![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yeah, terrible list.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] if you think tyson is a top 20 boxer, espn isn't the joke. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't say where I'd put him. The fact they have him at #50, it is an absolute joke. Note: Big difference between #50 and #20. You might also want to explain how Jones Jr is so low. Another great joke by ESPN. b [/ QUOTE ] instead of saying the list sucks, explain where these people should be ranked. what is wrong with jones at 46? on a list that has pernell whitaker 5 spots behind de la hoya and 20 spots behind chavez, some people sure have weird complaints |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] if you think tyson is a top 20 boxer, espn isn't the joke. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't say where I'd put him. The fact they have him at #50, it is an absolute joke. Note: Big difference between #50 and #20. You might also want to explain how Jones Jr is so low. Another great joke by ESPN. b [/ QUOTE ] instead of saying the list sucks, explain where these people should be ranked. what is wrong with jones at 46? on a list that has pernell whitaker 5 spots behind de la hoya and 20 spots behind chavez, some people sure have weird complaints [/ QUOTE ] Jones was one of the most dominant fighters of the time. Over a few weight classes. He could've ruled a couple weight classes indefinitely. Him at #46 is alot more glaring than Whitakers spot behind chavez. Chavez should be above Whitaker and DLH. He ruled for how many years? I'd easily put Jones Jr up around Chavez. b |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It seems this list is all about "boxers", (which the title implies) and not "fighters" or "brawlers", thus the brawlers so low and the boxers so high.
It is just one take on the definition of what makes a pugilist great. Their top 50 fighters or brawlers list would look completely different, LDO. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
It seems this list is all about "boxers", (which the title implies) and not "fighters" or "brawlers", thus the brawlers so low and the boxers so high. It is just one take on the definition of what makes a pugilist great. Their top 50 fighters or brawlers list would look completely different, LDO. [/ QUOTE ] I'm just a casual fan, so maybe I'm mistaken. But I thought both Duran and Dempsey were brawlers as opposed to "boxers". They also title the list "50 greatest fighters" on another page. http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/box...ory?id=2815643 I think they just use "boxers" to mean people who box for a living, not necessarily a style of boxing. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
does anyone have a resonable explaination as to why tyson is 50th? i'm genuinely curious b/c i know nothing about boxing. i just figured dominating the heavy weight division for four years or whatever would be enough to put him a little higher.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
does anyone have a resonable explaination as to why tyson is 50th? [/ QUOTE ] because his 2 biggest wins were vs. a light heavyweight well out of his league (spinks), and a washed up larry holmes @ 40. the rest of his wins came against has beens/never were's. if he hadn't gone to jail, lewis/holyfield would have exposed him 5 years earlier than they did. not good news when your career is basically nothing after 24 y.o. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
It seems this list is all about "boxers", (which the title implies) and not "fighters" or "brawlers", thus the brawlers so low and the boxers so high. It is just one take on the definition of what makes a pugilist great. Their top 50 fighters or brawlers list would look completely different, LDO. [/ QUOTE ] This is totally inaccurate. The most overrated fighter on the list is a brawler (LaMotta), while, as pointed out, a pure boxer like Whitaker is underrated. It's a bad list but that has nothing to do with them valuing technique over aggression. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It seems this list is all about "boxers", (which the title implies) and not "fighters" or "brawlers", thus the brawlers so low and the boxers so high. It is just one take on the definition of what makes a pugilist great. Their top 50 fighters or brawlers list would look completely different, LDO. [/ QUOTE ] This is totally inaccurate. The most overrated fighter on the list is a brawler (LaMotta), while, as pointed out, a pure boxer like Whitaker is underrated. It's a bad list but that has nothing to do with them valuing technique over aggression. [/ QUOTE ] Okay. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Can't decide which is worse, Foreman at 20 or Monzon at 45.
|
![]() |
|
|