BoxRec

That's a good point about the weight divisions, although I can't say I've sat and thought about all-time ranking for some time.

Jimmy Wilde will go down in history as one of the lightest men to ever box at 96 lbs, and also as arguably the best British boxer ever. Wilde was born in Wales and became that country’s first professional boxing champion as well as being the first World Flyweight Champion. He fought from 1911 to 1923 with a remarkable record of 132-3-1 with 99 Kos and lost his last two bouts. Wilde was a British and European Champion and held onto his World Title for more than seven years. He also went 104 bouts without losing to start his career. Wilde had three different nicknames as he was known as ‘The Mighty Atom’, ‘The Tylorstown Terror’ and ‘Ghost with the Hammer in his Hand.’ He had incredible power for somebody who was 5-feet-2-inches tall and usually weighed less than 100 lbs in the ring.

copied from an article on sportsbreak.

Hard to argue for his placement at the top of the list

Quite a few fighters to come from the fighting Kingdom of UK isn't there? Especially when you consider the state of Oregon for example is bigger than the whole of the UK!

Quality fighters like Benn, Hamed, Froch, Haye, Hatton are all slipping down the list when they would probably comfortably make the ATGs to come out of Oregon! (slightly tongue in cheek)

My post war top 3 would read.

Lewis
Calzaghe
Buchanan.

Wilde would be in the mix for me aswell.
Agree with Buchanan being under-rated. So much read into Duran but Duran made a generation of quality Lightweights look ordinary.
His Laguna victories are top drawer.

knockout wrote: ↑26 Sep 2018, 14:00 So hard to compare eras .

The one weight champion / eight weight division era versus the current era.

does the fact that Calazaghe and co fought in a watered down era where it was easier to have long reigns and clear out the division. I am using Calzaghe as an example because he is the easiest ... but he would have had to fight at light heavyweight and would have had to fight RJJ, Tarver, Dariusz in the late 90s early 00s which I imagine would have really reduced his reign at the top and probably cost him his unbeaten record .

Same for Haye , would have had to be a career heavyweight Pre 80s

I factor it in a lot, yes. A 2-3 year reign of a single title these days barely even compares to making one or two defenses in those days. Even a modern day unification might not be as good as say fighting the European or British champion. Number of defenses too. A fighter in those days really had to earn his title shot. It's very important to factor in the caliber of fighters accomplishing similar things relative to that era for example if fighters are retiring unbeaten all the time now surely that dilutes the accolade? Just as being a three division champion for example. It's easier to manipulate these days as fighters often wait and wait for big fights rather than take on all comers plus you've got records of the older fighters with losses because once upon a time a loss wasn't a death sentence the way it is these days to casual fans and non-title fights were sometimes really just preparation fights plus the pay was a lot less so there were legends that became punching bags and would lose all the time at the end. You'll see some truly wonderful fighters with records like 55-20-6 and held the one true title for a year and some above average guys that are like 40-3 that retire these days after a good payday and titles in 2 or 3 divisions.

Different era's, so different standards but I think everyone can agree it's been harder in the past - a lot harder. There's no exact science but I always rank relative to their era. How much did their skills stand out? How about their accomplishments how rare are they? etc; etc;

PredatorHayds wrote: ↑26 Sep 2018, 15:29 My post war top 3 would read.

Lewis
Calzaghe
Buchanan.

Wilde would be in the mix for me aswell.
Agree with Buchanan being under-rated. So much read into Duran but Duran made a generation of quality Lightweights look ordinary.
His Laguna victories are top drawer.

I remember reading a quote by Ray Arcel who trained Benny Leonard as well as Duran. He didn't say which was better as a Lightweight (between Leonard and Duran) but he did say Duran's era was weak. I think Buchanan was great and DeJesus was very, very good too but a lot in the middle wasn't that special but perhaps he stopped guys from making their mark on history? That's common when a guy is so good he's so dominant it appears that way. Eder Jofre made a great era of Bantamweights look a level or two better than what they likely were and prevented some fighters from being hall of famers in my book.

FWIW I would rate Duran as #4 all-time at 135 and Buchanan somewhere outside the top 10 but firmly within the top 20.I think with no Duran he'd have been champion for at least another 3-4 years.

Ironically I think there's a real tendency to under-rate Naz these days - only lost to an indisputable modern ATG in the form of Barrera and beat a host of world title holders. It's also not only about beating them, it's how he beat them.

It's obviously a lot harder in an era where they was one belt.

But still, some fighters from today beat the main men from there division at the time. So if there was one belt they would have been deemed the "true" champion if there was just one belt

Hatton Vs Tszyu
McGuigan Vs Pedroza
Haye Vs Mormeck
Honeyghan Vs Curry
Fury Vs Klitschko
Hamed beat all four champions at featherweight at one time or another but gave up the belts after winning them.

tiny_acres wrote: ↑26 Sep 2018, 14:41 Jimmy Wilde will go down in history as one of the lightest men to ever box at 96 lbs, and also as arguably the best British boxer ever. Wilde was born in Wales and became that country’s first professional boxing champion as well as being the first World Flyweight Champion. He fought from 1911 to 1923 with a remarkable record of 132-3-1 with 99 Kos and lost his last two bouts. Wilde was a British and European Champion and held onto his World Title for more than seven years. He also went 104 bouts without losing to start his career. Wilde had three different nicknames as he was known as ‘The Mighty Atom’, ‘The Tylorstown Terror’ and ‘Ghost with the Hammer in his Hand.’ He had incredible power for somebody who was 5-feet-2-inches tall and usually weighed less than 100 lbs in the ring.

copied from an article on sportsbreak.

Hard to argue for his placement at the top of the list

Yes, truly astonishing. Also those losses the first one he was outweighed by what would be more than two divisions in today's game and then he'd rattle off a six year unbeaten run and lose above the bantamweight division to the great Pete Herman being outweighed by, I believe 25 lbs. He only came back after a two year layoff into his 30's (ancient for a flyweight even now) for the payday and lost to Villa, another great.

Wilde's legacy is incredible. An absolute surefire top 20 all-time pound for pound great.

FWIW I would rate Duran as #4 all-time at 135 and Buchanan somewhere outside the top 10 but firmly within the top 20.I think with no Duran he'd have been champion for at least another 3-4 years.
^^^
Who do you rate as the best lightweight then if not Duran?

Joe Gans?

Kilsby wrote: ↑26 Sep 2018, 16:05 FWIW I would rate Duran as #4 all-time at 135 and Buchanan somewhere outside the top 10 but firmly within the top 20.I think with no Duran he'd have been champion for at least another 3-4 years.
^^^
Who do you rate as the best lightweight then if not Duran?

Joe Gans?

B.enny Leonard, Joe Gans and Carlos Ortiz. Though due to Duran's accomplishments after his lightweight days I'd say he had the better overall career and would rank higher on my pound for pound list.

I read a book on Gans once.... Jack Johnson admittedly learned much of his renowned defensive prowess from the little guy.

If you invent the style that others copy surely the inventor is the true genius