[Alan Smithee]

(Original post by Klinsmannic)
'Greatest' doesn't imply technical proficiency, there's more to it than that.

Please don't school me on boxing. I never said that technical proficiency was all there was. That said, any usage of fame to gauge someone's position as the greatest fighter ever is nonsense.

It's what you did in the ring that mattered. How many fights you won, how many you lost, more importantly WHO you fought and how you beat them etc. Being loved by the average Joe Bloggs just means you have crossover appeal.

If it was based on technical proficiency, there are probably ten fighters ahead of both Ali AND Robinson as technical geniuses, more ahead of Ali even. If anyone knows about Salvador Sanchez for instance and has seen him fight, they'll knwo what I mean.

[Klinsmannic]

(Original post by Fidelis Oditah)
Please don't school me on boxing

I wasn't talking to you directly, it was a general statement. And no, entertainment/having fans is not a component of being great. As purists should know, there are things other than technique, such as heart, stamina etc. Ali also had to deal with his ban from boxing, which he came back from with a bang.

I never said that technical proficiency was all there was. That said, any usage of fame to gauge someone's position as the greatest fighter ever is nonsense.

I never said anything about fame being a constituent of a great fighter.

It's what you did in the ring that mattered. How many fights you won, how many you lost, more importantly WHO you fought and how you beat them etc. Being loved by the average Joe Bloggs just means you have crossover appeal.

My justification for regarding him as the greatest was ''During the greatest era of boxing Ali was the only one to defeat all the other major contenders at the time...none of the other heavyweights managed that feat'' which should have answered your point (and what I've written above). lol again, I never said having lots of fans means your a great fighter. Please read my posts.

If it was based on technical proficiency, there are probably ten fighters ahead of both Ali AND Robinson as technical geniuses, more ahead of Ali even.

Once again, if you read my last post you would have seen: ''Technically, the Sugar Rays were superior (and many others), no doubt.'' You just agreed with me.

You have to remember that this is a vehicle for opinion and debate...it is in my opinion that Ali was the greatest ever, which you obviously disagree with. If I thought entertainment played a part I would have used the word ''charismatic'' instead of ''greatest''. Would also help if you read my posts and responded to them, rather than reading what you want to hear.

[CJ]

I think Mike Tyson's the greatest ever ...

/joke

An example there of how persona/ego and perceived image can influence the masses as to who is the greatest ever.

The amount of times i've heard people say Mike Tyson was the greatest just because of his attitude and media coverage... but each to their own I guess.

[Alan Smithee]

(Original post by Klinsmannic)
I wasn't talking to you directly, it was a general statement. And no, entertainment/having fans is not a component of being great. As purists should know, there are things other than technique, such as heart, stamina etc. Ali also had to deal with his ban from boxing, which he came back from with a bang.



I never said anything about fame being a constituent of a great fighter.



My justification for regarding him as the greatest was ''During the greatest era of boxing Ali was the only one to defeat all the other major contenders at the time...none of the other heavyweights managed that feat'' which should have answered your point (and what I've written above). lol again, I never said having lots of fans means your a great fighter. Please read my posts.



Once again, if you read my last post you would have seen: ''Technically, the Sugar Rays were superior (and many others), no doubt.'' You just agreed with me.

You have to remember that this is a vehicle for opinion and debate...it is in my opinion that Ali was the greatest ever, which you obviously disagree with. If I thought entertainment played a part I would have used the word ''charismatic'' instead of ''greatest''. Would also help if you read my posts and responded to them, rather than reading what you want to hear.

I love it when people change the implication of their post to suit their argument. The word for that kind of behaviour is tendentious.

At the end of the day, very few knowledgeable boxing fans put Ali as the greatest boxer ever. Sugar Ray Robinson did exactly the same feat as Ali i.e. beat all of the competition except he did it 20-30 years earlier. That, plus his far superior record, skills and heart make him better than Ali, simple as that. I know it's your opinion, and I respect that, but I suspect it's an opinion formed from knowing very little about the history of non-heavyweight boxing before Ali's time. If you knew that then you wouldn't have said Ali was the best.

In a list of the greatest fighters in the last 80 years, Ring Magazine had Ali at number three behind Henry Armstrong and Sugar Ray Robinson, I suppose they're wrong?

