BoxRec

Our second thread in the series, following the success of the Heavyweight thread...

This is a game which will be decided by the wisdom of the crowd.

Each of us has our own opinions on who was better than who, or which achievement was greater than others.
But let's bring it all together and allow simple mathematics to decide it all.

The game is this, each poster names and ranks his Top 10 Light Heavyweights of all time and with each ranking comes a certain number of points.
First place gets 10 points, tenth place gets 1 point - and everything fits in between.

Posters are NOT allowed to edit their posts or change their minds as it will effect the overall accumulated points for each fighter.

I will keep a track of the total scoring each time I'm online. This game has a 30-day deadline, after 30 days - the final points totals will be decided.
Our deadline day will be November 1st.

22 Posters declared:
Tomasino
elmersalsa
davie
BoxBuzz
APerno
dr_devious
Gilgamesh
Seamus
SaadOffTheDeck
Crease
Keko
SteveO
cfang
HyacinthusTurnipseed
crl333
Ambling Alp II
Give up
Ezzard
Techno89
pound per pound
Kalan
BroughtonRulesRefuge


FINAL Scoreboard: (22 members have voted)

1st - 180 pts Archie Moore
2nd - 179 pts Ezzard Charles
3rd - 146 pts Gene Tunney
4th - 131 pts Michael Spinks
5th - 91 pts Sam Langford
6th - 86 pts Bob Foster
7th - 61 pts Harry Greb
8th - 57 pts Tommy Loughran
9th - 56 pts Bob Fitzsimmons
10th - 50 pts Billy Conn

11th - 43 pts Roy Jones Jr
12th - 30 pts Maxie Rosenbloom
13th - 28 pts Harold Johnson
14th - 21 pts Tommy Gibbons
Tied 15th - 10 pts Jimmy Bivins
Tied 15th - 10 pts Sergey Kovalev
16th - 09 pts John Henry Lewis
18th - 04 pts Mike Gibbons
Tied 19th - 03 pts Georges Carpentier
Tied 19th - 03 pts Matthew Saad Muhammad
Tied 19th - 03 pts Joey Maxim
Tied 19th - 03 pts Andre Ward

Tied 23rd - 02 pts Mike McTigue
Tied 23rd - 02 pts Floyd Patterson
Tied 25th - 01 pt Jack Delaney
Tied 25th - 01 pt George Gardiner
Tied 25th - 01 pt Dwight Muhammad Qawi

I'm thinking about this one and struggling a bit.
I've got about 6 fighters that I'm definitely giving points to, but it's how to place them and who else makes up the top 10.

Gonna take some time over this.

Ezzard Charles
Archie Moore
Mike Spinks
Bob Fitzsimmons
Gene Tunney
Bob Foster
Sam Langford
Harry Greb
Tommy Loughran
Harold Johnson

Bert Sugar lists interesting
Moore , Charles,Loughran,Rosenbloom,Billy Conn ,Foster,Johnson,Jones Jr,O'Brien,Michael Spinks

- Congrats on an extensive, successful heavyweight poll.

That said, most polls are flawed in that there is no proscribed criteria such that records and timelines get ignored and many only subscribe to their favorites or fantasy of who beats whom conjecture, so it gets to be silly.

Note that I refrained from criticizing any selections other than offering my own, so if I may add some suggestions to correct the flaws. In Jazzy's volunteer current rankings poll he uses the median rather than point totals or averages because he says that stifles the "outlier" votes that he deems unworthy. And indeed, in his last poll about a third of the voters went for significant changes to the rankings, yet his result didn't budge a single fighter a single place.

Ok, first off 30 days is too long, second posting every vote and adding them up as you go makes is real easy for a troublemaking "outlier" who also has more than one account to come in the last hour and completely alter the final results. Take Ring ratings for example, a dozen or so emailed to the editor to be compiled. There is no transparency, but also no way for the voters to wait and alter their rankings, so we take the results at face value. Espn publishes their vote totals at the time of the new rankings where the voters ain't IDed, but we can at least pick out the idiot votes and apply to the likely sources all of whom are known. It ain't perfect, but better than Ring.

