BoxRec

Idisagree wrote:Floyd higher than Hearns at Welter is a joke. Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than any of Floyd's wins at welter.

Hearns only Knocked out Pipino Cuevas
Floyd never lost at welterweight. More time at the top. Better champion.

elmersalsa wrote:

Idisagree wrote:Floyd higher than Hearns at Welter is a joke. Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than any of Floyd's wins at welter.

Hearns only Knocked out Pipino Cuevas
Floyd never lost at welterweight. More time at the top. Better champion.

Floyd never lost at welterweight because he never face anyone worth mentioning at that weight other than a past his best Pac. His fight vs Maidana was as close as it get in their first fight. Floyd at welter wouldn't make my top 20. If we go by your logic, Tito was a champion for a lot longer than Floyd at welter and never lost at that weight. How come he is rated below Floyd?

Has Floyd be fighting in Hearns era we would not be having this conversation. Hearns would have decapitated Floyd at welter. Leonard would have beaten him to pulp and so would have Duran. I even think he would have lost to Benitez too.

Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than all of Floyd's wins at welter.

Idisagree wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

Idisagree wrote:Floyd higher than Hearns at Welter is a joke. Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than any of Floyd's wins at welter.

Hearns only Knocked out Pipino Cuevas
Floyd never lost at welterweight. More time at the top. Better champion.

Floyd never lost at welterweight because he never face anyone worth mentioning at that weight other than a past his best Pac. His fight vs Maidana was as close as it get in their first fight. Floyd at welter wouldn't make my top 20. If we go by your logic, Tito was a champion for a lot longer than Floyd at welter and never lost at that weight. How come he is rated below Floyd?

Has Floyd be fighting in Hearns era we would not be having this conversation. Hearns would have decapitated Floyd at welter. Leonard would have beaten him to pulp and so would have Duran. I even think he would have lost to Benitez too.

Hearns loss to Leonard means a lot more than all of Floyd's wins at welter.

Those are speculated opinions. Floyd was a phenomenal fighter. Had more important wins than the Hitman at WW. Hearns lost 2 of his biggest fights of his career, one of them was at 147. Floyd won every single fight at 147. Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.

elmersalsa wrote:Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.

so tito would jump from 17 to about 7
by beating a fighter that is not within
your top 25.

man wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.

so tito would jump from 17 to about 7
by beating a fighter that is not within
your top 25.

It's not about, who beat who. It's also about the performance and the stakes that were behind it.

Both, Tito and Oscar, failed MISERABLY in the biggest fight of their careers

elmersalsa wrote:I would like to put Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith in there, but, it's hard, man. It's hard.

Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith :surprised: you said its hard man to put them in there even though you would like too I'm totally with you on this one it would be really hard to put some-one or two in the top 25 when they would be flat out making most people's top 50 Kid Gavilan and Emile Griffith are better Welterweight's then Sugar Ray Leonard that's going out on a limb don't you think

campfire wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:I would like to put Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith in there, but, it's hard, man. It's hard.

Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith :surprised: you said its hard man to put them in there even though you would like too I'm totally with you on this one it would be really hard to put some-one or two in the top 25 when they would be flat out making most people's top 50 Kid Gavilan and Emile Griffith are better Welterweight's then Sugar Ray Leonard that's going out on a limb don't you think

Explain to me, why you would rate Leonard over Kid Gavilan or Griffith at WW

elmersalsa wrote:

man wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.

so tito would jump from 17 to about 7
by beating a fighter that is not within
your top 25.

It's not about, who beat who. It's also about the performance and the stakes that were behind it.

please.

Jack Britton fought Kid Lewis 20 times...

I think the series ended 10-7-3 in Britton's favour (or something like that).

Leonard-Duran was 1-1 at welter.
Griffith-Rodriguez was 3-1.

elmersalsa wrote:

campfire wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:I would like to put Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith in there, but, it's hard, man. It's hard.

