BoxRec

Ezzard wrote:No recriminations...

Alp posted his top 10 exactly 5 years to the day...

Alp, do you still adhere to that list or do you see things differently now?

Sorry, Ezz, I didn't see your post until now. Here is what I had said 5 years ago:

This is a very tough division to rate. I believe that there are 6 guys guys that you could make a case for being # 1: Spinks, Charles, Tunney, Moore, Langford, and Foster.

This is how I rate them:
1. Spinks
2. Charles
3. Tunney
4. Moore
5. Langford
6. Foster
7. Johnson
8. Jones
9. Greb
10. Qawi

I didn't used to rate Greb so highly at lightheavy, but I started to realize how successful he was at this weight.


There are several guys that you could make a case for being in the top 10: Loughran, Conn, Lewis, Fitzsimmons, Rosenbloom,Mustapha Muhammed etc.

There are so many guys that are so close. For example, the difference between the #lightheavy, and the # 30 lightheavy is significantly less than the #10 and # 30 in the heavyweight division.

I still feel pretty much the same. Who I had from #1-#6 is very close. Still think the exact order can be changed. I think they are a notch above everyone else.
I would take jones out of the Top 10. He was always a hard guy for me to rate becasue he competition at 175 was so bad for so long. (By the time he fought Tarver and Johnson he was past his best.) However he was so talented and won most of his fights so easily he has to be considered. Top 10 though is a little too high for him.

I would still keep Johnson, Greb and Qawi in the Top 10.
I would probably replace him with Loughran; though you could make an argument for some other guys. Still feel that the #30 lightheavyweight is closer to the #10 than just about any other weight class.

I really don't see how Qawi can be in the top 10, his resume completly pales in comparison to at least 25 other light heavyweights.

I also don't see how Hill would be in the top 40, let alone top 25. His only W of any real note is Henry Maske . .

Agreed, I've never heard anyone say Qawi was greater than Tommy Loughran or Maxie Rosenbloom just to sight two glaring examples. But there is a first time for everything. He was a very good fighter, capable of beating guys who rate ahead of him. But Dwight in the top 10 is beyond my comprehension. I don't think he rates ahead of Saad.

Ezzard Charles
Archie Moore
Sam Langford
Harry Greb
Gene Tunney
Bob Fitzsimmons
Billy Conn
Bob Foster
Michael Spinks
Tommy Loughran

BarryWashington wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:I really don't see how Qawi can be in the top 10, his resume completly pales in comparison to at least 25 other light heavyweights.

I also don't see how Hill would be in the top 40, let alone top 25. His only W of any real note is Henry Maske . .

some times i wonder about you

lets see:

leslie stewart ('87)
rufino angulo ('87)
bobby czyz ('89)
joe lasisi ('89)
frank tate ('92)
fabrice tiozzo ('00)

.

And to that list I say . . . so????

He was a good light HW for his era, but historically that resume is paper-thin. The likes of Oakland Billy Smith and Ad Stone have much better resumes and neither would make my top 40.

What happened to all the posters from this thread? I know Decagon got banned what about Pundit, Syntax etc, do they still post on here?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Agreed, I've never heard anyone say Qawi was greater than Tommy Loughran or Maxie Rosenbloom just to sight two glaring examples. But there is a first time for everything. He was a very good fighter, capable of beating guys who rate ahead of him. But Dwight in the top 10 is beyond my comprehension. I don't think he rates ahead of Saad.

He doesn't even rate ahead of Saad? Wow. It's a good thing that you are so unbiased.

Junior Jones doesn't rate ahead of MAB either. I imagine the majority of people would agree with me here. I doubt anyone in the world would agree that Qawi is top 10. I wont call you biased, but that placement is a joke.

If Saad doesn't rate close to Qawi, what makes Dwight so great? Beating Mike Rossman? Eddie is another of your pets that you overrate and beating Saad is your main go to point. So running him down doesn't strengthen any of your arguments.

Ezzard wrote:Here's my take on this worthwhile subject...

