BoxRec

I mean a champ at the top of his game,
not over the hill or weight drained, but regarded
as the best at the time in that weight.

bit before my time but Benn verious mclenan maybe ?

Macellan was a midde and not no1.
There arn`t many I could only think of
Laing -Duran
honeyghan-Curry
Hatton-Tszyu
and they could be open to dispute.

In Lennox Lewis' case, he was the #1 already and twice outclassed Holyfield. Calzaghe also came to be #1 by being around long enough and seems to be defining himself now in even money unifications (Lacy, Kessler).

Surely Laguna was #1 when Buchanan beat him, Napoles #1 when Stracy got him, Antuofermo was coming off a draw with Hagler and holding the title when Minter got him - on a technicality, Minter-Antuo 1 could be one.

Barry McGuigan beating on Pedroza is another.

Randy Turpin beat Sugar Ray Robinson in 1951. Although many believe that Robinson took the fight lightly as he was coming to the end of a European tour.

Autobarn wrote:In Lennox Lewis' case, he was the #1 already and twice outclassed Holyfield. Calzaghe also came to be #1 by being around long enough and seems to be defining himself now in even money unifications (Lacy, Kessler).

Totally agree Its sad to think that of all the "world champs" we`ve had over the years only them Hatton and maybe Hamed were good enough to be considerd geniune number 1`s by us and the rest of the world.

vargas wrote:Randy Turpin beat Sugar Ray Robinson in 1951. Although many believe that Robinson took the fight lightly as he was coming to the end of a European tour.

Good call forgot that one.

Jim Driscoll got the newspaper verdict over World Champion Abe Attell in in 1909.

With all the world title holders we have had
it`s not very many is it? Not that many have beaten a number 1
and only a small amount have been recognised as a true number 1.

Turpin v SRR
Honeyghan v Curry

and then maybe Hatton v Tzsyu

That's about it. Anything from the very old era I haven't a clue.

But just imagine if Andy Holligan had achieved the sensational there wouldn't have been any doubt.

It kind of puts British boxing into perspective though doesn't it?

Autobarn wrote:In Lennox Lewis' case, he was the #1 already and twice outclassed Holyfield. Calzaghe also came to be #1 by being around long enough and seems to be defining himself now in even money unifications (Lacy, Kessler).

Surely Laguna was #1 when Buchanan beat him, Napoles #1 when Stracy got him, Antuofermo was coming off a draw with Hagler and holding the title when Minter got him - on a technicality, Minter-Antuo 1 could be one.

Barry McGuigan beating on Pedroza is another.

The original post asked for not only statistically #1, but fighters at the top of their game.

I cannot think of any off the top of my head. Curry, Tszyu, Napoles were not. Possibly the closest is Holyfield... I think the majority had Holyfield as #1 at the time (being the two versioned champion and Lewis didn't beat the man to win the WBC title... infact, Holyfield did but didn't get the belt).... However, Evander looked on the slide vs Bean

thaibox uk wrote:Macellan was a midde and not no1.
There arn`t many I could only think of
Laing -Duran
honeyghan-Curry
Hatton-Tszyu
and they could be open to dispute.

Duran had been beaten by Benitez in the fight prior to the one against Laing, so that's another one you can wipe off the list. There aren't many that's for sure.

McClellan in many peoples opinion (including Emanuel Steward, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns and an incarcerated Mike Tyson) was the best fighter in the world at the time.

STP wrote:McClellan in many peoples opinion (including Emanuel Steward, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns and an incarcerated Mike Tyson) was the best fighter in the world at the time.

The most powerful puncher doesn't equate to the very best.

But for sure I would put Benn's win up there as GREAT. Especially when people were worried, before the fight, about his physical health afterwards.

ArtOfWar wrote:There aren't many that's for sure.

You can say that again. Especially when talking of recent times.

Only Lewis fits the bill over the last couple of years. He became a clear number one when he unified against his only real rival for top spot. All the others have worked themselves up to the top rather than beating the out and out best fighter in the division.

Hatton's the next closest, but there is an argument that while Tszyu was (as far as I'm concerned) still the undisputed champion, there was a better fighter than him at light-welter at the time of the Hatton fight.

Hopefully though there'll be Haye to add to the list later this year. Mormeck is obviously the clear number one at cruiser, and even at 35 it can't be claimed that he's gone over the top as he's coming off a career best win.

Ken Buchanan v Ismael Laguna

SticknMove wrote:

STP wrote:McClellan in many peoples opinion (including Emanuel Steward, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns and an incarcerated Mike Tyson) was the best fighter in the world at the time.

The most powerful puncher doesn't equate to the very best.

But for sure I would put Benn's win up there as GREAT. Especially when people were worried, before the fight, about his physical health afterwards.