Billy Graham and Mysterious Billy Smith :surprised: you said its hard man to put them in there even though you would like too I'm totally with you on this one it would be really hard to put some-one or two in the top 25 when they would be flat out making most people's top 50 Kid Gavilan and Emile Griffith are better Welterweight's then Sugar Ray Leonard that's going out on a limb don't you think

Explain to me, why you would rate Leonard over Kid Gavilan or Griffith at WW

WHY :?? BECAUSE HE WAS A CLASS OR TWO ABOVE THEM IN FIGHTING ABILITY THERE IS NO OTHER ANSWER

Really? I don't believe that.

man wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Tito at 147 was great, but, the "win" against Oscar DeLaHoya has much to be desired. If he would have won convincingly and maybe by KO, he would've been top 5 or at least in the top ten.

so tito would jump from 17 to about 7
by beating a fighter that is not within
your top 25.

It's elmer logic. It's not about making sense; it's about finding random things to favor guys he likes over those he doesn't.

Ezzard wrote:Jack Britton fought Kid Lewis 20 times...

I think the series ended 10-7-3 in Britton's favour (or something like that).

Leonard-Duran was 1-1 at welter.
Griffith-Rodriguez was 3-1.

Griffith won three split decisons against Rodriquez in fights that were all hotly disputed. He easily could have been 1-3 or even 0-4.

His next best opponent that he beat at welterweight is who? Denny Moyer? Benny Paret? Nobody close to Hearns and Benitez.

Griffith also lost to Paret once. Imagine if Leonard ever lost to someone like that. You would never hear the end of it.

Griffith's record was very good at welterweight. It is clearly not as good as Leonard's.

Emile Griffith and Kid Gavilan beat a whole variety of top notch welterweight boxers in their careers. I thought some guys in this forum knew this, and I am in totally shock in disbelief that not too many people in here defend the greats Kid Gavilan or Emile Griffith. What a shame. See their fights for crying out loud! Those guys fought different fighters with different styles in a tougher welterweight era. Nothing like the 1950s or 1960s, where you had to fight almost every month against the vey best contenders with only one champion.

And it makes me laugh. Really. Like if the greats Thomas Hearns or Sugar Ray Leonard compete in the 50s or 60s era, they will bumrush the competition. Really?

I AM TOTALLY DISSAPOINTED OF WHAT PEOPLE KNOW about Gavilan and Griffith. Or what they even know about the great Luis Manuel Rodriguez or top notch welters like Caspar Ortega, Gil Turner, Billy Graham, Florentino Fernandez, Isaac Logart and champions like Don Jordan, Benny "Kid" Paret and the great Carmen Basilio. Am I in a knowledgeable forum here?

I hope I do.

elmersalsa wrote:And it makes me laugh. Really. Like if the greats Thomas Hearns or Sugar Ray Leonard compete in the 50s or 60s era, they will bumrush the competition. Really?

the business had changed and these eras
can't be compared. later champs could make
enough money by making between 1 and
3 bouts per year, but on these occasions
they had to fight very good opposition. it
is not like in the fifties all divisions were
packed with titans and the eighties had
only cowards and dwarfs. nostalgia is a
temptress ...

Floyd and Trinidad should not be nearly so high; this division is stacked and they beat no great welters (Floyd's best wins there are over two blown-up, past their prime lightweights in Mosley and Pacman). Tito got the horrible decision vs Oscar and who . .Carr? Vargas?

Burley hardly had any fights at welter, so not sure how he's ranked at there . . .

Walker is absent since I'm putting him at 160.