1. Ezzard Charles
2. Archie Moore
3. Gene Tunney
4. Sam Langford
5. Michael Spinks
6. Tommy Loughran
7. Bob Foster
8. Harry Greb
9. Tommy Gibbons
10. Harold Johnson


Honourable mention to: Jack O'Brien, Jack Delaney, Billy Conn and Kid Norfolk

I'm not having a go Ezzard, because I really respect your logical and well thought out opinions. Just wondered why you don't give Roy Jones Jnr a mention?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Junior Jones doesn't rate ahead of MAB either. I imagine the majority of people would agree with me here. I doubt anyone in the world would agree that Qawi is top 10. I wont call you biased, but that placement is a joke.

If Saad doesn't rate close to Qawi, what makes Dwight so great? Beating Mike Rossman? Eddie is another of your pets that you overrate and beating Saad is your main go to point. So running him down doesn't strengthen any of your arguments.

Saad was a very good fighter and I have always maintained that. I have not been running him down. I have pointed out negatives in his career like I would anyone else.

Qawi beat Saad easily, twice.
Qawi beat Jerry Martin easily. Martin was outfighting Saad easily until the referee jumped in and stopped the fight when Martin was not in serious trouble.
Qawi beat James Scott in Scott's prison. Scott was a very good fighter.
Qawi gave Michael Spinks a competitive fight. Spinks was one of the greatest lightheavyweights of all time, if not the best. Saad would not have been that competitive with Spinks.
Qawi only had one loss before Spinks; and that was a 6-round decison in his 3rd fight.

If you want to say some other guys were better at 175; fine. There are several guys that are very close. However, to argue that he was not better than Saad who was in his era and who he beat twice is just silly.

I think Saad would've been quite competitive with Spinks at his best. In fact I think Spinks was a bit fortunate to come around when he did, when the 70's Lt. Heavyweight class was on its last legs and the less talented 80's crop was taking over. Had he come along 5 years earlier things may not've gone so smoothly.

Ambling Alp wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Junior Jones doesn't rate ahead of MAB either. I imagine the majority of people would agree with me here. I doubt anyone in the world would agree that Qawi is top 10. I wont call you biased, but that placement is a joke.

If Saad doesn't rate close to Qawi, what makes Dwight so great? Beating Mike Rossman? Eddie is another of your pets that you overrate and beating Saad is your main go to point. So running him down doesn't strengthen any of your arguments.

Saad was a very good fighter and I have always maintained that. I have not been running him down. I have pointed out negatives in his career like I would anyone else.

Qawi beat Saad easily, twice.
Qawi beat Jerry Martin easily. Martin was outfighting Saad easily until the referee jumped in and stopped the fight when Martin was not in serious trouble.
Qawi beat James Scott in Scott's prison. Scott was a very good fighter.
Qawi gave Michael Spinks a competitive fight. Spinks was one of the greatest lightheavyweights of all time, if not the best. Saad would not have been that competitive with Spinks.
Qawi only had one loss before Spinks; and that was a 6-round decison in his 3rd fight.

If you want to say some other guys were better at 175; fine. There are several guys that are very close. However, to argue that he was not better than Saad who was in his era and who he beat twice is just silly.

You've put forward a very good arguement Alp.

BarryWashington wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Junior Jones doesn't rate ahead of MAB either. I imagine the majority of people would agree with me here. I doubt anyone in the world would agree that Qawi is top 10. I wont call you biased, but that placement is a joke.

If Saad doesn't rate close to Qawi, what makes Dwight so great? Beating Mike Rossman? Eddie is another of your pets that you overrate and beating Saad is your main go to point. So running him down doesn't strengthen any of your arguments.

Saad was a very good fighter and I have always maintained that. I have not been running him down. I have pointed out negatives in his career like I would anyone else.

Qawi beat Saad easily, twice.
Qawi beat Jerry Martin easily. Martin was outfighting Saad easily until the referee jumped in and stopped the fight when Martin was not in serious trouble.
Qawi beat James Scott in Scott's prison. Scott was a very good fighter.
Qawi gave Michael Spinks a competitive fight. Spinks was one of the greatest lightheavyweights of all time, if not the best. Saad would not have been that competitive with Spinks.
Qawi only had one loss before Spinks; and that was a 6-round decison in his 3rd fight.

