BoxRec

I say featherwieght. In the last forty years there have been enough all time greats to fill out a 32 man tournament.

By featherweight I also include great junior featherweights that move up successfully and fought well at 126 as well, i.e, Gomez, Fenech and the three Mexican legends Barrera, moralez and Marquez, who may have been a feather all along.

You won't find more great fighters than the great featherweights in history as a division. Think about the best 16 or twenty great feathers you've seen and make a list. These are the ones I saw with my own eyes. I didn't see the Mount Rushmore Featherweights like Pep, Saddler, and on and on. I'm in my late forties and am an American.

Arguello
Sanchez
Pedroza
Nelson
Gomez
Chacon
Fenech
Olivarez
McGuigan
Marquez
Barrera
Morales
Pacquiao
Little Red Lopes
Laporte
Lockridge

And I'm missing guys like Esparragoza and probaly an embarrassing large lot of names that will cause me to say "how did I miss that guy"

Give me featherweights. Best division of all time.

Thoughts? Add names I missed in two catagories: 1. those I saw (post 1975 to present) and the boxing royalty going back 90 years,

Thanks.

Definitely welterweight.

Robinson,Leonard,Griffith,Napoles,
Hearns,Pacquiao,Mayweather,Curry,Duran,
Langford,Walcott,De La Hoya,Mosley,
Trinidad,Burley,Basilio,Walker,Mclarnin,Britton,
Ross,Gavilan,Armstrong,Whitaker,Rodriguez....etc.

Hell you could do a top 5 p4p with just welters.

wow - the welters for me

Of course the feathers have been stronger since the 70s, but historically I think welter probably takes it. Light Heavyweight was also very deep from its inception until the late 1960s.

If you actaully take a period in time (say a certain year) how often has the featherweights actually had a lot of depth? A lot of guys pass through the division, but don't actually stay there for long. However people take every great fighter that ever fought at feather and count them, which really skews things. To a lesser extent, this happens with the lightweights and welterweights as well.

I agree that lightheavyweight had a lot of depth for a long time. (and again in the late 1970s and early 1980s ). However, it has been so bad for the last 30 years or so that it really hurts the argument that lightheavyweight is the best.

Sullivan, Johnson, Langford, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield, Lewis.

Not a bad list.

I may say featherweights and welterweights. And I include middleweights, too.

Featherweight had Naseem Hamed, Barrera, Morales, Pacquiao, Juan Manuel Marquez all in the last 20 years, plus all the guys mentioned by previous posters. It really is a loaded division historically

Middleweight with greats like Hagler,Greb,Mickey Walker,Robinson,Monzon,Hopkins,Lamotta,Toney,McCallum,Billy Conn,Stanley Ketchel,Tony Zale and many, many more. Has generally been a deep division over the years.

I've been a hardcore fan for about a decade and in the time I've followed the sport the Welterweight region (140 included) has been where the biggest fights have been most consistently that I've seen.

gilgamesh wrote:Featherweight had Naseem Hamed, Barrera, Morales, Pacquiao, Juan Manuel Marquez all in the last 20 years, plus all the guys mentioned by previous posters. It really is a loaded division historically

Middleweight with greats like Hagler,Greb,Mickey Walker,Robinson,Monzon,Hopkins,Lamotta,Toney,McCallum,Billy Conn,Stanley Ketchel,Tony Zale and many, many more. Has generally been a deep division over the years.

I've been a hardcore fan for about a decade and in the time I've followed the sport the Welterweight region (140 included) has been where the biggest fights have been most consistently that I've seen.

140-147 has been pretty dam good, when I first started watching LWW had Tszyu, Gatti, mayweather, Cotto, Hatton ect
And now around that weight you still have Floyd, as well as guys like Bradley, pacquiao, Alexander, Matthysse, Kahn, Maidana, Rios, and now Broner, outside of Floyd and Manny I don't know if any Of these guys will become ATG's but it will sure make for some fun fights

The End wrote:Definitely welterweight.