EDIT: I forgot to mention lol, Ali himself said Sugar Ray Robinson was the greatest pound for pound fighter of all time!

[Mos Def]

(Original post by Fidelis Oditah)
I love it when people change the implication of their post to suit their argument. The word for that kind of behaviour is tendentious.

At the end of the day, very few knowledgeable boxing fans put Ali as the greatest boxer ever. Sugar Ray Robinson did exactly the same feat as Ali i.e. beat all of the competition except he did it 20-30 years earlier. That, plus his far superior record, skills and heart make him better than Ali, simple as that. I know it's your opinion, and I respect that, but I suspect it's an opinion formed from knowing very little about the history of non-heavyweight boxing before Ali's time. If you knew that then you wouldn't have said Ali was the best.

In a list of the greatest fighters in the last 80 years, Ring Magazine had Ali at number three behind Henry Armstrong and Sugar Ray Robinson, I suppose they're wrong?

EDIT: I forgot to mention lol, Ali himself said Sugar Ray Robinson was the greatest pound for pound fighter of all time!

No one cares what Ali thinks

Ok lets scratch this argument and go to best fight ever, im not a pursuit im a fan so i havent seen em all lmao...

for me its Rumble in The Jungle vs ... Gatti v Ward (1/2/3)

[Klinsmannic]

(Original post by Fidelis Oditah)
I love it when people change the implication of their post to suit their argument. The word for that kind of behaviour is tendentious.

What are you talking about? When did I say entertainment had anything to do with being great? I've told you why I thought Ali was the greatest, and it had nothing to do with the number of fans he had. Why can't you get that? Stop willy-waving your boxing knowledge and stick to the script, i.e. the content of my posts. This is an Internet forum, everything I've posted is recorded, so please quote where I have said, or even implied, entertainment makes a fighter great. Why do I have to keep clarifying this point to you each time? The word for your behaviour is 'blinkered'.

At the end of the day, very few knowledgeable boxing fans put Ali as the greatest boxer ever. Sugar Ray Robinson did exactly the same feat as Ali i.e. beat all of the competition except he did it 20-30 years earlier. That, plus his far superior record, skills and heart make him better than Ali, simple as that. I know it's your opinion, and I respect that, but I suspect it's an opinion formed from knowing very little about the history of non-heavyweight boxing before Ali's time. If you knew that then you wouldn't have said Ali was the best.

You said: ''How many fights you won, how many you lost, more importantly WHO you fought and how you beat them etc.'' Well Ali was the greatest because of WHO he beat, the plans he thought-up to work out how he could beat them, the way he beat them, and his great record- Ali had a better win percentage, winning 91% of his career fights compared to Robinson's 86%. You also have to consider his extraordinary speed for a big heavyweight which was unprecedented before and after his time. The likes of Foreman, Frazier, Norton, Liston et al would probably have been considered on a par with Ali had they all been born in different eras, but Ali came back to beat all of them after such adversity. None of the others could claim to be the best of the greatest era in boxing history because they couldn't beat all the other contenders like Ali managed to do, and the way he did it. This is why I think Ali was the greatest. Respect to Robinson though, technically the best.

In a list of the greatest fighters in the last 80 years, Ring Magazine had Ali at number three behind Henry Armstrong and Sugar Ray Robinson, I suppose they're wrong?

I've seen the list and it's for the 80 best fighters in the last 80 years, based on absolute number of KOs, consecutive KOs, percentage KOs, who they KO'd, and who they didn't KO. It's not a measure of who was the greatest (it's a magazine by the way, written by some journos in 2002, not an electronic measuring device). It's a list that only deals in KOs.. therefore it's not the best barometer. Furthermore, the inclusion of 'absolute number of KOs' is biased against heavyweights or those that didn't have as many fights so it's a rubbish measure of pound-for-pound (because pound-for-pound should be judged across divisions and career lengths, as you should know)...Sugar Ray Leonard is in 9th place ffs, because he only had 40 fights in his short career. Heavyweights tend to have less fights over their careers, so they're already marked-down on the number of absolute KOs. Rocky Marciano is in 12th lol. Also your mate Salvador Sanchez is 24th lol. How you can claim this to be the greatest pound for pound list is laughable, it's an absolute list biased in favour of those that had long careers.

