and also I see him able to beat anyone at Welter on his best night. He was a beast. Many guys beat his resume though.

But Duran actually beat Leonard. Not saying anyone is right or wring... Just that it's a tricky one to figure out.

[Keko]

Twice he was pretty lost and there's no rules.Head to head is joke

[dr_devious]

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Emile Griffith
4. Sugar Ray Leonard
5. Jack Britton
6. Ted Kid Lewis
7. Jose Napoles
8. Barney Ross
9. Floyd Mayweather
10. Jimmy McLarnin

I've re-wrote that list about 5 times this month, The following have been in and out more than once (don't ask me why they don't make the final list, I might cry)
Manny Pacquiao, Pernell Whittaker, Roberto Duran, Tommy Hearns, Kid Gavilan, Carmen Basillio, Joe Walcott

Tommy Hearns would beat Napoles and Mayweather at WW

[davie]

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Emile Griffith
4. Sugar Ray Leonard
5. Jack Britton
6. Ted Kid Lewis
7. Jose Napoles
8. Barney Ross
9. Floyd Mayweather
10. Jimmy McLarnin

I've re-wrote that list about 5 times this month, The following have been in and out more than once (don't ask me why they don't make the final list, I might cry)
Manny Pacquiao, Pernell Whittaker, Roberto Duran, Tommy Hearns, Kid Gavilan, Carmen Basillio, Joe Walcott

Tommy Hearns would beat Napoles and Mayweather at WW

Tommy Hearns would beat a fair few on that list, he'd possibly smash some of them senseless he was a monster at 147lbs, I just didn't feel he had the strength of resume at that weight class.

The same reason I havn't found a place for RJJ at MW, or Sam Langford or Bob Fitzsimmons at any weight class for that matter. An issue that is causimg me a great deal of sleepless nights compiling these lists

There are a couple on the 'didn't make the list' list that I would pick head to head against the ones that did make my top 10, but thats not how I set my criteria for ATG type lists

[Ambling Alp II]

I put in Hearns mainly because his only loss was to Leonard, and he had some good positives. He didn't beat any legends, but did score the crushing KO2 win over Cuevas, and beat several good ones. He also did it very convincingly most of the time.

Having said that, I had him at #7, and there are several guys right behind him that are very close; so I can no problem if someone didn't quite have him in the Top 10.

I had Hearns in because he was so close with Leonard and also I see him able to beat anyone at Welter on his best night. He was a beast. Many guys beat his resume though.

But Duran actually beat Leonard. Not saying anyone is right or wring... Just that it's a tricky one to figure out.

That helps Duran's case. Howver, he also lost in 8 rounds. Hearns did more in other welterweight fights than Duran did. So Hearns should be rated higher at welterweight.

[Ambling Alp II]

If the criteria is solid, then the list will be.

Not if it's not applied correctly or judged properly

I'm going to include the fighters who I think win head to head..... Tim Bradley beats them all IMO
I'm going to include fighter with the best resume....Danny Garcia has faced a real who's who of welterweight greats, he's in too

Your criteria could be flawless, but if you are a moron, then you'll populate your list with nonsense, thankfully, I do not judge you or Ezzard to fit that criteria

Where's Kalan?

Well sure, you do have to know what you are doing. Someone like Kalan is probably going to come up with a horrible list. If someone doesn't know what a quality win is or a bad loss is, then they will come up with a horrible list.

However, again, with Tim Bradley would beat anyone example, that is doing the who you think would win head to head thing. People just need to block that out.

Just weigh the good against the bad of what really happened.

[Crease]

Keep on voting gents, i've been really busy recently.

But i'll get around to updating the scoreboard over the next 48 hours...

[Crease]

Whoever has will make update that we see the result?

Patience is a virtue, my friend.

[Crease]

But here is how things stand:

Current Scoreboard: (16 Members have voted)

1st - 156 pts Sugar Ray Robinson
2nd - 127 pts Sugar Ray Leonard
3rd - 121 pts Henry Armstrong
4th - 86 pts Emile Griffith
5th - 58 pts Jose Napoles
6th - 51 pts Barney Ross
7th - 49 pts Thomas Hearns
8th - 45 pts Kid Gavilan
9th - 34 pts Jimmy McLarnin
10th - 31 pts Floyd Mayweather Jr

11th - 27 pts Jack Britton
12th - 16 pts Luis Manuel Rodriguez
Tied 13th - 15 pts Carmen Basilio
Tied 13th - 15 pts Barbadoes Joe Walcott
15th - 13 pts Roberto Duran
16th - 8 pts Pernell Whitaker
17th - 7 pts Ted Kid Lewis
18th - 6 pts Manny Pacquaio
19th - 4 pts Mickey Walker
20th - 3 pts Tommy Ryan

21st - 2 pts Felix Trinidad
Tied 22nd - 1 pt Paul Williams
Tied 22nd - 1 pt Oscar De La Hoya
Tied 22nd - 1 pt Don Curry
Tied 22nd - 1 pt Fritzie Zivic