My list (subject to revision):

1) Ray Robinson

2) Kid Gavilan

3) Emile Griffith

4) Joe Walcott

5) Henry Armstrong

6) Jimmy McClarnin

7) Ray Leonard

8 ) Carmen Basilio

9) Luis Rodriguez

10) Jose Napoles

11) Jack Britton

12) Barney Ross

13) Virgil Akins (look at the complete record prior to the championship; I have no doubt he let Jordan beat him per orders from the Mob)

14) Young Corbett III

15) Jackie Fields

16) Roberto Duran

17) Curtis Cokes

18) Billy Graham

19) Tommy Hearns (I'm breaking my cardinal rule here and ranking more ability than resume)

20) Joe Dundee

21) Fritzie Zivic

22) Pernell Whitaker

23) Floyd Mayweather Jr

24) Ted 'Kid' Lewis

25) Lou Broulliard

Kid Gavilan's record sh^&s all over Leonards . . .seriously. Hearns was a great win and Benitez a very good win but after that it's pretty shallow. Gavilan beat tons of great fighters; sometimes over the span of a few months.

dempseyfire wrote:Kid Gavilan's record sh^&s all over Leonards . . .seriously. Hearns was a great win and Benitez a very good win but after that it's pretty shallow. Gavilan beat tons of great fighters; sometimes over the span of a few months.

Thanks you!, OMG! I knew someone would know something about the great Kid Gavilan. Thank you, JAH for the post!

And by the way, nice list that you got!

dempseyfire wrote:Floyd and Trinidad should not be nearly so high; this division is stacked and they beat no great welters (Floyd's best wins there are over two blown-up, past their prime lightweights in Mosley and Pacman). Tito got the horrible decision vs Oscar and who . .Carr? Vargas?

Burley hardly had any fights at welter, so not sure how he's ranked at there . . .

Walker is absent since I'm putting him at 160.

My list (subject to revision):

1) Ray Robinson

2) Kid Gavilan

3) Emile Griffith

4) Joe Walcott

5) Henry Armstrong

6) Jimmy McClarnin

7) Ray Leonard

8 ) Carmen Basilio

9) Luis Rodriguez

10) Jose Napoles

11) Jack Britton

12) Barney Ross

13) Virgil Akins (look at the complete record prior to the championship; I have no doubt he let Jordan beat him per orders from the Mob)

14) Young Corbett III

15) Jackie Fields

16) Roberto Duran

17) Curtis Cokes

18) Billy Graham

19) Tommy Hearns (I'm breaking my cardinal rule here and ranking more ability than resume)

20) Joe Dundee

21) Fritzie Zivic

22) Pernell Whitaker

23) Floyd Mayweather Jr

24) Ted 'Kid' Lewis

25) Lou Broulliard

i would have pernell in the top ten and hearns
ahead of duran (not only because of the direct
matchup, but for overall achievement at welter).

man wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Floyd and Trinidad should not be nearly so high; this division is stacked and they beat no great welters (Floyd's best wins there are over two blown-up, past their prime lightweights in Mosley and Pacman). Tito got the horrible decision vs Oscar and who . .Carr? Vargas?

Burley hardly had any fights at welter, so not sure how he's ranked at there . . .

Walker is absent since I'm putting him at 160.

My list (subject to revision):

1) Ray Robinson

2) Kid Gavilan

3) Emile Griffith

4) Joe Walcott

5) Henry Armstrong

6) Jimmy McClarnin

7) Ray Leonard

8 ) Carmen Basilio

9) Luis Rodriguez

10) Jose Napoles

11) Jack Britton

12) Barney Ross

13) Virgil Akins (look at the complete record prior to the championship; I have no doubt he let Jordan beat him per orders from the Mob)

14) Young Corbett III

15) Jackie Fields

16) Roberto Duran

17) Curtis Cokes

18) Billy Graham

19) Tommy Hearns (I'm breaking my cardinal rule here and ranking more ability than resume)

20) Joe Dundee

21) Fritzie Zivic

22) Pernell Whitaker

23) Floyd Mayweather Jr

24) Ted 'Kid' Lewis

25) Lou Broulliard

i would have pernell in the top ten and hearns
ahead of duran (not only because of the direct
matchup, but for overall achievement at welter).

