BoxRec

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 21:10 Pretty sure everyone is well aware of these fights.

You have to weigh the pluses and minuses for everyone. We are still waiting for a big plus for Joshua.
The next time you are going through the boxrec database looking for losses that old timers (which you consider anyone before Lennox Lewis) had, make sure you count the big wins too.

The devastating losses do count against the old timers. As do the big wins.

tiny_acres wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 22:34

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 21:10 Pretty sure everyone is well aware of these fights.

You have to weigh the pluses and minuses for everyone. We are still waiting for a big plus for Joshua.
The next time you are going through the boxrec database looking for losses that old timers (which you consider anyone before Lennox Lewis) had, make sure you count the big wins too.

The devastating losses do count against the old timers. As do the big wins.

I think half of the forum members think today's fighters are superior to yesterday.
And the other half think nothing can beat the old timers.
Somewhere in the middle is the truth.
But I agree with you Alp that you have to weigh wins and losses and over all depth of resume.
And to rank an active fighter in an all time sense is pointless and inaccurate.
Joshua may one day be an all time great. But it is WAY too early to even think about

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 11:53

tiny_acres wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 22:34

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 21:10 Pretty sure everyone is well aware of these fights.

You have to weigh the pluses and minuses for everyone. We are still waiting for a big plus for Joshua.
The next time you are going through the boxrec database looking for losses that old timers (which you consider anyone before Lennox Lewis) had, make sure you count the big wins too.

The devastating losses do count against the old timers. As do the big wins.

I think half of the forum members think today's fighters are superior to yesterday.
And the other half think nothing can beat the old timers.
Somewhere in the middle is the truth.
But I agree with you Alp that you have to weigh wins and losses and over all depth of resume.
And to rank an active fighter in an all time sense is pointless and inaccurate.
Joshua may one day be an all time great. But it is WAY too early to even think about

I pretty much agree with what you have said.
I think one thing that people need to bear in mind is the length of time we are talking about. In historical terms, the sport is over 120 years old.
Some people seem to think in terms of 2 groups of fighters.
1. Current fighters and maybe recently retired fights as one group.
2. Then they lump everyone before their own time in one group. To them Jeffries, Dempsey, Louis, and Ali are all Old Timers.
So naturally they consider a much higher % of fighters in the current era to be top fighters then really are. Naturally fighters that weren't legends but were very good aren't going to be on their radar. They don't realize that there were hundreds of heavyweights better than Povetkin or White for example.

People need to bear in mind is the length of time we are talking about. In historical terms, the sport is over 120 years old.

But yes you have to weigh the pluses and minus of a fighters career. The highlights and the lowlights. You have to that with any fighter regardless of era. With a Frank Bruno for example, you have to count the losses to Smith, Witherspoon, Lewis and Tyson against the wins over Coetzee and McCall. You have to take into consideration the quality of opponent and to some extent the competitiveness of the fights, win or lose.

And yes, it's way too early to rate a current fighter unless he has been fighting for many years.

polecateddy wrote: ↑22 Dec 2018, 10:21 It is quite hard to get a handle on Bruno's ability. His significant win was against McCall, and you have to go to his competitive loses to Smith, Tyson, Witherspoon and Lewis. The Tyson 2 fight was a bit of a mental collapse, and probably isn't a true reflection of his earlier form. The better version of Bruno was pre Lewis really, and Bruno's love of the weights room probably hurt his stamina and speed. He would have been better served had he stayed at 16 and a half stone and worked in the skills he had by the McCall fight. Bruno lacked the athleticism of say Lewis - and I remember that being starkly illustrated watching Bruno trying to play basketball with Lewis. Lewis looked like a god and Bruno a lump of lead.

Bruno never scored a knock down in any of his 5 world title fights, although he very nearly dropped McCall in round 2. And nobody ever floored McCall to my knowledge! I don't the sound of people suggesting Dillan Whyte being better though. Watching Whyte hesitating and making a meal of stopping an out of shape punch bag in Lucas Browne doesn't sell me. I would have thought that version of Browne would have definitely made for one of Bruno's one round knock over jobs. I could see Whtye being simply target practice for the likes of Witherspoon, Tyson and Lewis, with no redeeming moments at all.

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑27 Dec 2018, 22:35 I don't know if Charles Martin getting a belt is an example of lack of talent so much as bad matchmaking. I don't think Martin ever even cracked the top 10 and was never really among the divisions elite.