Do you agree with this ranking of top ten boxers of all tome

Destruction and destroy (Hagler).

I loved the middle weight battles of the 80s.

I liked how they talked about Mando Ramos in American Me...

Ronnie Pudding wrote:

Being serious:

1. Sugar Ray Robinson

2. Roberto Duran

3. Henry Armstrong

4. Harry Greb

5. Sam Langford

6. Sugar Ray Leonard

7. Willie Pep

8. Benny Leonard

9. Muhammed Ali

10. Joe Louis

Good list. Also Jack Johnson and HAGLER

If you created your list some time mid-1989, I would not have an issue with Mike Tyson in top ten. I cannot erase Buster Douglas fight from my memory. Tyson was never highly skilled. When Tyson was quickly knocking bums out in first round, 1987 & 1988, many could say Tyson simply fought next man up. In 1988, no one could say it was necessarily Tyson's fault his competitors were bums. For the record, Buster Douglas fight was supposed to be a warm-up for first Tyson-Holyfield fight. After Douglas-Tyson, Mike Tyson clearly was not up to an immediate Holyfield fight.

A young Larry Holmes was very skilled. His left jab was outstanding! Holyfield was very skilled. I have an issue listing lighter weight boxers in top ten. I know many of the most skilled boxers were less than heavy weight. The challenge in heavy weight division is not a challenge simply of skill. The challenge in heavy weight division is being punched by a 215 plus pound man. Even though Ali was bigger than both Sugar Rays, those men do not know the pain of being punched by Sonny Liston, Larry Holmes, George Foreman, Joe Frazier, Ken Norton Sr. and Earnie Shavers.

We were missed out on M. Ali's most skilled years, but Ali was mentally toughest fighter ever. Young Ali fought on intelligence, skill and toughness. Older Ali fought on intelligence and toughness. No other boxer ever took the punches Ali took. Ali had too much pride to go down and not get up.

No, Sugar Ray could not have been a heavyweight champion. A bulked up middleweight would not have pop as a heavy and he would still have a middleweight chin. Hearns was an incredible puncher as a welterweight but not as a middleweight and couldn't absorb the punches as a well.

You are right. But my main point was that it is a stupid argument and many skilled fighters can make it work at different weight classes, obviously taking someone who could fight as a light weight at their lightest and bulking them up to a heavy weight would have drawbacks. But the point is the skills and strategy that a boxer needs are important and while they differ a bit from one weight class to another, they translate well enough that ranking fighters from different weight classes makes sense. Saying only the heavy weights count as the best of all time is dumb. Otherwise, you might as well remove all rules and make it a fight to the death or something.

nope, but nice try wrote:

Laughable list when it doesnt include any Sugar Ray's particularly Ray Robinson.

^^ Both Sugar Rays and what about Pacquiao?

I mostly agree with this. Tyson knocked out a lot of nobodies. But I also think Tysons biggest downfall was himself. When Cus died so too did Tyson in a way. But the combination of his power, speed and accuracy was unmatched when he was in top form. Dude was coked out and not training seriously when he fought Buster Douglas. I always just think what might have been had Cus lived longer.

I realize this list is a joke, but Ali is overrated.

He lost twice in his prime to contemporaries (Frazier and Norton) in their first bouts. This suggests that he was not "The Greatest".

George Foreman and Mike Tyson don't

belong on any boxing top ten list.They

were overrated bashers with very

little boxing skill.

Joe Frazier would kick most of this top 10 lists ass. (albeit he lost to Foreman and Ali but did beat Ali once) Hard to say about Tyson....he looked awesome in the day but I think Ali, Foreman, and Frazier would all KO him.

I don't know much about boxing but Floyd is super-boring, would rather watch a marathon.

Ali was charismatic, but had very little punching power for a heavyweight. Everything I've read and seen about Joe Louis would tell me he was number 1. He had tremendous power and could move quite well.

Hagler would be number 1 on my list. Sledgehammer like power and a lefty to boot.

I don't know how you rank Tyson. He looked amazing against mostly nobodies.

Both Sugar Rays belong on the list. Aaron Pryor was an incredible boxer who never got his chance to fight Sugar Ray Leonard. Leonard suffered a detached retina and their fight was cancelled.

I would include Larry Holmes and Teofilo Stevenson.

It seems obvious enough the OP was just talking heavy weight so I'll leave it at that.

If one is talking about what boxer reached the highest pinnacle of greatness, even for a brief time, then I don't see how it can be anyone else but Ali. The few years between between when Ali beat Liston to when he was banned from boxing because of the war is amazing. Yeah, I know he didn't fight anyone that great in that time. But c'mon the way he moves in that time period with the size and length he had was incredible. Combine that with his savvy, and skill. There is no way Joe Louis in his prime beats Ali in his prime.

People need to understand that Ali was a shadow of what he once was by the 1970s even as he regained his title. His legs weren't there. That is how good he was in the mid 60s. And since the era no heavyweight comes close to the all around athleticism Ali had, let alone skill.

I thought that "Sugar Ray Robinson" was the number one.

You can see here in this video 5:30 Mohmmed Ali showing a great respect for him.

Sugar Ray Robinson was Mohammed Ali idole.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbZIVOX-bpw&t=2107s

Marciano was a great boxed of a time.

Ryan Foreman wrote:

There is no way Joe Louis in his prime beats Ali in his prime.

No way? Ali in his prime lost to Joe Frazier in his prime and to Ken Norton in his prime.

nope, but nice try wrote:

I mostly agree with this. Tyson knocked out a lot of nobodies. But I also think Tysons biggest downfall was himself. When Cus died so too did Tyson in a way. But the combination of his power, speed and accuracy was unmatched when he was in top form. Dude was coked out and not training seriously when he fought Buster Douglas. I always just think what might have been had Cus lived longer.

Moreso if he had not fired Rooney.

He was skilled when he wanted to be. He won. Got lazy. Didn't want to defend anymore. Just kept relying on the one punch bomb.

The guys he beat to win the belts weren't bums. They were the best they had at the time. A 1989 Tyson kills Holyfield in the first round just like he destroyed another undersized undefeated heavyweight.

Alan

portsea57 wrote:

What! Big George .

George Chuvalo will always remember him.

I'm still amazed that so many people are hypnotised by this P4P nonsense. Let's try a different tack...or two. Weightlifting. Now, that is split up into divisions like boxing, but if you were rating the greatest weightlifters of all-time it would be nonsense to not have the guys who lift the greatest poundage age as the top guys. But, there will be some nutter who starts claiming that some 140pd guy is the greatest because he never lost a contest ( in his weight division ) and had an amazing technique. It's nonsense. For example, we never hear about any 140pd javelin thrower with a sublime technique because he won't be able to thrown anywhere near as far as the big lads.