ATG p4p lomachenko

[man]

It's debatable of course, but these are the guys I'd have as the Top 10 All Time

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Sam Langford
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Harry Greb
5. Henry Armstrong
6. Willie Pep
7. Roberto Duran
8. Muhammad Ali
9. Archie Moore
10. Sugar Ray Leonard

good list for me. though p4p i would
not have moore in there.

Who would you replace him with?

pac, with confidence.

[gilgamesh]

good list for me. though p4p i would
not have moore in there.

Who would you replace him with?

pac, with confidence.

Mayweather ranks higher than Pac. He beat him head to head, and had an easy time with Pac's main rival Marquez whom Pac always struggled with.

[oogiebe]

Harry Greb

Was he a funny guy or something?

IDK...didn't see the humor in one of the finest fighters of all time. Only man to beat Gene Tunney, and Greb a middleweight.

[boxing_rocks]

Harry Greb

Was he a funny guy or something?

IDK...didn't see the humor in one of the finest fighters of all time. Only man to beat Gene Tunney, and Greb a middleweight.

I can only imagine what would Hagler or Golovkin do to him.

[gilgamesh]

Was he a funny guy or something?

IDK...didn't see the humor in one of the finest fighters of all time. Only man to beat Gene Tunney, and Greb a middleweight.

I can only imagine what would Hagler or Golovkin do to him.

That's true. You can only imagine it because there's not any footage of him, but his record speaks for itself.

[boxing_rocks]

IDK...didn't see the humor in one of the finest fighters of all time. Only man to beat Gene Tunney, and Greb a middleweight.

I can only imagine what would Hagler or Golovkin do to him.

That's true. You can only imagine it because there's not any footage of him, but his record speaks for itself.

This is like comparing a record of Ali Raymi with somebody facing tough opponents. Skill level, strength, conditioning, size of boxers at that time were so much lower than now, that their records aren't worth much.

[boxing_rocks]

Harry Greb

Was he a funny guy or something?

Yes, he sorta was:

[oogiebe]

I can only imagine what would Hagler or Golovkin do to him.

That's true. You can only imagine it because there's not any footage of him, but his record speaks for itself.

This is like comparing a record of Ali Raymi with somebody facing tough opponents. Skill level, strength, conditioning, size of boxers at that time were so much lower than now, that their records aren't worth much.

For the record I think Greb is one of the best ever. Very underrated fighter. Size of all divisions is the same (with extra classes being inserted). The only division impacted by size differential over time is the HW's, so I'm not clear what you mean.

[oogiebe]

Harry Greb

Was he a funny guy or something?

Yes, he sorta was:

LOL!! Nice!

[gilgamesh]

I can only imagine what would Hagler or Golovkin do to him.

That's true. You can only imagine it because there's not any footage of him, but his record speaks for itself.

This is like comparing a record of Ali Raymi with somebody facing tough opponents. Skill level, strength, conditioning, size of boxers at that time were so much lower than now, that their records aren't worth much.

The people Greb faced were the best of their era. He more than held his own with them. While he may not be the force that he was then in different eras I doubt very much that you could take a fighter as great as seemed to be by all accounts and find him completely out of his depth in any era.

This is not to say he couldn't be beaten...hell any man can be beaten, but I suspect he'd be a tough night out for most any fighter from any era.

[Abradolf Lincler]

I can only imagine what would Hagler or Golovkin do to him.

That's true. You can only imagine it because there's not any footage of him, but his record speaks for itself.

This is like comparing a record of that late Yemeni boxer stopping all his opposition with somebody facing tough opponents. Skill level, strength, conditioning, size of boxers at that time was so much lower than now, that their records aren't worth much.

Why? Even if you believe this, you realize that Greb fought in the same time period, under the same conditions as his opponents. He didn't have any advantages in the regards you mentioned. So, relative to his era (which is all you can be unless you've figured out time travel) Greb is pretty much unparalleled in terms of the opposition he faced and beat. Your argument doesn't matter even if it were true.

[oogiebe]

That's true. You can only imagine it because there's not any footage of him, but his record speaks for itself.

This is like comparing a record of that late Yemeni boxer stopping all his opposition with somebody facing tough opponents. Skill level, strength, conditioning, size of boxers at that time was so much lower than now, that their records aren't worth much.

Why? Even if you believe this, you realize that Greb fought in the same time period, under the same conditions as his opponents. He didn't have any advantages in the regards you mentioned. So, relative to his era (which is all you can be unless you've figured out time travel) Greb is pretty much unparalleled in terms of the opposition he faced and beat. Your argument doesn't matter even if it were true.

A bit harsh, but I agree. Greb was a great fighter who fought all comers in a pretty good era of boxing. He isn't considered an ATG for nothing.

[Abradolf Lincler]

And for the record, your Ali Raymi analogy made zero sense. He faced opponents that were garbage by any standards. Greb faced opponents that were great by his era's standards, even if you don't believe they'd be great today (which, again, doesn't matter).

[oogiebe]

And for the record, your Ali Raymi analogy made zero sense. He faced opponents that were garbage by any standards. Greb faced opponents that were great by his era's standards, even if you don't believe they'd be great today (which, again, doesn't matter).

I didn't make any statement to Ali Raymi, so I'll assume you're replying to someone else. yes?

[Abradolf Lincler]

And for the record, your Ali Raymi analogy made zero sense. He faced opponents that were garbage by any standards. Greb faced opponents that were great by his era's standards, even if you don't believe they'd be great today (which, again, doesn't matter).

I didn't make any statement to Ali Raymi, so I'll assume you're replying to someone else. yes?

Yes. Same guy I replied to previously who compared Greb's record with Raymi's.