Although Duran's stint was shorter I think the wins over Palomino and Leonard eclipse anything Hearns did at 147, by a large amount.

The reason I didn't ranked the great Roberto Duran higher was:
1. Not enough fights at welterweight. Only 8 or 9 fights he had there.
2. The No Mas fight balanced his great win against Sugar Ray in Montreal. He had his greatest win and his worst loss @ 147lbs.

The great Henry Armstrong beat 6 hall of famers at welterweight. Remarkable!

He beat at 147lbs: Barney Ross, Ceferino Garcia, Baby Arizmendi, Pedro Montanez, Fritzie Zivic (fight#3), and Lew Jenkins (fight#2)

Made 19 successful world title defenses. Three in one month and 11 of them in 1939 alone?

He gotta be second place...Justification? yes!

campfire said WHY :?? BECAUSE HE WAS A CLASS OR TWO ABOVE THEM IN FIGHTING ABILITY THERE IS NO OTHER ANSWER [/quote]



I agree. Leonard is a rock solid number two. There really should be no question that he should be ahead of Gavilan and Griffith.

When rating fighters, we should take a hard look at the highs and the lows.
Gavilan beat Basilio and Graham. He also lost to Doug Ratford twice. He lost to Lester Felton. He had a draw with Gene Burton and Buster Tyler.

Griffith lost to Benny Paret. He had four extremely close fights with Rodriquez. Really, you could easily have Rodriguez higher than him. Griffith is as overrated at welterweight as he is underrated at middleweight.

Leonard top wins are as good as anyone's but Robinson. He won 75% of his fights against ATGs near their primes when they fought him. No one else can claim that. Unlike Griffith and Gavilan, he did not lose to lesser fighters.

Ambling Alp II wrote:campfire said WHY :?? BECAUSE HE WAS A CLASS OR TWO ABOVE THEM IN FIGHTING ABILITY THERE IS NO OTHER ANSWER

I agree. Leonard is a rock solid number two. There really should be no question that he should be ahead of Gavilan and Griffith.

When rating fighters, we should take a hard look at the highs and the lows.
Gavilan beat Basilio and Graham. He also lost to Doug Ratford twice. He lost to Lester Felton. He had a draw with Gene Burton and Buster Tyler.

Griffith lost to Benny Paret. He had four extremely close fights with Rodriquez. Really, you could easily have Rodriguez higher than him. Griffith is as overrated at welterweight as he is underrated at middleweight.

Leonard top wins are as good as anyone's but Robinson. He won 75% of his fights against ATGs near their primes when they fought him. No one else can claim that. Unlike Griffith and Gavilan, he did not lose to lesser fighters.[/quote]

Put Leonard in the 50s and 60s and he would've lost as much as Gavilan and Griffith. They fought in a way tougher era than Leonard's era.

And it's understandable. Those guys were fighting great opposition, with different styles and almost every month. It was the norm of the times.

Anybody that believes that Gavilan and Griffith were overrated doesn't know nothing about boxing.

Gavilan and Griffith ECLIPSES Leonard's competition at welterweight. They beat more hall of fame fighters and champions and exceptional contenders

Ambling Alp II wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Jack Britton fought Kid Lewis 20 times...

I think the series ended 10-7-3 in Britton's favour (or something like that).

Leonard-Duran was 1-1 at welter.
Griffith-Rodriguez was 3-1.

Griffith won three split decisons against Rodriquez in fights that were all hotly disputed. He easily could have been 1-3 or even 0-4.

His next best opponent that he beat at welterweight is who? Denny Moyer? Benny Paret? Nobody close to Hearns and Benitez.

Griffith also lost to Paret once. Imagine if Leonard ever lost to someone like that. You would never hear the end of it.

Griffith's record was very good at welterweight. It is clearly not as good as Leonard's.

I wasn't comparing the careers of ray and Emile. But good of you to jump in just in case I was.