If you want to say some other guys were better at 175; fine. There are several guys that are very close. However, to argue that he was not better than Saad who was in his era and who he beat twice is just silly.

saad does deserve to get ranked higher than qawi at lhw - no question.

qawi put together four top wins and one competitive loss then moved up to cruiserweight. saad muhammad has the much better resume than muhammad qawi at lhw. hell i would rate saad muhammad just barely under spinks. i dont get why people seriously think spinks should be considered as the best lhw of all time.

I wouldn't rate him ay the top, but he was undefeated, didn't duck anyone and unified the title. Not many light heavies can say that.

Ambling Alp wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Junior Jones doesn't rate ahead of MAB either. I imagine the majority of people would agree with me here. I doubt anyone in the world would agree that Qawi is top 10. I wont call you biased, but that placement is a joke.

If Saad doesn't rate close to Qawi, what makes Dwight so great? Beating Mike Rossman? Eddie is another of your pets that you overrate and beating Saad is your main go to point. So running him down doesn't strengthen any of your arguments.

Saad was a very good fighter and I have always maintained that. I have not been running him down. I have pointed out negatives in his career like I would anyone else.

Qawi beat Saad easily, twice.
Qawi beat Jerry Martin easily. Martin was outfighting Saad easily until the referee jumped in and stopped the fight when Martin was not in serious trouble.
Qawi beat James Scott in Scott's prison. Scott was a very good fighter.
Qawi gave Michael Spinks a competitive fight. Spinks was one of the greatest lightheavyweights of all time, if not the best. Saad would not have been that competitive with Spinks.
Qawi only had one loss before Spinks; and that was a 6-round decison in his 3rd fight.

If you want to say some other guys were better at 175; fine. There are several guys that are very close. However, to argue that he was not better than Saad who was in his era and who he beat twice is just silly.

Saying Saad couldn't push Spinks is speculation. He pretty much dominated Dwight anyway. I didn't find that fight to be close at all. Saying Martin was beating him is fantasy. It's definitely pushing the envelope to call it a prime Saad that faced Qawi. That style would have always been difficult for him because of Dwight's underrated defense. But he was at the end of his line. You always use results like that when they are convenient for your stance.

Dwight beat him twice, that is true. If you rated their ten best wins, Dwight has 3 at most. The other 7 go to Saad. That stands for something. Silly is acting like there is miles of difference between them.

WHERE THE HELL ARE KID NORFORK AND EDDIE BOOKER THEY BOTH BELONG NEAR THE TOP

I'd rate Eddie as a Middleweight. Underrated fighter, agree on that.

I would also rate Saad over Qawi. Overall the better resume, and head to head Saad was used up by the time Qawi got to him. I would probably favor Qawi prime vs prime but it would've not been the slaughter that occured in their actual fights.

The Saad was over the hill is one of those myths that doesn't seem to go away. Saad was 27 years old when they fought the first time. Yes he had several tough fights, but when you are that age you shake that off.You don't get to use the past his prime excuse when you are 27. He was still only 28 in their rematch.

Both times Qawi won easily. That is n't the end all be all but it means a lot.
Jerry Martin was a relevant common opponent. Any unbiased observer that saw their fight would say that Martin was winning. Qawi easily defeated Martin.
Yes Saad did have a nice title run and that has to count for something. However, look at how many close calls he had against fighters far inferior that Qawi. Bob Foster had a much longer title run and apparently some of the same people who are so impressed with Saad's title reign don't even think Foster is in the top 10.

What is the worst you can say about Qawi? That he lost to Spinks? Qawi was competitive against Spinks, one of the very best lightheavyweights of all time. If anything that loss showed that Qawi was a great fighter.

Ambling Alp wrote:The Saad was over the hill is one of those myths that doesn't seem to go away. Saad was 27 years old when they fought the first time. Yes he had several tough fights, but when you are that age you shake that off.You don't get to use the past his prime excuse when you are 27. He was still only 28 in their rematch.