[oogiebe]

And for the record, your Ali Raymi analogy made zero sense. He faced opponents that were garbage by any standards. Greb faced opponents that were great by his era's standards, even if you don't believe they'd be great today (which, again, doesn't matter).

I didn't make any statement to Ali Raymi, so I'll assume you're replying to someone else. yes?

Yes. Same guy I replied to previously who compared Greb's record with Raymi's.

LMAO! Oh...(yikes)

[boxing_rocks]

That's true. You can only imagine it because there's not any footage of him, but his record speaks for itself.

This is like comparing a record of that late Yemeni boxer stopping all his opposition with somebody facing tough opponents. Skill level, strength, conditioning, size of boxers at that time was so much lower than now, that their records aren't worth much.

Why? Even if you believe this, you realize that Greb fought in the same time period, under the same conditions as his opponents. He didn't have any advantages in the regards you mentioned. So, relative to his era (which is all you can be unless you've figured out time travel) Greb is pretty much unparalleled in terms of the opposition he faced and beat. Your argument doesn't matter even if it were true.

Yes, he was great for his era, but fighters of his era are nothing compared to more modern ones.

Replying to the remark about size, yes both Greb and let's say Jacobs had to be under 160 at weigh-in, but Jacobs would be 20 pounds heavier in the ring. If he lived now, Greb would fight at 147.

[oogiebe]

Ok, I'm done here..."comparing fighters from other eras" version 999,999,999

[Lackeos]

Harry Greb

The only thing laughable about Harry Greb is that Gene Tunney was better.

[boxing_rocks]

Harry Greb

The only thing laughable about Harry Greb is that Gene Tunney was better.

... and current top cruisers would beat crap out of him.

[Heretic]

Not yet, the question was "Will he get there"...he might.

That being said, I don't even know if there's really enough out there for him to achieve it.

Beating Mikey Garcia is the biggest possible achievement I can see out there for him, beyond that he'd be facing people that are simply TOO BIG for him I think.

To truly be Top 10 all time he'd have to take his show successfully all the way up to Welterweight, and be able to beat those guys too. I just can't see it...but let's never say never.

So you are saying that a small guy can never be p4p top 10 of all time? Is it not the reason for the whole concept of p4p?

Loma definitely has what it takes to get there but he still has loads of work to do before he is there.

Did I say that? Because I'm pretty sure that's not what I said at all.

I'm saying he'd need Marquee wins and names, and frankly for him to get marquee wins and names on his record he'd have to go all the way up to Welterweight because beyond maybe 4 or 5 names the well runs dry at 135 on down....and he's still not P4P Top 10 all time.

There really aren't that many Marquee names among the little guys, but if you had a dominant enough run for a long enough amount of time you could possibly become one of the All Time Greatest.

That being said Ricardo Lopez is probably the best ever at 105, and I don't think too many people would have him inside the All Time Top 30 or 40...but that's not a comment on his talent, it's a comment on the lack of marquee names on his resume.

It would be hard for those guys to achieve becaue there ARE no marquee names in those weight classes usually. Right now the current 115 pound division and the focus it's being given are an exception.

Yeah I see what you mean.

Still the reason for there not being marquee names in lower weight classes is mostly because nobody gives a shit about the lower weight classes.

This in turn makes it so that a guy from lower weights cannot get that high on p4p all time lists. That's bit unfair for the midgets out there

But hey that's the way it goes. HW's always get way too much credit and midgets get none

Maybe we would need to give more credit for the lower weight classes?

I do agree that the only way to prove yourself as great boxer is by beating other great boxers. That's why guys like the K brothers will never get the credit they deserve. There were not enough good big boxers to beat.

On a side note for me Pac will always be better than Mayweather. Their match happened way too late to mean anything. Floyd didn't want anything to do with prime Pac. He knew he would have lost.

If Pac quit the hard fights earlier and went on can crushing tour for the rest of his career would he be greater than he is now?

That's a no for me

[Heretic]

That's true. You can only imagine it because there's not any footage of him, but his record speaks for itself.

This is like comparing a record of Ali Raymi with somebody facing tough opponents. Skill level, strength, conditioning, size of boxers at that time were so much lower than now, that their records aren't worth much.

For the record I think Greb is one of the best ever. Very underrated fighter. Size of all divisions is the same (with extra classes being inserted). The only division impacted by size differential over time is the HW's, so I'm not clear what you mean.

I am not an expert on the matter but I think that modern day fighters cut way more weight than they used to do. They had same day weight ins in the past.

Modern day boxers would fight one or two division higher in the past.

Just one more reason why the different eras should not be compared.

[boxing_rocks]

Just one more reason why the different eras should not be compared.

Exactly. Let legends remain legends. Don't compare Ford T with modern BMW.

[Thomastearns]

In my mind footwork is the hallmark of a great fighter. Combine that with a good chin and an accurate jab and you have the basis of greatness.

I'm still haunted by the sight of watching too many game amateurs knocking the stuffing out of each other in the old Regent Street gym. I remember thinking these guys have families to go back to, jobs to go the next morning. Why doesn't someone teach them to move?

Great fighters from Sugar Ray Robinson, Muhammad Ali, to Bruce Lee all had exemplary footwork. Yet Lomachenko may have the best of all! He bamboozles his opponents like no one did before him. No one.

Definitely all time top 10, the record says so. He'll never be the 'greatest', you need more than sublime boxing skills for that, but he's possibly the best boxer this world has yet seen.

[man]

Mayweather ranks higher than Pac. He beat him head to head, and had an easy time with Pac's main rival Marquez whom Pac always struggled with.

i am in the camp that believes floyd
managed his career extremely well,
while pac took on crazy risk after crazy
risk in his prime.

don't want to dig too deep into this, since
there are really enough pac-pbf threads
already in existence.