BoxRec

Now yesterday I was asked to name the top 5 fighters of all time, and it was so dificult to do that my list sounded stupid when I named them.

I just would like to see what someone else would do if they could only pick 5 greatest boxers of all times.

5 greatest are:-

1) Sugar Ray Robinson
2) Joe Louis
3) Muhammad Ali
4) Willie Pep
5) Jack Johnson

My 5 favourite are:-

1) Sugar Ray Leonard
2) Matthew Saad Muhammad
3) Sugar Ray Robinson
4) Muhammad Ali
5) Pernell Whittaker

Syntax Error wrote:5 greatest are:-

1) Sugar Ray Robinson
2) Joe Louis
3) Muhammad Ali
4) Willie Pep
5) Jack Johnson

My 5 favourite are:-

1) Sugar Ray Leonard
2) Matthew Saad Muhammad
3) Sugar Ray Robinson
4) Muhammad Ali
5) Pernell Whittaker

Your first list is exactly what I had, people started harassing me when I named Pep, like I'd just broke a crime.

Grimm wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:5 greatest are:-

1) Sugar Ray Robinson
2) Joe Louis
3) Muhammad Ali
4) Willie Pep
5) Jack Johnson

My 5 favourite are:-

1) Sugar Ray Leonard
2) Matthew Saad Muhammad
3) Sugar Ray Robinson
4) Muhammad Ali
5) Pernell Whittaker

Your first list is exactly what I had, people started harassing me when I named Pep, like I'd just broke a crime.

Pep deserves to be in there, as an all time great IMO.

He was superb!!! 8)

Any one who can look at Pep's record and have a problem with him being named one of the 5 best ever is the one with the problem.I'm not even saying I agree but I'd find it hard to disagree.
My 5

1 Robinson
2 Armstrong
3 Greb
4 Ali
5 Maybe Ezzard Charles,almost unbeatable at 160 and 175.

All of the choices are reasonable and it becomes a question of who you like more.

My Top 5:

1 Robinson
2 Armstrong
3 Langford
4 Jofre
5 Gans

:)

How could u have jofre in the top 5??? the only hall of famer he ever faced was fighting harada and fighting harada beat jofre twice. im not saying he is not an all time great, im simply saying he defintely doesnt deserve top 5. he did score victory over veteran WBA champion jose legra which was a great win, and he knocked out vincente salvidar but both fighters were past their prime. I just think he didnt prove himself enough. had he beat harada it might be different. in his prime the only great fighter he faced was harada.

im simply think he is not a top 5 fighter, and if u place him there, ur overlooking many greats that deserved to be in the top 5 much more.


as for pep, sure he had an incredible record and was a matser boxer, but have u ever though just once to rate sandy saddler over him???? i mean both dominated featherweight division except saddler beat pep 3 times out of 4??? when they BOTH WERE IN THEIR PRIMES. that should count for something. saddler even past his prime managed to TKO 13 a young upcoming HOF flash elorde after losing there first fight.

ill say this, saddler lost a lot of non title fights but those were non title fights. when it came tiiime to fight for the title, saddler showed his true colors and always came in top shape and always won.

one thing about pep. as great a master boxer as he was, and he was one of the best. he didnt have the best chin and thats probably why such a power hitter like saddler beat him not to mention saddler could also box. pep was knocked down a lot in his prime years by guys with losing records. dont get me wrong, pep is one of the greatest. just dount count saddler out. he beat pep three times.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:How could u have jofre in the top 5??? the only hall of famer he ever faced was fighting harada and fighting harada beat jofre twice. im not saying he is not an all time great, im simply saying he defintely doesnt deserve top 5. he did score victory over veteran WBA champion jose legra which was a great win, and he knocked out vincente salvidar but both fighters were past their prime. I just think he didnt prove himself enough. had he beat harada it might be different. in his prime the only great fighter he faced was harada.

im simply think he is not a top 5 fighter, and if u place him there, ur overlooking many greats that deserved to be in the top 5 much more.


as for pep, sure he had an incredible record and was a matser boxer, but have u ever though just once to rate sandy saddler over him???? i mean both dominated featherweight division except saddler beat pep 3 times out of 4??? when they BOTH WERE IN THEIR PRIMES. that should count for something. saddler even past his prime managed to TKO 13 a young upcoming HOF flash elorde after losing there first fight.

ill say this, saddler lost a lot of non title fights but those were non title fights. when it came tiiime to fight for the title, saddler showed his true colors and always came in top shape and always won.

one thing about pep. as great a master boxer as he was, and he was one of the best. he didnt have the best chin and thats probably why such a power hitter like saddler beat him not to mention saddler could also box. pep was knocked down a lot in his prime years by guys with losing records. dont get me wrong, pep is one of the greatest. just dount count saddler out. he beat pep three times.