Both times Qawi won easily. That is n't the end all be all but it means a lot.
Jerry Martin was a relevant common opponent. Any unbiased observer that saw their fight would say that Martin was winning. Qawi easily defeated Martin.
Yes Saad did have a nice title run and that has to count for something. However, look at how many close calls he had against fighters far inferior that Qawi. Bob Foster had a much longer title run and apparently some of the same people who are so impressed with Saad's title reign don't even think Foster is in the top 10.

What is the worst you can say about Qawi? That he lost to Spinks? Qawi was competitive against Spinks, one of the very best lightheavyweights of all time. If anything that loss showed that Qawi was a great fighter.

You must be confusing myth with fact. How many relevant wins did he have after the Qawi fights? He was past his best. I'm sorry if that pokes holes in your stance, but it's factual.

If anyone is biased, it is you. It was a close fight, the stoppage was premature but Matthew was definitely assuming control of the fight. And struggling with Jerry shows where he was at that point in his career, rapidly slipping. Feel free to compare those fights, what it really does is show Saad's strength of resume. You're fixated on Martin for Qawi. You can keep him, he wasn't close to one of Saad's best wins.

The most laughable part of your post is holding close fights against fighters like Johnson and Lopez against him. That's downright pathetic. Your beloved Ali had many struggles of his own. More than Wladimir Klitschko. Does it matter there?

What does Bob Foster have to do with this discussion? Nobody is putting Saad in their top 10. I just rate him ahead of Qawi. Who I think was a great fighter. He just carries an inferior resume to Matthew Saad Muhammad and neither of them sniff the Light Heavy top 10 on any reasonable list.

BarryWashington wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:The Saad was over the hill is one of those myths that doesn't seem to go away. Saad was 27 years old when they fought the first time. Yes he had several tough fights, but when you are that age you shake that off.You don't get to use the past his prime excuse when you are 27. He was still only 28 in their rematch.

Both times Qawi won easily. That is n't the end all be all but it means a lot.
Jerry Martin was a relevant common opponent. Any unbiased observer that saw their fight would say that Martin was winning. Qawi easily defeated Martin.
Yes Saad did have a nice title run and that has to count for something. However, look at how many close calls he had against fighters far inferior that Qawi. Bob Foster had a much longer title run and apparently some of the same people who are so impressed with Saad's title reign don't even think Foster is in the top 10.

What is the worst you can say about Qawi? That he lost to Spinks? Qawi was competitive against Spinks, one of the very best lightheavyweights of all time. If anything that loss showed that Qawi was a great fighter.

You must be confusing myth with fact. How many relevant wins did he have after the Qawi fights? He was past his best. I'm sorry if that pokes holes in your stance, but it's factual.

If anyone is biased, it is you. It was a close fight, the stoppage was premature but Matthew was definitely assuming control of the fight. And struggling with Jerry shows where he was at that point in his career, rapidly slipping. Feel free to compare those fights, what it really does is show Saad's strength of resume. You're fixated on Martin for Qawi. You can keep him, he wasn't close to one of Saad's best wins.

The most laughable part of your post is holding close fights against fighters like Johnson and Lopez against him. That's downright pathetic. Your beloved Ali had many struggles of his own. More than Wladimir Klitschko. Does it matter there?

What does Bob Foster have to do with this discussion? Nobody is putting Saad in their top 10. I just rate him ahead of Qawi. Who I think was a great fighter. He just carries an inferior resume to Matthew Saad Muhammad and neither of them sniff the Light Heavy top 10 on any reasonable list.

b-i-n-g-o

Alp will suddenly care about strength of opposition when Ali comes into the fold. He is a knowledgable poster but I've never encountered anyone less consistent. He will argue whatever suits his purpose.

How many fights did Saad win against people in the IBHOF? Zero

How many fights did Qawi win against people in the IBHOF? Two

Trevor Berbick beat Muhammad Ali.

Context and timing are as important as the results.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Trevor Berbick beat Muhammad Ali.

Context and timing are as important as the results.

Who did Saad beat that was so much better than anyone Qawi beat?

BarryWashington wrote: end of discussion regarding saad muhammad and muhammad qawi at lhw

Why? Because you said so? Who made you the over fuhrer?

Qawi beat Saad TWICE. He ran Spinks close. He is rated higher by BoxRec.

Legacy is about who you beat, not how many you beat.