would benitez make your top 100 atg list

[BennyST]

Lewis and Trinidad are arguably just outside of a top 100 list.

Spinks, however, is an ATG who should be no lower than 50.

Spinks greater than Lewis and Tito? Hmmmm, I'd disagree a little, but not argue it much, but saying Spinks should be no lower than 50 while those two just outside 100? That's pushing it man. That's a big difference.

Résumé of Holmes, Muhamad, Johnson, Qawi, Davis, Lopez and Cooney doesn't really top Lewis' of Holyfield, Klitschko, Ruddock, Tyson, Bruno, McCall, Tucker, Tua, Morrison, Mercer, Briggs, Rahman, etc etc by 50, if at all. Same with Tito.



Anyway, Benitez definitely in the top 100. Great fighter.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Yes i would have him top 100 All time,, but very low on the list like 91-100....

I would have guys like holyfield, chavez, hagler, hopkins, all ahead of him, but i would have him higher than tito,

[Panamaniac]

You're close to where Bert Sugar had him.

On the assumption you meant that as a compliment and given his perceived authority, Burt Sugar is not as reputable a source as one would expect. He ranked Benitez (96) ahead of Tyson (100).There's no way on God's green earth Benitez could've left a bigger footprint on the 'sweet science' than Tyson...

[rightsideup]

On the assumption you meant that as a compliment and given his perceived authority, Burt Sugar is not as reputable a source as one would expect. He ranked Benitez (96) ahead of Tyson (100).There's no way on God's green earth Benitez could've left a bigger footprint on the 'sweet science' than Tyson...

I agree with I use that book as a guideline only I would even rate Lennox Lewis higher than Wilfred.

[SBleeder]

On the assumption you meant that as a compliment and given his perceived authority, Burt Sugar is not as reputable a source as one would expect. He ranked Benitez (96) ahead of Tyson (100).There's no way on God's green earth Benitez could've left a bigger footprint on the 'sweet science' than Tyson...

Tyson made a bigger "footprint" than Jimmy Wilde, too. Sure as heck wasn't greater than him, though.

[Humean]

Benitez would have to be in a top 100. He beat Cervantes when he was only 17 years old! He beat Duran and Palomino, lost a very close fight with Hearns and gave Leonard a good fight. Also probably in the top 10 best defences in boxing history. You'd have to have him in the top 100 somewhere.

[IronDanHamza]

Tyson made a bigger "footprint" than Jimmy Wilde, too. Sure as heck wasn't greater than him, though.

Tyson's resume is probably better than Jimmy Wilde's, in all honesty.

[IronDanHamza]

Spinks greater than Lewis and Tito? Hmmmm, I'd disagree a little, but not argue it much, but saying Spinks should be no lower than 50 while those two just outside 100? That's pushing it man. That's a big difference.

Résumé of Holmes, Muhamad, Johnson, Qawi, Davis, Lopez and Cooney doesn't really top Lewis' of Holyfield, Klitschko, Ruddock, Tyson, Bruno, McCall, Tucker, Tua, Morrison, Mercer, Briggs, Rahman, etc etc by 50, if at all. Same with Tito.



Anyway, Benitez definitely in the top 100. Great fighter.

Certainly.

Especially Lewis.

[billeau2]

I never make these lists....You always run into triangulation issues. "If A is better than B, Then A has to be better than C."

People try to mitigate this problem with criteria but it still gets muddled.

The problem is the argument that "styles make fights". If you have a great fighter who gets beat by a non-great it is, ironickly, not necessarily an issue. So for example, Jones loses to Tarver and nobody can say with certainty that if they had fought at an earlier time, even at a different weight, Tarver did not have Jone's number. But Tarver is not considered a great.....so no big deal. Substitute Montel Griffith in this same example above if it is easier to fathom....

But what about if we are looking at our list and we compare Jones to Toney? or Hopkins? Suddenly Jone's specific performance against a fighter becomes very important. If Toney and Jones had never fought Toney might be considered differently....BASED on the fact that Toney lost, and was pretty much outclassed by Jones. With Hopkins, the fight that mattered was close (the first one) but again, the victory by Jones will always influence the relative position of each fighter on the list.

To me this is a problem. Does losing to another all time great make one less great than losing to another great fighter? It should be based on how the fight was lost, not just the relative position of one fighter to another.

[soul_survivor]

Certainly.

Especially Lewis.

Why do you think Spinks is greater than Lewis? On what basis? And where would you rank Lewis on an ATG heavyweight list?

I'm curious as to what your thinking is on this topic