Also, in rating 1-2-3 order, it's silly to create an extra math step that could result in error by using point totals in inverse. If totaled like a golf game where a hole is one is worth 1 stroke, not ten, we'd get the proper point totals that could then be divided by total number of participants to get an average rating. For example, a competitive poll might result in the best fighter with an average of 2.35 which shows the disparities better. the 2nd ranked fighter might be a 3.1 and the third ranked fighter might be a 3.2, showing how close the 2nd ranking really is, in short, more informative.

Ideally you could also take private emails over a shorter interval, figure the results to be posted and then publish the individual poll with names for any who want to see who votes who and verify the totals. At the end of the day, it's just another silly poll that can be some fun here and there, but maybe you have Transnational takeover ambitions, ya think?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0nR0FUzyRI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0nR0FUzyRI

Here is my list outta the way:
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Archie Moore
3. Gene Tunney
4. Tommy Loughran
5. Michael Spinks
6. Maxie Rosenbloom
7. Bob Foster
8. Billy Conn
9. Roy Jones, Jr.
10. Matthew Saad Muhammad

I think that I have my light heavyweight all time list like that.

Archie Moore
Ezzard Charles
Bob Foster
Mike Spinks
Gene Tunney
Roy Jones Jr
Jimmy Bivins
Bob Fitzsimmons
Tommy Gibbons
John Henry Lewis

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:- Congrats on an extensive, successful heavyweight poll.

That said, most polls are flawed in that there is no proscribed criteria such that records and timelines get ignored and many only subscribe to their favorites or fantasy of who beats whom conjecture, so it gets to be silly.

Note that I refrained from criticizing any selections other than offering my own, so if I may add some suggestions to correct the flaws. In Jazzy's volunteer current rankings poll he uses the median rather than point totals or averages because he says that stifles the "outlier" votes that he deems unworthy. And indeed, in his last poll about a third of the voters went for significant changes to the rankings, yet his result didn't budge a single fighter a single place.

Ok, first off 30 days is too long, second posting every vote and adding them up as you go makes is real easy for a troublemaking "outlier" who also has more than one account to come in the last hour and completely alter the final results. Take Ring ratings for example, a dozen or so emailed to the editor to be compiled. There is no transparency, but also no way for the voters to wait and alter their rankings, so we take the results at face value. Espn publishes their vote totals at the time of the new rankings where the voters ain't IDed, but we can at least pick out the idiot votes and apply to the likely sources all of whom are known. It ain't perfect, but better than Ring.

Also, in rating 1-2-3 order, it's silly to create an extra math step that could result in error by using point totals in inverse. If totaled like a golf game where a hole is one is worth 1 stroke, not ten, we'd get the proper point totals that could then be divided by total number of participants to get an average rating. For example, a competitive poll might result in the best fighter with an average of 2.35 which shows the disparities better. the 2nd ranked fighter might be a 3.1 and the third ranked fighter might be a 3.2, showing how close the 2nd ranking really is, in short, more informative.

Ideally you could also take private emails over a shorter interval, figure the results to be posted and then publish the individual poll with names for any who want to see who votes who and verify the totals. At the end of the day, it's just another silly poll that can be some fun here and there, but maybe you have Transnational takeover ambitions, ya think?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0nR0FUzyRI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0nR0FUzyRI

I suspect you've taken this little bit of forum fun, entirely too seriously

1 Archie Moore
2 Tommy Gibbons
3 Michael Spinks
4 Harold Johnson
5.Maxie Rosenbloom *(sight unseen)
6 Sam Langford
7 Jimmy Bivins
8 Billy Conn
9 Harry Greb *(sight unseen)
10. Joey Maxim


I need clarification. Do former HW champions have a place here? It won't change my #1 pic....but could effect others.

I don't think Ezzard, Tunney, Patterson, Jones, Braddock etc should be in this discussion. But I suppose I'll wait to hear the ruling.

BoxBuzz wrote:1 Archie Moore
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10.


I need clarification. Do former HW champions have a place here? It won't change my #1 pic....but could effect others.

I don't think Ezzard, Tunney, Patterson, Jones, Braddock etc should be in this discussion. But I suppose I'll wait to hear the ruling.

Of course they have a place. If they fought at the weight and have notable wins then why not?

davie wrote:Archie Moore
Ezzard Charles
Bob Foster
Mike Spinks
Gene Tunney
Roy Jones Jr
Jimmy Bivins
Bob Fitzsimmons
Tommy Gibbons
John Henry Lewis

Out of interest Davie, how does Archie get over Ezzard?