Do you just enjoy attacking posts without concrete justification?

BB, you really need to learn more about these fighters outside of their paper records to understand why they are so great. Debate for the sake of debate is quite meaningless. Yes, Jofre lost those bouts to Harada but who among the greats didn't lose? Sugar Ray Robinson lost 19 times and that takes nothing away from his greatness. Armstrong lost 21 times, does that mean Rocky Marciano is P4P better than him?

P4P all time is a very subjective thing and all the fighters listed in these posts belong in the discussion. How can you be so sure who's Top 5 or not with all the candidates? Jofre has the credentials to be up there in that discussion and so does Pep.

To enlighten you and others about Jofre, here's an excellent article from someone who knows more about boxing than either of us:

http://www.ibroresearch.com/Articles/Jo ... _jofre.htm

NICE ARTICLE, thanx for the link. and i dont see how u could think i was attacking u. i was simply debating. u dont have to get all mad at my opinion that jofres not a top 5 FIGHTER of all time.

I am not talking about pep. i have him in top 10 and a good case can be made for top 5. pep is possibly a top 5 fighter of all time.

as for jofre, i gaurantee u most experts and writers would not rate ed jofre in the top 5 greatest fighters. he simply did not prove himself enough. he finalyl had the chance against future hall of famer in fightig harada and harada beat him twice fiarly when jofre was still in his prime. it could have to do with style of harada, or maybe not. point is in his biggest matches, he lost to harada. that puts a seriousely dent on his record. and u have to look at his record as well as articles and reading on him. ray robinson lost 19 times BUT avenged all major defeats in title fights while jofre didnt (harada). thats what makes surgar so great, past his prime he still knocked out guys liek fullmer. SO YES ROBINSON LOST BUT MADE UP FOR THEE BIGGEST LOSSES. IN JOFRES MOST IMPORTANT BOUTS, HE LOST BOTH.
u dont just look at records, u look at opposition and who he beat and who he didnt beat. fact is he fought one fall of famer, and lost to him twice when both were in their primes. and he cleaned out the bantam division beating top contenders but never any great names.

are u talking about top 5 fighters or top 5 "boxers" who ever lived??? theirs a difference. cause if it were top "boxer boxer", guys like marciano wouldnt be in top 1,000. but it its top fighters of all time, rock would prob be in top 15.

can u clare that up for me???

Yes, I do consider him one of the five best fighters of all-time and this is not a question of experts. As you might have seen in the article, Nat Fleisher and the author both would agree and it's a matter of perspective. I notice you do not have Jofre among your 50 greatest fighters. Maybe the article and some facts about him will change your opinion.

I base Eder Jofre's greatness on these facts:

1) He was a Ring Top 10 contender for a span of 18 years (1959-76) and every year he was active. Not too many fighters can make that claim. Longetivity means a lot when I rate a fighter.

2) He won the lineal title in both the bantamweight and featherweight divisions. He didn't duck challengers. He fought and beat a variety of fighters of different styles and in different ways.

3) All but one of those defenses were against Top 10 contenders and he went into other fighters backyards and beat them on a regular basis. The Harada fights were extremely close, and both were fought in Japan. Do you really think he might not have legitimately won one or both of those fights if they were held in Brazil (not a hometown decision but legitimately)? You're a wrestler, aren't you more pumped up hearing the cheers of your fellow students than a rowdy crowd on the road? Doesn't your team perform better? BTW, Harada would make my Top 20 P4P list as well.

4) Jofre held the bantamweight title for 5 years and won the featherweight title over Legra coming out of retirement to do it. He went 11-2 in title fights.

5) Saying that he didn't fight HOF fighters is a bad argument because the IBHOF ignores lighter weight fighters. It's better to look at Ring Top 10 contenders IMO. But I ask you, does Ingemar Johansson belong in the Hall of Fame? Tommy Burns? Jess Willard? But because they are heavyweights, they get in. On your 50 fighters list, you rank 12 or 13 heavyweight champs plus Langford but only 2 bantamweights (McGovern and Olivares and both were featherweight champs as well) and one flyweight (Jimmy Wilde, who is the only "hyped" flyweight media couldn't ignore).