Secondly lists are subjective, and there is no method of deciding who was the greatest ever in a fair objective way, which is why we love to watch boxing, and why we have numerous discussions on TSR. The fact that you can criticise my opinion is unlike a true boxing fan, because it's a game of opinions, and there wouldn't be the hundreds of different all-time lists that there are today if everything was black and white. The fact that you use boxing lists as 'evidence' just shows you are unable to deal with my reasoning. It's like a kid arguing with his mate about something, then calling in another mate with a similar opinion to back him up.

[Alan Smithee]

(Original post by Klinsmannic)
What are you talking about? When did I say entertainment had anything to do with being great? I've told you why I thought Ali was the greatest, and it had nothing to do with the number of fans he had. Why can't you get that? Stop willy-waving your boxing knowledge and stick to the script, i.e. the content of my posts. This is an Internet forum, everything I've posted is recorded, so please quote where I have said, or even implied, entertainment makes a fighter great. Why do I have to keep clarifying this point to you each time? The word for your behaviour is 'blinkered'.



You said: ''How many fights you won, how many you lost, more importantly WHO you fought and how you beat them etc.'' Well Ali was the greatest because of WHO he beat, the plans he thought-up to work out how he could beat them, the way he beat them, and his great record- Ali had a better win percentage, winning 91% of his career fights compared to Robinson's 86%. You also have to consider his extraordinary speed for a big heavyweight which was unprecedented before and after his time. The likes of Foreman, Frazier, Norton, Liston et al would probably have been considered on a par with Ali had they all been born in different eras, but Ali came back to beat all of them after such adversity. None of the others could claim to be the best of the greatest era in boxing history because they couldn't beat all the other contenders like Ali managed to do, and the way he did it. This is why I think Ali was the greatest. Respect to Robinson though, technically the best.



I've seen the list and it's for the 80 best fighters in the last 80 years, based on absolute number of KOs, consecutive KOs, percentage KOs, who they KO'd, and who they didn't KO. It's not a measure of who was the greatest (it's a magazine by the way, written by some journos in 2002, not an electronic measuring device). It's a list that only deals in KOs.. therefore it's not the best barometer. Furthermore, the inclusion of 'absolute number of KOs' is biased against heavyweights or those that didn't have as many fights so it's a rubbish measure of pound-for-pound (because pound-for-pound should be judged across divisions and career lengths, as you should know)...Sugar Ray Leonard is in 9th place ffs, because he only had 40 fights in his short career. Heavyweights tend to have less fights over their careers, so they're already marked-down on the number of absolute KOs. Rocky Marciano is in 12th lol. Also your mate Salvador Sanchez is 24th lol. How you can claim this to be the greatest pound for pound list is laughable, it's an absolute list biased in favour of those that had long careers.

Secondly lists are subjective, and there is no method of deciding who was the greatest ever in a fair objective way, which is why we love to watch boxing, and why we have numerous discussions on TSR. The fact that you can criticise my opinion is unlike a true boxing fan, because it's a game of opinions, and there wouldn't be the hundreds of different all-time lists that there are today if everything was black and white. The fact that you use boxing lists as 'evidence' just shows you are unable to deal with my reasoning. It's like a kid arguing with his mate about something, then calling in another mate with a similar opinion to back him up.

The only people I hear say Ali was the greatest boxer ever are armchair boxing fans. His name never comes up in discussions with people who actually know the sport of boxing.

In relation to Sanchez, he died at 23 years old. I never said he was pound for pound, I merely said that technically he was streets ahead of Ali.

[Liquid Tutti]

I'm with Fidelis Oditah. Sugar Ray Robinson is the greatest IMO.

But everybody has their opinions. There are many boxers that can rival Ray Robinson's position as the greatest. e.g Willie Pep.

[Klinsmannic]

(Original post by Fidelis Oditah)
The only people I hear say Ali was the greatest boxer ever are armchair boxing fans. His name never comes up in discussions with people who actually know the sport of boxing.

That's a cop out of a post.

[Né Stig]

Both Sugar Ray's were awesome and easily top of the pound-for-pound tree.

