BoxRec

On a scale of 1-10, where would you rate your knowledge of past fighters/fights?

It has to be at a rating where most posters here agree with. Other posters can correct it to what they think you're rated.

Post your rating and move on.

My knowledge of boxing history, id give myself a low 3.

7.

I'd say an 8 or 8.5, from the mid-70's until now I'd give myself a 10 but that gets offset by the turn of the century stuff where I know all of the names and a lot of the results but am lacking in many of the story lines.

BarryWashington wrote:7.5. I know a lot, but, I still have so much to learn.

Frilla, I don't think we've had enough boxing related discussions for me to evaluate what I think your knowledge of past greats/fights is.

The only boxing related discussions we have ever had about past fights and fighters were those i was aware of. We have not had many discussions about boxing history, hence the reason why i gave myself a 3.

5 but still learning.

I'd give myself a 4. Relatively new to the game, only started following it seriously for the last 8 years! Keen to learn though

I dont think anyone will be lower than i am.

I have gained alot though, especially reading through here.

From who I have had discussions with there are a few that I feel should be mentioned for their knowledge and contribution to the site.
Barrywashington, Datsue, Deadly weapon, Lackeos and Reggiediggs. these guys I rate 8+ for boxing knowledge

'Frilla wrote:I dont think anyone will be lower than i am.

I have gained alot though, especially reading through here.

Everyone starts somewhere.

Posters i think are the closest to 10 from what i read here everyday.(From the top of my head, i may have missed 1 or 2)

Saadoffthedeck
Dempseyfire
raylawpc
Goodnight, Irene
Ezzard
Yancey
DiamondWeapon
BoxBuzz

I would add Klompton, Beaujack and Chuck to that list, definite 10's.

5.5-6.

Lower weight classes and Asia is killing my ranking.

I'm amazed at the knowledge sum of the guys on this site have. In comparison to some guys here I would be like low ranking of 1 or 2.

'Frilla wrote:Posters i think are the closest to 10 from what i read here everyday.(From the top of my head, i may have missed 1 or 2)

Saadoffthedeck
Dempseyfire
raylawpc
Goodnight, Irene
Ezzard
Yancey
DiamondWeapon
BoxBuzz

Thanks for including me in your list, but I would rate myself considerably lower.

I only consider myself knowledgeable on boxing and the top three weight classes from about the 1962-1977 period.

After the Holmes-Norton fight in '78, I recall slowly losing interest in boxing with the advent of all those different joke boxing "organizations" and multiple titleholders for the same weight class.

Tyson, Holyfield, and Lewis revived my interest for awhile, but the K-brothers put me back to sleep as far as the current scene goes.

Also, does a poster with the moniker of the "Great John L. Sullivan" (or something similar) still post?

I always thought he had some good opinions.

The Great John L.

Now that you mention it, I havent seen him lately.

......ahem....i know i haven't written much lately, but still.....

1.

I have scarecely dipped my toes into boxing's history, and spend a lot of time on here simply enjoying other peoples opinions and learning from them.

(then you tube the fooooook outta it all!!!!)

Jaclem wrote:......ahem....i know i haven't written much lately, but still.....

Without people like you for context, Jaclem, we would all rate ourselves a 10.

One of my favourite posters ever.

Ray & Dempsey both know a lot about the older fighters, far more than I.

Alp is excellent at reading records and ignoring all context to form biased opinions.

Jaclem recognizes the limitations of Ali, a good thing, he also recognizes the limits of Aaron Pryor also a good thing.....However he seems to imagine that simply batting 3 and 0 against the Legendary Archie Moore is enough to catapolt a fighter to the pinnacle of heights. Come to think of it, that's exactly what it takes to prove such a hypothesis.

I wouldnt rate myself any higher than a five at best (probably much lower). I know a lot about certain periods and certain fighters but I have a lot to learn about a lot of areas Im interested in and there are a lot of areas I couldnt care less about. So yeah, probably much lower than a five.

..thanks to my loyal goodnight......as for boxbuzz.....tooting the same old 4th ezz vs. archie horn..always to denigrate me personally and attack my upbringing and my character .....it hurts me...really hurts...

I rate myself an 8

I would rate Elmer as a 1. Maybe a .5.