who the greatest middleweight of all time

[Yogi]

Abdullah, why are you restricting Robinson to only the '50-'51 version?

You could go back quite a few years before that, as well, if you're making a case for him, because he did frequent the Middleweight division quite often when he was in his Welterweight prime and did have some very good wins when he did so (including a couple wins in 1945 over one of the very top Middleweight contenders of the time and future champion, Jake LaMotta, which were fights in which both fighters weighed within the Middleweight range).

[Yogi]

Ok, I don't know how this is going to look to you guys and I'm sure they'll be a few complaints about...but here, this is my "off the top of my head" ranking of the greatest 160 pounders of all-time;

1. Harry Greb
2. Sugar Ray Robinson
3. Daniel Mendoza
4. Carlos Monzon
5. Stanley Ketchel
6. Marvin Hagler
7. Bob Fitzsimmons
8. Jem Mace
9. Mickey Walker
10. Charley Burley

Something like that, anyways.

[KingAbdullah]

that's a first. Ever seen Daniel mendoza? neither has anyone else but everyone's entitled to his opinions. Can't envision someone with primitive skills from bareknucle lasting long with the modern era fighters. Why Mendoza?

[Yogi]

that's a first. Ever seen Daniel mendoza? neither has anyone else but everyone's entitled to his opinions. Can't envision someone with primitive skills from bareknucle lasting long with the modern era fighters. Why Mendoza?

In the words of early boxing historian and author of boxing's first extensive publication (Boxiana), Pierce Egan called Mendoza "a complete artist and a star of the first brilliancy".

Still to this day, there are those who consider Mendoza to be the p4p greatest bareknuckle fighter to have ever lived and seeing as he weighed in at about 160 or a little less, I think he deserves a placement on an all-time ranking for both his talents in his time (which were unmatched) and what he meant to the sport in general, as far as strategy & technique are concerned...He was considered to be the first pure scientific fighter to participate in the sport, and there are those who credit him for being the first to invent the jab, and having footwork & reflexes that were unmatched for a long, long time. There are also those who considered him to be the first real "superstar" of the sport, and he generally gets great credit as someone who was very instrumental in helping the sport overcome the "dark ages" that began with the reign of Jack Slack a few decadees earlier. Boxing was very nearly extinct in the mid/late 1700's, with all the fakes fights and whatnot...but once Mendoza hit the scene the sport then boomed in popularity over the next few decades, and ran neck-and-neck with horse racing as the "sport of kings".

Basically I rate him so highly because of the tremendous boxing skill he was said to have shown in his era (and how he was the bareknuckle version of Sugar Ray Robinson, if you will...the measuring stick in which all other great ones were compared to from then on), which they say was unmatched for a lot of years. I also rate him highly because of what he meant historically to the sport in general, as far as developing technique, new styles, and helping to keep it as a shameless sport.

P.S. I try not to use those "fantasy matchups" when deciding who a greater fighter is, and instead try to rate them mostly against their peers. So whether Mendoza could compete with a more modern fighter or not, is pretty much irrelevant to me.

[pugay_kamay]

Well it seems that u r doing your assignment, I never heard of Mendoza before, but Sugar Ray Robinson, Jake Lamotta & Monzon of course...
Anyhow for me the greatest middleweight ever was Marvin Hagler... other boxers such as robinson, lamotta or monzon never fought in any of their career like boxers Hagler has fought... Leonard, Duran & Hearns these are the greatests of their times... they fought each other on the prime of their careers, eventhough marvin lost to leonard... I would rate Roy jones 5-6 and maybe 8 or 9th for B-Hop... the fact that B-Hop reigned as middleweight champ for more than a decade (correct me if im wrong)...

[Gavilan1]

Myself, I favor consistency and brilliance in the ring when critically judging a fighter.

The Hagler of the early eighties was a quick, switch hitting pressure fighter with superb stamina/toughness and a great variation in his arsenal. The Hagler that battered Minter, blew out Caveman Lee and pressured Hearns into submisson was one of the all time MW forces.

Remember also that Marvin always took on everyone, including Hearns at their peaks and still won. Only a special fighter can do that consistently and win. No two ways about it, I think Hagler was the best ever.

I think Hagler v Monzon achievment/performance wise really is a matter of perspective. All of those hometown draws Monzon received in his career really have to go against him. He had ONE great fight against Griffith, and his other big wins were against a ridiciliously undersized Napoles, and Benvenuti. He had a very robotic style, that a real stylist like Hagler would just feast on. Monzon liked to control the pace, and carry out the planned mission very consistently with his great jab, and ring generalship. It really comes down to pressure here, and NO ONE is/was more conditioned then what Hagler was.

How Robinson can be ranked above both Monzon and Hagler at middle really is a head stracher-if you're talking about dominance/consistancy/great performances-Robinson did not accomplish as much-Middleweight champion 5 times just means losing an then winning.

Sure Robinson was past his best during the best part of his time at middle but you can't use that against Monzon or Hagler as a spare achievment-when they were clearly the better MW's-stronger and both beat some real useful fighter's.

[Yogi]

How Robinson can be ranked above both Monzon and Hagler at middle really is a head stracher-if you're talking about dominance/consistancy/great performances-Robinson did not accomplish as much-Middleweight champion 5 times just means losing an then winning.

But what about Robinson's first career (for lack of a better term) at Middleweight when he was undefeated in close to or over sixty fights while weighing in within the Middleweight range?

A lot of people focus more on the mid/late 50's Robinson, who was past his best and was losing the odd one here and there, but I think more attention should be paid to what the Middleweight Robinson accomplished from about 1945 to 1952...There's quite a bit to be impressed about through these eyes, as like I said, he had that long undefeated stretch of about sixty fights (with wins against the likes of LaMotta x3, Adams, Belloise, Villemain, Basora, Olson x2, Delannoit, Turpin, Graziano, etc...there's some definate quality there) , with the only setback being a draw to Basora, which he later made up for with a first-round knockout.

To me, what Robinson did from '55 on was sort of like a bonus and, even though to me he could've stayed retired & been considered right up there for this division, I think that helps his overall legacy at this weight, even though he had won & lost the title a few times. I generally give a decent amount of credit to what a fighter accomplishes when he's past his peak, if he is actually accomplishing something special...which I certainly think Robinson did from the mid 50's on.

A quick browse of Robinson's record shows he had a total of about a dozen wins against fighters who were inducted into the IBHOF based primarily on their respective Middleweight accomplishments...Hagler?

[supaduck]

Hagler rules, dumb****. But ya Ray Robinson's better.

[Yogi]

Hagler rules, dumb****. But ya Ray Robinson's better.

Now that's a quality post if I've ever seen one on here!

*two thumbs up*

[supaduck]

Heh, well there's no denying it. Take a prime Ray Robinson and put him up against any middleweight in history and I'd bet half my bank account he'd win it.