Robinson,Leonard,Griffith,Napoles,
Hearns,Pacquiao,Mayweather,Curry,Duran,
Langford,Walcott,De La Hoya,Mosley,
Trinidad,Burley,Basilio,Walker,Mclarnin,Britton,
Ross,Gavilan,Armstrong,Whitaker,Rodriguez....etc.

Hell you could do a top 5 p4p with just welters.

Duran? Pacquiao? Langford? welterweights?
Lightweights, anytime.
Lou Ambers, Alexis Arguello, Henry Armstrong, Joe Brown, Ken Buchanan, Tony Canzoneri, Roberto Duran, Joe Gans, Beau Jack, George Lavigne, Benny Leonard, Floyd Mayweather Jr, Jack McAuliffe, Packey McFarland, Shane Mosley, Battling Nelson, Carlos Ortiz, Willie Ritchie, Barney Ross, Lew Tendler, Freddie Welsh, Pernell Whitaker, Ike Williams, Ad Wolgast, ...

Senya13 wrote:

The End wrote:Definitely welterweight.

Robinson,Leonard,Griffith,Napoles,
Hearns,Pacquiao,Mayweather,Curry,Duran,
Langford,Walcott,De La Hoya,Mosley,
Trinidad,Burley,Basilio,Walker,Mclarnin,Britton,
Ross,Gavilan,Armstrong,Whitaker,Rodriguez....etc.

Hell you could do a top 5 p4p with just welters.

Duran? Pacquiao? Langford? welterweights?
Lightweights, anytime.
Lou Ambers, Alexis Arguello, Henry Armstrong, Joe Brown, Ken Buchanan, Tony Canzoneri, Tony Canzoneri, Roberto Duran, Joe Gans, Beau Jack, George Lavigne, Benny Leonard, Floyd Mayweather Jr, Jack McAuliffe, Packey McFarland, Shane Mosley, Battling Nelson, Carlos Ortiz, Willie Ritchie, Barney Ross, Lew Tendler, Freddie Welsh, Pernell Whitaker, Ike Williams, Ad Wolgast, ...

If Duran, Langford and Pacquiao can't be welter weights Armstrong, Mayweather and Arguello can't be lightweights.

Arguello had plenty of title fights at classical lightweight limit (jr. light and light). Mayweather also was fighting for a long time at lightweight limit if using traditional weight divisions, without jr. ones. Langford hadn't done anything at welter. Duran had only two meaningful fights there, one win, one loss. You can leave Pacquiao if you want, but he hasn't done much at welter to be considered an ATG at that weight.

Senya13 wrote:Arguello had plenty of title fights at classical lightweight limit (jr. light and light). Mayweather also was fighting for a long time at lightweight limit if using traditional weight divisions, without jr. ones. Langford hadn't done anything at welter. Duran had only two meaningful fights there, one win, one loss. You can leave Pacquiao if you want, but he hasn't done much at welter to be considered an ATG at that weight.

Langford has draws with Blackburn and Walcott as well as a win over Gans. Duran beat one of the best welters of all time.

Did the OP restrict it to what weight they spent the most time at?

And what had Blackburn achieved at welterweight for a draw with him to be significant for rating at that weight? Walcott was very inconsistent at the time. One drawn fight doesn't mean much in all-time welterweight ratings.
One win, even over Ray Leonard, doesn't make one an ATG welterweight.

I'm going with the welterweights too.

The list of fighters over the generations is mouth-watering.

Senya13 wrote:And what had Blackburn achieved at welterweight for a draw with him to be significant for rating at that weight? Walcott was very inconsistent at the time. One drawn fight doesn't mean much in all-time welterweight ratings.
One win, even over Ray Leonard, doesn't make one an ATG welterweight.

Blackburn was a great fighter and when they fought it was at welter. The point you are trying to argue you have no one to argue with . I never said anyone was an ATG welter weight . I simply gave a list of greats who fought at the weight

Welterweight didn't produce those ATGs. They simply had a short stop at that weight.