I like Ali, and there was nothing bad to say about him, other than he wasn't as influential as the 2-Ray's IMO.

Best fight I've witenessed has got to be Ali vs. Fraser. In the more modern era, you'd have to look at Castillo vs. Coralles.

[Chocca]

(Original post by walshie)
Both Sugar Ray's were awesome and easily top of the pound-for-pound tree.

I like Ali, and there was nothing bad to say about him, other than he wasn't as influential as the 2-Ray's IMO.

Best fight I've witenessed has got to be Ali vs. Fraser. In the more modern era, you'd have to look at Castillo vs. Coralles.

Or Barrera-Morales I

[Né Stig]

So then - the Mr Nothing boxer Zab Judah gets done by Cotto. I felt that was always on the cards to be honest. I think he should retire. He hasn't won a decent fight n his career, and I don't want to hear names of Spinks or Corley as they've won nothing either. In fact, Spinks beat Zab a long time ago.

Any decent light-welter has beat Zab: PBF, Tszyu, Baldomir. Even Spinks and now Cotto lolololololzzzzzzz.

[Né Stig]

Can't wait for the Hatton fight

Hatton for the points victory.

[Mubsy]

Yeah come on Hatton. Don't care how we wins aslong as he wins!

[Nogueira]

Greatest boxer ever : Rocky Marciano but a prime Mike Tyson could have went with anyone and I wouldn't have counted him out. He was an animal.

Anyway some news regarding Britians current best boxer -

Unbeaten WBO 168 pound champion Joe Calzaghe (43-0) looks set for a unification match with Danish WBC/WBA champion Mikkel Kessler (39-0) in the UK on November 3rd. The venue is pencilled to be the Millenium Stadium subject to final negotiations. The fight is one of the most eagerly awaited in the super middleweight division between two outstanding and unbeaten fighters with over 82 wins and no losses between them. In his last defense the unbeaten Calzaghe drew over 35,000 fans to see his third round stoppage of Peter Manfredo Jr and a bigger crowd is anticipated for this unification bout. Sports Network promoter Frank Warren confirmed the details in his column in the UK tabloid The Sun on Saturday. He stated, "With Kessler bringing his WBA and WBC titles to the party, I expect at least 60,000 to be in attendance. As a result, both fighters will be getting career-high purses."
Sunday, July 8 2007

I cannot wait if this happens. Looks like I'll be heading back to Cardiff to see my second Calzaghe fight in a row which should be awesome.

[Mos Def]

Ohhh yeaaaaaah... calzaghe's time is up

[CJ]

What a **** Frank Warren really is.

Takes ages to actually get a fight together, it's all but agreed for it to take place over there (which Calzaghe is happy with) yet he keeps pushing for the venue.

Wouldn't suprise me if Kessler pulls out leaving egg on his face, and no opponent for another god-knows how long.
If only it could be Taylor... although everyone knows how limited and slow Warrens abilities are.

[Mos Def]

(Original post by <CJ>)
What a **** Frank Warren really is.

Takes ages to actually get a fight together, it's all but agreed for it to take place over there (which Calzaghe is happy with) yet he keeps pushing for the venue.

Wouldn't suprise me if Kessler pulls out leaving egg on his face, and no opponent for another god-knows how long.
If only it could be Taylor... although everyone knows how limited and slow Warrens abilities are.

Hahaha

[CJ]

Honestly, if I was Calzaghe, I wouldn't be impressed by the fighters Warren put in front of me after the big Lacy fight, when the Americans actually took notice.

Sakio Bika and Peter Manfredo ffs... He's 35 now, and only NOW is getting the opportunity to fight some big names

No wonder the Hatton camp have stayed clear...

[Mos Def]

(Original post by <CJ>)
Honestly, if I was Calzaghe, I wouldn't be impressed by the fighters Warren put in front of me after the big Lacy fight, when the Americans actually took notice.

Sakio Bika and Peter Manfredo ffs... He's 35 now, and only NOW is getting the opportunity to fight some big names

No wonder the Hatton camp have stayed clear...

Calzaghe couldn't care less, as long as the money comes rolling in...tbh i thought he was scared to fight Kessler, i was wrong.