For your greatest fighters list, it's obvious you didn't consider Jofre, but did you carefully consider Panama Al Brown? Fighting Harada? George Dixon? Kid Williams? Abe Attell? Carlos Zarate? Fighters like Yoshio Shirai and Howard Winstone not in the HOF are far better than Burns or Johansson, but who cares about the lighter weights, right? Well, boxing fans that take the time to learn about those fighters do. The best fighter not currently in the HOF is Jung-Koo Chang and he fought at 108 pounds.

It's obvious that you study the higher weights more than the lighter weights. There is nothing wrong with that, most people do. But if you're going to make an informed all-time P4P list with credibility, you have to look into these little guys as well.

The only reason the post comes off as being "upset" is because I feel you did not even consider Jofre's credentials before challenging his inclusion on my p4p list. And no, just saying he lost to Harada or didn't fight another HOF (which he did, Vicente Saldivar) is not enough. If you did consider Jofre, then he would have easily made your Top 50 list and been much higher.

:)

1. Robinson
2. Charles
3. Armstrong
4. Duran
5. Ali

If Pushed it would be

Sugar Ray Leonard
Ray Robinson
Ali
Wilde
Armstrong.

Leonard?

Tantum wrote:Leonard?

Yep, its not asking for it being based on achievements. Leonard fought in a great era and had wins over fellow greats - like Hagler, Hearns, Duran, Benetez etc. Two of these are always in these debates on their own rights.

The guy was the best boxer I have ever seen.

not in any particular order:

greb
langford
robinson
hard to decide after those three but they stand out

stujones wrote:

Tantum wrote:Leonard?

Yep, its not asking for it being based on achievements. Leonard fought in a great era and had wins over fellow greats - like Hagler, Hearns, Duran, Benetez etc. Two of these are always in these debates on their own rights.

The guy was the best boxer I have ever seen.

Well said for sticking to your guns.

You don't want to come on the BBC Boxing forum, SRL takes a major pounding from a lot of posters on there.

I'm with you; I don't rate him at number 1, but I do think he is one of the finest.

1. Henry Armstrong
2. Sugar Ray Robinson
3. Harry Greb
4. Muhammad Ali
5. Roberto Duran
........

dnahar32 wrote:Yes, I do consider him one of the five best fighters of all-time and this is not a question of experts. As you might have seen in the article, Nat Fleisher and the author both would agree and it's a matter of perspective. I notice you do not have Jofre among your 50 greatest fighters. Maybe the article and some facts about him will change your opinion.

I base Eder Jofre's greatness on these facts:

1) He was a Ring Top 10 contender for a span of 18 years (1959-76) and every year he was active. Not too many fighters can make that claim. Longetivity means a lot when I rate a fighter.

2) He won the lineal title in both the bantamweight and featherweight divisions. He didn't duck challengers. He fought and beat a variety of fighters of different styles and in different ways.

3) All but one of those defenses were against Top 10 contenders and he went into other fighters backyards and beat them on a regular basis. The Harada fights were extremely close, and both were fought in Japan. Do you really think he might not have legitimately won one or both of those fights if they were held in Brazil (not a hometown decision but legitimately)? You're a wrestler, aren't you more pumped up hearing the cheers of your fellow students than a rowdy crowd on the road? Doesn't your team perform better? BTW, Harada would make my Top 20 P4P list as well.

4) Jofre held the bantamweight title for 5 years and won the featherweight title over Legra coming out of retirement to do it. He went 11-2 in title fights.

5) Saying that he didn't fight HOF fighters is a bad argument because the IBHOF ignores lighter weight fighters. It's better to look at Ring Top 10 contenders IMO. But I ask you, does Ingemar Johansson belong in the Hall of Fame? Tommy Burns? Jess Willard? But because they are heavyweights, they get in. On your 50 fighters list, you rank 12 or 13 heavyweight champs plus Langford but only 2 bantamweights (McGovern and Olivares and both were featherweight champs as well) and one flyweight (Jimmy Wilde, who is the only "hyped" flyweight media couldn't ignore).

For your greatest fighters list, it's obvious you didn't consider Jofre, but did you carefully consider Panama Al Brown? Fighting Harada? George Dixon? Kid Williams? Abe Attell? Carlos Zarate? Fighters like Yoshio Shirai and Howard Winstone not in the HOF are far better than Burns or Johansson, but who cares about the lighter weights, right? Well, boxing fans that take the time to learn about those fighters do. The best fighter not currently in the HOF is Jung-Koo Chang and he fought at 108 pounds.

