BoxRec

Jip wrote:I do a lot of research.

You cant answer questions. Or u answer the questions that suits u, the other u leave out cause they uncomfortable.

Duran is inferior to pacquiao. Prime for prime.

Stamina pacquiao
Speed pacquiao
Footwork pacquiao
Punching power pacquiao
Technique duran
Punch variation pacquiao
Chin duran

Ossyrules wrote:

Jip wrote:I do a lot of research.

You cant answer questions. Or u answer the questions that suits u, the other u leave out cause they uncomfortable.

Duran is inferior to pacquiao. Prime for prime.

Stamina pacquiao
Speed pacquiao
Footwork pacquiao
Punching power pacquiao
Technique duran
Punch variation pacquiao
Chin duran

Your opinion is your own jip no problems. I'll undoubtably disagree with your top 50, which will reek of casual fan knowledge, but that's no problem it's your top 50 so see it as you do fit

I'll never agree Pacquaio was better than Duran though. Duran would massacre him

Jip wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:

Jip wrote:I do a lot of research.

You cant answer questions. Or u answer the questions that suits u, the other u leave out cause they uncomfortable.

Duran is inferior to pacquiao. Prime for prime.

Stamina pacquiao
Speed pacquiao
Footwork pacquiao
Punching power pacquiao
Technique duran
Punch variation pacquiao
Chin duran

Your opinion is your own jip no problems. I'll undoubtably disagree with your top 50, which will reek of casual fan knowledge, but that's no problem it's your top 50 so see it as you do fit

I'll never agree Pacquaio was better than Duran though. Duran would massacre him

Yeah yeah. If someone doesnt automaticly only do old atg boxer in his top 10 than he is right away a casual. Like boxer of the last 20 years are just some bums.

I will make a good list. No nonsense. Like having bob f. In a top 3 haha...dude had slower footwork than ruiz and his record wasnt all that.

Boxing Writer wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Manny should be in the top 30 or 40. Monzon and Hagler did much more than GGG, even with a Canelo win. The only other recent fighter you could maybe put up there is Roman. The rest is status quo. I don't have a top 50, but I can spit out 10.

1. Langford
2. Greb
3. Robinson
4. Armstrong
5. Charles
6. Duran
7. Moore
8. B Leonard
9. Tunney
10. Canzoneri

Pretty good list, although I'd exclude Benny Leonard and Tony Canzoneri from top-10 and put there Ali and Louis. Bob Fitzimmons also deserves a metion here. Making top-50 would be incredibly hard, but I'd say 5 fighters of the last 25 years deserve to be in top-50 - Holyfield, Floyd, Manny, Whitaker and Hopkins. Roy Jones Jr. based on abilities - yes, but not based on resume.

paddy chavez wrote:it's so objective take greb 30 years ago he was rated around 8/10 in everything i read now many have him no1 ,gene tunney was a bang on top 10 or higher now he isn't rated they high by most . take whitaker he wasn't thought of as a great fighter while active very good but not great now some have him top ten which i find crazy who did he ever beat but now it's trendy to say he was a genius .

RScarf1 wrote:Willie Pep should be on the list.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:it's so objective take greb 30 years ago he was rated around 8/10 in everything i read now many have him no1 ,gene tunney was a bang on top 10 or higher now he isn't rated they high by most . take whitaker he wasn't thought of as a great fighter while active very good but not great now some have him top ten which i find crazy who did he ever beat but now it's trendy to say he was a genius .

Whitaker was considered the best in the sport for several years.

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:it's so objective take greb 30 years ago he was rated around 8/10 in everything i read now many have him no1 ,gene tunney was a bang on top 10 or higher now he isn't rated they high by most . take whitaker he wasn't thought of as a great fighter while active very good but not great now some have him top ten which i find crazy who did he ever beat but now it's trendy to say he was a genius .

Whitaker was considered the best in the sport for several years.

Not what I remember , maybe viewed different in the states but Chavez was always rated above him .and before you mention their fight Frankie Randell beat chavez 4 months later so he was clearly past his prime

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
Whitaker was considered the best in the sport for several years.

Not what I remember , maybe viewed different in the states but Chavez was always rated above him .and before you mention their fight Frankie Randell beat chavez 4 months later so he was clearly past his prime

That fight happened when Chavez was considered the best, the mantle was passed to Whitaker. Neither of them were in their primes at that point. Pea was just that much better.

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:
Not what I remember , maybe viewed different in the states but Chavez was always rated above him .and before you mention their fight Frankie Randell beat chavez 4 months later so he was clearly past his prime

That fight happened when Chavez was considered the best, the mantle was passed to Whitaker. Neither of them were in their primes at that point. Pea was just that much better.

Just as Felix tridad was better than sweetpea

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
That fight happened when Chavez was considered the best, the mantle was passed to Whitaker. Neither of them were in their primes at that point. Pea was just that much better.

Just as Felix tridad was better than sweetpea

Well, that's just silly.

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote: Just as Felix tridad was better than sweetpea

Well, that's just silly.

Why exactly the same reasoning Whitaker was past his best against Trinidad the same as Chavez was Vs Pernell ....I do think style wise Pernell was all wrong for Chavez but I rate Chavez higher

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
Well, that's just silly.

Why exactly the same reasoning Whitaker was past his best against Trinidad the same as Chavez was Vs Pernell ....I do think style wise Pernell was all wrong for Chavez but I rate Chavez higher

It's not nearly the same, and you know it.

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:
Why exactly the same reasoning Whitaker was past his best against Trinidad the same as Chavez was Vs Pernell ....I do think style wise Pernell was all wrong for Chavez but I rate Chavez higher

It's not nearly the same, and you know it.

But it is the same ,do you think Frankie Randell would of beat the Chavez of 3 years before ? He was on his 87th fight I think he clearly wasn't the fighter that beat Rosario on even Camacho while Whitaker was probably at his peak .

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
It's not nearly the same, and you know it.

But it is the same ,do you think Frankie Randell would of beat the Chavez of 3 years before ? He was on his 87th fight I think he clearly wasn't the fighter that beat Rosario on even Camacho while Whitaker was probably at his peak .

Randall would have always given him problems, he certainly could have beaten him. Silly analogy aside, Whitaker was seen as great during his career. Saying otherwise is either exaggerating for affect or just plain ignorant.

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:
But it is the same ,do you think Frankie Randell would of beat the Chavez of 3 years before ? He was on his 87th fight I think he clearly wasn't the fighter that beat Rosario on even Camacho while Whitaker was probably at his peak .

Randall would have always given him problems, he certainly could have beaten him. Silly analogy aside, Whitaker was seen as great during his career. Saying otherwise is either exaggerating for affect or just plain ignorant.

So many times was Pernell fighter of the year if he was so dominate? 4/5 .....no once

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
Randall would have always given him problems, he certainly could have beaten him. Silly analogy aside, Whitaker was seen as great during his career. Saying otherwise is either exaggerating for affect or just plain ignorant.

So many times was Pernell fighter of the year if he was so dominate? 4/5 .....no once

That settles it then.

paddy chavez wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

paddy chavez wrote:
So many times was Pernell fighter of the year if he was so dominate? 4/5 .....no once

That settles it then.

Cheers I thought so too