BoxRec

elmersalsa wrote:I rate myself an 8

Don't be so modest, Elmo!

Could see an 8 if Duran's jock were considered a part of history.

This is a guy who insists Hearns would never beat Duran except at 154

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Could see an 8 if Duran's jock were considered a part of history.

This is a guy who insists Hearns would never beat Duran except at 154

researching for close to 50 years i give myself a 9, i saw one person gave himself a 8 so i maybe should give myself a 99 all in fun

Goodnight, Irene wrote:7.

If by 7 you mean the number you would add to 25 before multiplying it by 11 in order to get a conservative estimation of your boxing knowledge on a scale of 1-10, then I agree. The only thing as low as 7 out of 10 is your love for Ike, and I think that will grow to a 9 as you rewatch more of his fights and see what greatness is.
DD

Greatness, as defined by Webster's Dictionary, is split-decisioning David Tua.

1.5 i recently took up boxing, so i know nothing about boxing past

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Greatness, as defined by Webster's Dictionary, is split-decisioning David Tua.

Well played.

scotto....i've been at it for 65 years.....i don't know if that makes me more knowledgeable or just older

Jaclem wrote:scotto....i've been at it for 65 years.....i don't know if that makes me more knowledgeable or just older

I remember when you and my grandad took me to my first match in the fifties. You and him were always telling me that the game was never the same once they forced fighters to wear those "sissy" gloves.

....buzz....ah yes....i remember it well....you had reached puberty and said they could liven the match up by having scantily dressed girls to carry signs announcing the number of the rounds.....you always were ahead of your time...

Most people here know of my heavyweight bias, if we were talking past great heavyweights, I'd probably rate myself a 7. Taking into account lower weight divisions, particularly those below welterweight, I can't give myself more than a 3.

elmersalsa wrote:I rate myself an 8

Wow.

Something has gotta be wrong here, alot of people disagree with your 8 rating, whys that?

The Dark Destroyer wrote:1. Maybe 2 on a good day.

Sg, you should read some of the posts around here, some great knowledge here, and most threads make for a good read.

'Frilla wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:I rate myself an 8

Wow.

Something has gotta be wrong here, alot of people disagree with your 8 rating, whys that?

He is way too biased to come across as knowledgeable. Elmer knows a lot of the names, but it's either bias or being clueless. Either way, that doesn't add up to an 8.

Biased, yes.

That Duran/Armstrong thread is classic.

It is a magician against a bum-rusher, you hear!?

I thought it was a guy with irritable bowel syndrome vs a shoe gazer.

Boxer vs Cyclist, I take the boxer too.

Probably about a 2. I was definite 1 until taking some time to look at it over the last 6 months or so.

From the 60's to the 80's I'd give myself a 7 or 8 across the board of weight classes. That's the era I have the most interest in, as I consider it the apex of the era of filmed footage (although I'm not saying the sport evolved past, say, Armstrong/Robinson's era, just that the quality of the footage is generally better and more easily accessible). I have a decent knowledge of other eras, but in comparison to guys like Steve Compton (klompton), John Ochs, Clay Moyle, Springs Toledo, etc., my knowledge base regarding the turn of the century to around the 20's and such is elementary. I know of the fighters, much more about certain ones than others, but the depth of my knowledge of a lot of these guys is pretty damn shallow.

''''''''''well, modesty has kept me from rating myself.....but as no one else is going to do it, i rate myself an 8.5...even though i am weak on many current boxers and knowing the various weight classes and who the alphabet boys consider champions. but this about the classic era so i'll maintain my rating...

Jaclem...what has changed is that an entire new class of "Super Size My Cheeseburger" fighters have entered the ring under the guise of "Modern Heavyweight"

Remember when top HW's included the very top of the LHW division? Moore Charles and Marciano would look like Welters against some of these guys. However they would likely be calling out "Timber" on many occasions as they cut through much of the Hog Pen like a hot knife through butter.

........buzz....i miss them too...great light heavies outboxing and sometimes kayoing good heavyweights. i always liked the light heavies best......fighting the... best of their own division.......challenged by the really good middleweights and their speed and the heavies with their power.

heavyweight just describes the pounds they come in at now.....very little talent compared to the 190...200...210 heavies of the time when even without a weight limit to make they made it a point to show up in good condition .


as for my rating of myself i rated myself 8.5 instead of 9.5 because i never can remember the name of the referee of the dempsey/miske fight without looking it up.

Jaclem, it was Jimmy Dougherty . . .He also refereed the Tommy Gibbons fight.