For what it is worth - I am going with 'who could have beat whom' on his best night:

1. Gene Tunney
2. Michael Spinks
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Archie Moore
5. Billy Conn
6. Sam Langford
7. Tommy Loughran
8. Maxie Rosenbloom
9. Bob Foster
10. Joey Maxim

Keko wrote:Bert Sugar lists interesting
Moore , Charles,Loughran,Rosenbloom,Billy Conn ,Foster,Johnson,Jones Jr,O'Brien,Michael Spinks

Alas Bert is deceased & is no longer with us... As such he is not a member of BoxRec.

But if you wish, i could accept the above 10 list as your pick, if that's what you want?

Or would you prefer to customise & name your own?

BoxBuzz wrote:I need clarification. Do former HW champions have a place here? It won't change my #1 pic....but could effect others.

I don't think Ezzard, Tunney, Patterson, Jones, Braddock etc should be in this discussion. But I suppose I'll wait to hear the ruling.

We don't have a rigid system for our Members to follow. They can choose their own criteria to base their top 10 fighters on.

Though, clearly a fighter MUST have fought in the weight division to be recognised & categorised as such.

I mean for example - it's just not credible for me to put Marco Antonio Barrera in my top 10 Light Heavies, considering that he never fought there.....

But, as I say Mr Buzz it's YOUR list & if you choose to exclude the Heavyweight Champs from it, then you are perfectly entitled to do so.

Tomasino wrote:

davie wrote:Archie Moore
Ezzard Charles
Bob Foster
Mike Spinks
Gene Tunney
Roy Jones Jr
Jimmy Bivins
Bob Fitzsimmons
Tommy Gibbons
John Henry Lewis

Out of interest Davie, how does Archie get over Ezzard?

The main reason would probably be my unapologetic bias towards the old mongoose

http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... e#p4316275

I pretty much covered it on here. Most disagree with me but I just feel his longevity and strength of record, particularly at LHW, give him the nod here. Some of Ezzards best achievements came in the heavyweight division

Not a popular opinion to be fair, just how I see it

BoxBuzz wrote:1 Archie Moore
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10.


I need clarification. Do former HW champions have a place here? It won't change my #1 pic....but could effect others.

I don't think Ezzard, Tunney, Patterson, Jones, Braddock etc should be in this discussion. But I suppose I'll wait to hear the ruling.

This man knows what he's talking about!

Crease wrote:

Keko wrote:Bert Sugar lists interesting
Moore , Charles,Loughran,Rosenbloom,Billy Conn ,Foster,Johnson,Jones Jr,O'Brien,Michael Spinks

Alas Bert is deceased & is no longer with us... As such he is not a member of BoxRec.

But if you wish, i could accept the above 10 list as your pick, if that's what you want?

Or would you prefer to customise & name your own?

Is it forbidden?

Really unusual character you when this all matter!
I like to see everyone's thinking and do not bother me, so be it and not members

BoxBuzz wrote:1 Archie Moore
2 Tommy Gibbons
3 Michael Spinks
4 Harold Johnson
5.Maxie Rosenbloom *(sight unseen)
6 Sam Langford
7 Jimmy Bivins
8 Billy Conn
9 Harry Greb *(sight unseen)
10. Joey Maxim


I need clarification. Do former HW champions have a place here? It won't change my #1 pic....but could effect others.

I don't think Ezzard, Tunney, Patterson, Jones, Braddock etc should be in this discussion. But I suppose I'll wait to hear the ruling.

I think they should be taken into account but also the fact that the belt is not held. Yet this is an important part regardless of who they are.

BoxBuzz wrote:1 Archie Moore
2 Tommy Gibbons
3 Michael Spinks
4 Harold Johnson
5.Maxie Rosenbloom *(sight unseen)
6 Sam Langford
7 Jimmy Bivins
8 Billy Conn
9 Harry Greb *(sight unseen)
10. Joey Maxim


I need clarification. Do former HW champions have a place here? It won't change my #1 pic....but could effect others.

I don't think Ezzard, Tunney, Patterson, Jones, Braddock etc should be in this discussion. But I suppose I'll wait to hear the ruling.