It's obvious that you study the higher weights more than the lighter weights. There is nothing wrong with that, most people do. But if you're going to make an informed all-time P4P list with credibility, you have to look into these little guys as well.

The only reason the post comes off as being "upset" is because I feel you did not even consider Jofre's credentials before challenging his inclusion on my p4p list. And no, just saying he lost to Harada or didn't fight another HOF (which he did, Vicente Saldivar) is not enough. If you did consider Jofre, then he would have easily made your Top 50 list and been much higher.

:)

I agree that Jofre was a great fighter but I think you should rate Harada higher as Harada beat a peak Jofre 2 times clearly. Harada should have been a 3 weight world champion but was robbed in his first fight with jOHNNY Famechon... (refereed by Willie Pep!... who certainly wasn't an all timer as a Referee!).
Yeah Jofre was great but Harada is very underrated by many and should get more recognition... I think if Harada was Mexican he'd be mentioned much more.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:How could u have jofre in the top 5??? the only hall of famer he ever faced was fighting harada and fighting harada beat jofre twice. im not saying he is not an all time great, im simply saying he defintely doesnt deserve top 5. he did score victory over veteran WBA champion jose legra which was a great win, and he knocked out vincente salvidar but both fighters were past their prime. I just think he didnt prove himself enough. had he beat harada it might be different. in his prime the only great fighter he faced was harada.

im simply think he is not a top 5 fighter, and if u place him there, ur overlooking many greats that deserved to be in the top 5 much more.


as for pep, sure he had an incredible record and was a matser boxer, but have u ever though just once to rate sandy saddler over him???? i mean both dominated featherweight division except saddler beat pep 3 times out of 4??? when they BOTH WERE IN THEIR PRIMES. that should count for something. saddler even past his prime managed to TKO 13 a young upcoming HOF flash elorde after losing there first fight.

ill say this, saddler lost a lot of non title fights but those were non title fights. when it came tiiime to fight for the title, saddler showed his true colors and always came in top shape and always won.

one thing about pep. as great a master boxer as he was, and he was one of the best. he didnt have the best chin and thats probably why such a power hitter like saddler beat him not to mention saddler could also box. pep was knocked down a lot in his prime years by guys with losing records. dont get me wrong, pep is one of the greatest. just dount count saddler out. he beat pep three times.

I disagree with you when you say Pep was at his peak when he fought Saddler. Pep had already fought in well over 100 fights, had been champion for 6 years, was 26 and had recently been in a Airplane crash in which he'd broken his neck.... its fair to say that Pep was on the slide against Saddler. Pep gave Sandy a boxing lesson in their 2nd fight but he could'nt reproduce this form in their last two fights.
Its True that Saddler was great in his own right and is underrated but I still think that Pep was past his prime when he fought Sandy and rates higher than him overall despite the results of their fights.

I got ...

Sugar Ray Robinson (if any one has a list that excludes him, they should be banned from boxers of the past forum immediately).

Henry Armstrong, held three titles at same time. An amazing fighter in a tough era.

Sam Langford. I couldn't care less if he never held a title, actually it kinda adds to his mystic at this point. He was good enough to be the champ in every division from 160 to heavyweight. At 5' 7" and 170 some odd pounds, at his prime he could beat any heavyweight in the world (too bad he never got to fight Johnson while Sam was in his prime) never mind light heavyweights or middleweights.

Joe Louis. A perfect fighting machine who held the title as his personal possesion. Must be on every one's list if for no other reason because no other fighter EVER has dominated their division like Joe did. The most dominate boxer of all time.

Muhammad Ali. His story has been told a hundred times over. I have nothing else to add, nor do I think I need to.

"Sam Langford. I couldn't care less if he never held a title, actually it kinda adds to his mystic at this point. "


That's sort of the way I feel about Charles Burley, too. So many people who were very familiar with him (like Eddy Futch) called him the best all-round boxer they ever saw that it's hard not to consider him among the very best ever. But lack of opportunity to fight other greats, and often limited footage of them in action, can really make it tough to rate certain fighters who were excluded from championship fights.

As to the original list posted by syntax and seconded by grimm, my only complaint would be that it's probably a bit too skewed towards heavyweights--which, if anything, makes anyone criticizing you for including Pep even more studip!

