BoxRec

A while back I compiled a list for rating heavyweights for each decade. I thought I would do one for middleweights.
I looked at Ring Magazine's Annual Ratings and developed a point system. A fighter ranked #1 for the year getrs 10 points, #2 gets 9 points and so on until #10 gets 1 points. the champion gets 12 points.
I then totaled the 10 years of each decade. Of course Ring Magazine's ratings aren't perfect, but they are certainly a lof better than the WBA, WBC etc.

A fighter that fouht at the end of one decade and the beginning of the next does get shortchanged in this system. Still this is fun and interesting.
Here are the rankings with the fighters total points in parenthesis:

1930's
1. Marcel Thil (66 )
2. Vince Dundee (36)
2. Teddy Yarosz (36)
4. Freddie Steele (34)
5. Dave Shade (31)
5. Fred Apostoli (31)
7. Ken Overlin (25)
8. Frank Battaglia (23)
9. Gorilla Jones (22)
10. Al Hostak (21)

1940's
1. Tony Zale (97)
2. Jake LaMotta (68 )
3. Steve Belloise (44)
4. Marcel Cerdan (38 )
5. Holman Williams (37)
6. Charley Burley (35)
7. Rocky Graziano (26)
8. Bert Lytell (23)
9. Georgie Abrams (19)
10. Archie Moore (18 )
10. Coley Welch (18 )

1950's
1. Sugar Ray Robinson (70)
2. Joey Giardello (45)
3. Gene Fullmer (42)
3. Bobo Olson (42)
5. Rocky Castellani (37)
6. Randy Turpin (35)
7. Spider Webb (31)
7. Charles Humez (31)
9. Carmen Basilio (27)
10. Holly Mims (21)

1960's
1. Nino Benvenuti (60)
2. Dick Tiger (49)
3. Joey Giardello (48 )
4. Sandro Mazzinghi (39)
5. Emile Griffith (37)
6. Gene Fullmer (35)
7. Joey Archer (33)
8. Paul Pender (31)
9. Luis Folledo (26)
10. Don Fullmer (24)

1970's
1. Carlos Monzon (84)
2. Rodrigo Valdez (56)
3. Vito Antuofermo (45)
4. Benny Brisco (41)
5. Emile Griffith (36)
6. Marvin Hagler (30)
7. Mike Colbert (28 )
8. Tony Mundine (23)
8. Ronnie Harris (23)
10. Hugo Corro (21)
10. Tony Licata (21)

In 1962, Ring lists Paul Pender and Dick Tiger as "Co-Champions". I thought the fairest way to award points was to give both 11 points. The #1 contender got 9 points, #2 8 points etc. # 10 didn't get any points for that year.

Looking at the results, there is some interesting things. Guys who you don't hear much about anymore did well. for example, Rocky Castellani was #5 for the 1950's and Steve Belloise was #3 for the 1940's.

Anyway, what do you guys think of the results?

Ambling Alp,

Excellent work, great contribution!

Thanks you very much!

Ambling Alp wrote: 1940's
1. Tony Zale (97)
2. Jake LaMotta (68 )
3. Steve Belloise (44)
4. Marcel Cerdan (38 )
5. Holman Williams (37)
6. Charley Burley (35)
7. Rocky Graziano (26)
8. Bert Lytell (23)
9. Georgie Abrams (19)
10. Archie Moore (18 )
10. Coley Welch (18 )

Interesting piece of work Alp. Like you said it's good to see some lesser talked about fighters getting a mention. However I am somewhat suprised to see that Eddie Booker falied to make the 1940's list considering his many achievements in that decade.

The ratings for 1930 have been corrected.

Thanks Ric. I edited my original post. There were a few minor changes.

KOJOE90 wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote: 1940's
1. Tony Zale (97)
2. Jake LaMotta (68 )
3. Steve Belloise (44)
4. Marcel Cerdan (38 )
5. Holman Williams (37)
6. Charley Burley (35)
7. Rocky Graziano (26)
8. Bert Lytell (23)
9. Georgie Abrams (19)
10. Archie Moore (18 )
10. Coley Welch (18 )

Interesting piece of work Alp. Like you said it's good to see some lesser talked about fighters getting a mention. However I am somewhat suprised to see that Eddie Booker falied to make the 1940's list considering his many achievements in that decade.

I went through Booker's record, and there is some reasoning why he didn't do better.
He only had one fight in 1940, so he wasn't ranked.
In 1941, Booker wasn't ranked even though he was 1-1-1 with Hogue, had a draw with Moore and was 11-0 against non contenders. However Moore was only 1-1-1 that year, so he wasn't ranked either. (Moore was #4 the year before, and #1 the year after.) Hogue wasn't ranked either.

In 1942, Booker was #8, even though he had a draw with Moore who was #1. Booker also beat Llloyd Marshall that year. He id have a draw with a non-contender named Bandit Romero. Still you would think Booker would have been higher than #8.

In 1943, Booker was only 2-2, though 1 loss was to #2 Williams. He wasn't ranked for the year.

In 1944, Booker beat both Williams and Archie Moore and may have been ranked #1 for the year. However, he retired in March. Ring didn't rank him for the year. Williams ended up being #1 despite losing to Booker.

It's hard to believe, but Booker was only ranked for one year in his career, and that was only #8. He certainly would have been ranked in 1944, possibly #1 if he hadn't retired.

Of course he may have made the ratings after 1944 if he hadn't retired.

I remember when you did the HW and commended you then. Though I did put in a request for welters at the time.

Just jokes - nice work thanks.

el tigre- Sorry that I haven't got to the welterweights. I will have it ready soon, maybe even today.