Surely if you are not putting certain people in because they won a HW title, then Spinks shouldn't be in.
Or Greb who spent 90% of his career a MW.
There's barely a name on your list didn't come up from 160 or leave the LHW division to step up and face the big boys.

davie wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:1 Archie Moore
2 Tommy Gibbons
3 Michael Spinks
4 Harold Johnson
5.Maxie Rosenbloom *(sight unseen)
6 Sam Langford
7 Jimmy Bivins
8 Billy Conn
9 Harry Greb *(sight unseen)
10. Joey Maxim


I need clarification. Do former HW champions have a place here? It won't change my #1 pic....but could effect others.

I don't think Ezzard, Tunney, Patterson, Jones, Braddock etc should be in this discussion. But I suppose I'll wait to hear the ruling.

Surely if you are not putting certain people in because they won a HW title, then Spinks shouldn't be in.
Or Greb who spent 90% of his career a MW.
There's barely a name on your list didn't come up from 160 or leave the LHW division to step up and face the big boys.

He only did that so as to shut Ezzard out

Also, Harry Greb fought scores of fights at light heavyweight.

Keko wrote:Is it forbidden?
Really unusual character you when this all matter!
I like to see everyone's thinking and do not bother me, so be it and not members

I would prefer to hear the views of current members. If we start including outside elements, however notable they are (including Bert Sugar) then where does it stop?

Do we start taking in Ray Arcel's views, or howsabout Freddie Roach. Following on from that - do we look the views of veteran promoters... Maybe a Bob Arum or a Don King? (which then favouritism would DEFINITELY come into it)...

Basically, it's just a never-ending line of opinions starting from the first. As such, I'd prefer to keep this in house.

Crease wrote:

Keko wrote:Is it forbidden?
Really unusual character you when this all matter!
I like to see everyone's thinking and do not bother me, so be it and not members

I would prefer to hear the views of current members. If we start including outside elements, however notable they are (including Bert Sugar) then where does it stop?

Do we start taking in Ray Arcel's views, or howsabout Freddie Roach. Following on from that - do we look the views of veteran promoters... Maybe a Bob Arum or a Don King? (which then favouritism would DEFINITELY come into it)...

Basically, it's just a never-ending line of opinions starting from the first. As such, I'd prefer to keep this in house.

I thought it was placing its list of problem because it will not count anyway. I like to see different ways of thinking and of public figures that I appreciate. I do not think it bothers the topic or that there is a reason not to be.
Well my little that bothered but I understand that not all think the same. Anyway, this category has a lot of different views.

1. Ezzard Charles
2. Sam Langford
3. Gene Tunney
4. Archie Moore
5. Michael Spinks
6. Bob Foster
7. John Henry Lewis
8. Billy Conn
9. Harold Johnson
10. Maxie Rosenbloom

Tomasino wrote:

davie wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:1 Archie Moore
2 Tommy Gibbons
3 Michael Spinks
4 Harold Johnson
5.Maxie Rosenbloom *(sight unseen)
6 Sam Langford
7 Jimmy Bivins
8 Billy Conn
9 Harry Greb *(sight unseen)
10. Joey Maxim


I need clarification. Do former HW champions have a place here? It won't change my #1 pic....but could effect others.

I don't think Ezzard, Tunney, Patterson, Jones, Braddock etc should be in this discussion. But I suppose I'll wait to hear the ruling.

Surely if you are not putting certain people in because they won a HW title, then Spinks shouldn't be in.
Or Greb who spent 90% of his career a MW.
There's barely a name on your list didn't come up from 160 or leave the LHW division to step up and face the big boys.

He only did that so as to shut Ezzard out

Also, Harry Greb fought scores of fights at light heavyweight.

Not at all, but I already voted for Ezz as a top ten HW, and as you say, Greb did fight at LHW. I sort of shyed away from HW champions...as I considered them in a different category.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Tomasino wrote:

davie wrote:

Surely if you are not putting certain people in because they won a HW title, then Spinks shouldn't be in.
Or Greb who spent 90% of his career a MW.
There's barely a name on your list didn't come up from 160 or leave the LHW division to step up and face the big boys.

He only did that so as to shut Ezzard out

Also, Harry Greb fought scores of fights at light heavyweight.

Not at all, but I already voted for Ezz as a top ten HW, and as you say, Greb did fight at LHW. I sort of shyed away from HW champions...as I considered them in a different category.

How about Spinks? If Archie had beat the Rock would you still rate him the best light heavy?