Sorry, Ali was a great HW, but not one of the top 5 fighters of all time.

My list which could easily change

1) Robinson

2) Langford

3) Greb

4) Henry Armstrong

5) Tough . . .could be Pep, Benny Leonard, or possibly Charles. Jofre could very much be in there but I simply haven't seen footage of the guy. I have a higher weight class bias, I freely admit

silkov wrote:

dnahar32 wrote:Yes, I do consider him one of the five best fighters of all-time and this is not a question of experts. As you might have seen in the article, Nat Fleisher and the author both would agree and it's a matter of perspective. I notice you do not have Jofre among your 50 greatest fighters. Maybe the article and some facts about him will change your opinion.

I base Eder Jofre's greatness on these facts:

1) He was a Ring Top 10 contender for a span of 18 years (1959-76) and every year he was active. Not too many fighters can make that claim. Longetivity means a lot when I rate a fighter.

2) He won the lineal title in both the bantamweight and featherweight divisions. He didn't duck challengers. He fought and beat a variety of fighters of different styles and in different ways.

3) All but one of those defenses were against Top 10 contenders and he went into other fighters backyards and beat them on a regular basis. The Harada fights were extremely close, and both were fought in Japan. Do you really think he might not have legitimately won one or both of those fights if they were held in Brazil (not a hometown decision but legitimately)? You're a wrestler, aren't you more pumped up hearing the cheers of your fellow students than a rowdy crowd on the road? Doesn't your team perform better? BTW, Harada would make my Top 20 P4P list as well.

4) Jofre held the bantamweight title for 5 years and won the featherweight title over Legra coming out of retirement to do it. He went 11-2 in title fights.

5) Saying that he didn't fight HOF fighters is a bad argument because the IBHOF ignores lighter weight fighters. It's better to look at Ring Top 10 contenders IMO. But I ask you, does Ingemar Johansson belong in the Hall of Fame? Tommy Burns? Jess Willard? But because they are heavyweights, they get in. On your 50 fighters list, you rank 12 or 13 heavyweight champs plus Langford but only 2 bantamweights (McGovern and Olivares and both were featherweight champs as well) and one flyweight (Jimmy Wilde, who is the only "hyped" flyweight media couldn't ignore).

For your greatest fighters list, it's obvious you didn't consider Jofre, but did you carefully consider Panama Al Brown? Fighting Harada? George Dixon? Kid Williams? Abe Attell? Carlos Zarate? Fighters like Yoshio Shirai and Howard Winstone not in the HOF are far better than Burns or Johansson, but who cares about the lighter weights, right? Well, boxing fans that take the time to learn about those fighters do. The best fighter not currently in the HOF is Jung-Koo Chang and he fought at 108 pounds.

It's obvious that you study the higher weights more than the lighter weights. There is nothing wrong with that, most people do. But if you're going to make an informed all-time P4P list with credibility, you have to look into these little guys as well.

The only reason the post comes off as being "upset" is because I feel you did not even consider Jofre's credentials before challenging his inclusion on my p4p list. And no, just saying he lost to Harada or didn't fight another HOF (which he did, Vicente Saldivar) is not enough. If you did consider Jofre, then he would have easily made your Top 50 list and been much higher.

:)

I agree that Jofre was a great fighter but I think you should rate Harada higher as Harada beat a peak Jofre 2 times clearly. Harada should have been a 3 weight world champion but was robbed in his first fight with jOHNNY Famechon... (refereed by Willie Pep!... who certainly wasn't an all timer as a Referee!).
Yeah Jofre was great but Harada is very underrated by many and should get more recognition... I think if Harada was Mexican he'd be mentioned much more.

My Jofre pick was based on sustained excellence over long periods, multiple titles, a willigness to fight anyone anywhere, and some love for the smaller weights. The point I made in my post still holds: I think Jofre goes 1-1 with Harada in a neutral site, and wins if either fight is held in Brazil (and not hometown decisions either but legitimate wins). Imagine Hagler-Leonard at Boston Garden? Don't you think the fight would have been different in fromt of Hagler's hometown fans? Maybe I'm reacting to watching Hatton-Tszyu, but I think a close matchup between great fighters can hinge on the home crowd.

Harada is way up there as well, in my Top 20, but not Top 5 P4P. The Asian fighter bias is definitely there or Jung-Koo Chang would have made the HOF in his first year of eligibility. Wilde, Greb, Pep, Duran and others mentioned are all up there. It's tough to name just five.