He was about the best jab artist I've seen, his whole game was based around it the way he'd feint the jab to bring down the straight right.

The way he could got into position, his footwork, his balance. And his timing of punch was ridiculous at times.

His best punch was the left hook to the body - had precisely 10 10-counts KO's with that in precisely 20 fights. Hit Nigel with it and Nigel froze for a second before waving him in for more (but Nigel says he knew if McClellan hit him with that again he'd be down)!

Jack Kid Berg V Kid Chocalate

stujones wrote:The original post asked for not only statistically #1, but fighters at the top of their game.

I'd suggest then that this is a bit flawed. As soon as they have been beaten, reasons/excuses come out as to why they weren't at the 'top of their game'!

So Curry becomes weight drained, Pedroza and Tzsyu past it, etc...

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:The original post asked for not only statistically #1, but fighters at the top of their game.

I'd suggest then that this is a bit flawed. As soon as they have been beaten, reasons/excuses come out as to why they weren't at the 'top of their game'!

So Curry becomes weight drained, Pedroza and Tzsyu past it, etc...

Totally agree. Anyone can use statistics to prove their own point.

How many fighters are there around at the moment that can be considered the genuine No 1? Perhaps Wlad at HW, Calzaghe at SMW, Floyd at LMW, Hatton at LWW, Pacman at SFW. And even these guys have question marks - Has Wlad ever beaten the top man at HW? Floyd didn't beat the man at LMW and now he'll probably go back to Welter (who's No 1 there? Cotto, Williams, Cintron or is it still Floyd?); some would argue that JMM is above Pacquiao and I don't need to talk about JC or RH (see about 1000 other threads).

FWIW, I rate Hatton beating Tszyu, Turpin beating SRR, Honeyghan beating Curry, Barry Mc beating Pedroza, Lewis beating Holyfield and Benn beating McLellan as the most likely to fit in this category. This is because BEFORE the fights their opponents were unanimously viewed as the No 1's. Hindsight is wonderful for pessimists and haters.

vargas wrote:Randy Turpin beat Sugar Ray Robinson in 1951. Although many believe that Robinson took the fight lightly as he was coming to the end of a European tour.

Turpin nearly beat him in the rematch, it's worth noting.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:The original post asked for not only statistically #1, but fighters at the top of their game.

I'd suggest then that this is a bit flawed. As soon as they have been beaten, reasons/excuses come out as to why they weren't at the 'top of their game'!

So Curry becomes weight drained, Pedroza and Tzsyu past it, etc...

yeah, you can't ask for everything. world #1, at his prime, peak of his powers, might as well add that he has to be coming off the perfect performance, his best ever training preparation, the best pre-fight breakfast.

it can be argued that when a fighter finally qualifies as true "elite level" that he has used up his best getting there.

stujones wrote:

Autobarn wrote:In Lennox Lewis' case, he was the #1 already and twice outclassed Holyfield. Calzaghe also came to be #1 by being around long enough and seems to be defining himself now in even money unifications (Lacy, Kessler).

Surely Laguna was #1 when Buchanan beat him, Napoles #1 when Stracy got him, Antuofermo was coming off a draw with Hagler and holding the title when Minter got him - on a technicality, Minter-Antuo 1 could be one.

Barry McGuigan beating on Pedroza is another.

The original post asked for not only statistically #1, but fighters at the top of their game.

I cannot think of any off the top of my head. Curry, Tszyu, Napoles were not. Possibly the closest is Holyfield... I think the majority had Holyfield as #1 at the time (being the two versioned champion and Lewis didn't beat the man to win the WBC title... infact, Holyfield did but didn't get the belt).... However, Evander looked on the slide vs Bean

Evander chose Bean over Lewis and tried to delay as long as he could by going for meaningless fights with Botha and Akinwande that got called off. He was doing all he could to avoid the fight.

Lewis outclassed Holyfield, jesus VM.. thats just wrong.

I think even the biggest Lewis fan .... where is Goz ..... will say that the rematch was close.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:The original post asked for not only statistically #1, but fighters at the top of their game.

I'd suggest then that this is a bit flawed. As soon as they have been beaten, reasons/excuses come out as to why they weren't at the 'top of their game'!

So Curry becomes weight drained, Pedroza and Tzsyu past it, etc...

Exactly Ian, the Curry-Honeyghan fight is a prime example. I can remember at the time that people thought Honeyghan was mad to even contemplate fighting Curry at all let alone in the States as well as, in most people's opinion, he was one of the best fighters around and it was seen as a complete formality because, basically, Curry was seen as that good. It hadn't been a year since Curry had flattened Milton McCrory.

It's easy to look back and say that Curry was spoiled goods, but at the time Honeyghan's win fulfilled everything which the original poster specified, and Lloyd's achievement shouldn't be underestimated.