Page 2 of 2
Posted: 16 Nov 2005, 06:51
by Steve M
Considering how good he was, his title reign was a farce.
Ahumada, Bennett and Lopez were all good\very good and Hutchins was solid, but the long periods of inactivity and ending up getting stripped was ridiculous.Look how much Galindez crammed in during the same period of time.
Posted: 16 Nov 2005, 11:25
by silkov
[quote="Steve M"]Considering how good he was, his title reign was a farce.
Ahumada, Bennett and Lopez were all good\very good and Hutchins was solid, but the long periods of inactivity and ending up getting stripped was ridiculous.Look how much Galindez crammed in during the same period of time.[/quo
A lot of the lay off was due to his hand injury... he still managed defences against very good opposition... he handled Lopez better than either Saad or Galindez did in two tries each.
Posted: 16 Nov 2005, 11:49
by silkov
mercman wrote:Quite. Conteh's relative inactivity (but remember he did defend his title successfully 6 times I think) does not make his reign a farce. It makes him injured.
Yes, I;d say Contehs 3 defences are worth more than many other world champions 10+ defences... especially in todays era. I don't see how you could call his reign a farce. Despite the mistakes he made he actually deserves credit for standing up to the men who controled boxing at the time and saying 'I'm taking the punches, so I'll decide who I fight for and where etc'... the fact that it backfired on him doesn't change the fact that many of Contehs greivences with boxing politics were genuine. He should have regained the title against Parlov but was robbed and against Saad the first time he was very unlucky not to win.
People also forget that at one point Conteh was being talked of seriously as a challenger to Ali. This is how highly he was regarded.
Posted: 16 Nov 2005, 12:31
by Rory McCloskey
i dont have the time or energy to do a top 50.. so how about a top 5?
1) Ezzard Charles
2) Archie Moore
3) Gene Tunney
4) Tommy Loughran
5) Sam Langford
HM RJJ and Mike Spinks.
Posted: 16 Nov 2005, 13:12
by dalek
hmmm.i've had this discussion with klompton.loughran was nowhere near his prime when fighting greb.tunney's fights seem to be changing each year in favour of greb.before long it'll read 5-0 to harry.
Posted: 17 Nov 2005, 14:37
by Ambling Alp
I just wanted to reply to some of the comments to some of the guys that didn't make the Top 50 list.
Michael Moorer - I think he could have been one of the greatest lightheavyweights of all time, but he didn't stay in the division long enough. He never really had a major showdown at this weight class.
Still, he was so dominaint that I almost put him in.
Tiger Jack Fox - Just didn't have enough big wins. He beat Rosenbloom, but the was well past his prime by then. Got ko'd in 3 by John Henry Lewis and stopped in 9 by Melio Bettina. Just missed the Top 50.
Dennis Andies - No way. there atleast another dozen guys that are better than him. Just watch him on tape or look at his record.
John Conteh - He was one of the last guys that I had to cut. He as well as a few other guys were very close with about the last dozen or so guys that did make the list.
There seems to be a wide opinon regarding him. Some people thought he was a great talent and should have made it easily. Others weren't that impressed.
In the end, I just didn't think he quite did enough. Losing to Saad Muhammad twice is no shame, but he lost to Parlov who I have at # 50, lost to a journeyman named Eddie Duncan, had a draw with Jessie Burnett, and Lopez is the only guy on this list that he beat, and I thought Lopez did just enough in his other fights to make the Top 50. It's certainly arguable that Conteh should make this list, but he is certainly is a border line case. He didn't standout during his era any more than Rossman, Lopez, Parlov, James Scott or Richie Kates. These guys are all very close.
Mike Rossman seems to be a guy that some didn't think should make it. He had some losses,but he had a pretty decent career. He gave Galindez a pretty good beating to win the championship and lost to the title back to Galindez after he broke his hand. I thought he did just enough to make it the top 50, but it's arguable.
Posted: 17 Nov 2005, 17:50
by silkov
Ambling Alp wrote:I just wanted to reply to some of the comments to some of the guys that didn't make the Top 50 list.
Michael Moorer - I think he could have been one of the greatest lightheavyweights of all time, but he didn't stay in the division long enough. He never really had a major showdown at this weight class.
Still, he was so dominaint that I almost put him in.
Tiger Jack Fox - Just didn't have enough big wins. He beat Rosenbloom, but the was well past his prime by then. Got ko'd in 3 by John Henry Lewis and stopped in 9 by Melio Bettina. Just missed the Top 50.
Dennis Andies - No way. there atleast another dozen guys that are better than him. Just watch him on tape or look at his record.
John Conteh - He was one of the last guys that I had to cut. He as well as a few other guys were very close with about the last dozen or so guys that did make the list.
There seems to be a wide opinon regarding him. Some people thought he was a great talent and should have made it easily. Others weren't that impressed.
In the end, I just didn't think he quite did enough. Losing to Saad Muhammad twice is no shame, but he lost to Parlov who I have at # 50, lost to a journeyman named Eddie Duncan, had a draw with Jessie Burnett, and Lopez is the only guy on this list that he beat, and I thought Lopez did just enough in his other fights to make the Top 50. It's certainly arguable that Conteh should make this list, but he is certainly is a border line case. He didn't standout during his era any more than Rossman, Lopez, Parlov, James Scott or Richie Kates. These guys are all very close.
Mike Rossman seems to be a guy that some didn't think should make it. He had some losses,but he had a pretty decent career. He gave Galindez a pretty good beating to win the championship and lost to the title back to Galindez after he broke his hand. I thought he did just enough to make it the top 50, but it's arguable.
Andries was a very good fighter.... I've seen his fights and he';d certainly beat the likes of Rossman who onyl won the title because GALINDEZ had half killed himself making the weight... when Galindez got in shape in their rematch it was no contest.
Posted: 17 Nov 2005, 18:36
by zuru
I don't have my reading glasses on hand,so I only skimmed over the posts,but what I did notice,that I had to respond to, was the fact that Dwight Braxton,was ranked above Matthew Saad Muhammed.Just because he beat him,doesn't necessarily mean he was the better Lightheavyweight.Saad was WAY past his prime in the 1st fight,let alone the 2nd.Saad deserves to be ranked higher than Braxton,due to all of the quality opponents that he beat,that were not available at the time Braxton came around.And so does John Conteh.I was going to make a post about Conteh a few weeks back,but I move in slooow motion.
zuru
PS
Michael Moorer,as well as a few others DON"T belong.(just my thoughts)