The Top 20 All-Time Greatest P4P List

[travestyny]

I never said historians were never wrong, but I think most of them give their due diligence in researching history. Unless an author just has a clear bias and is strictly cheerleading the subject of his book, I think most will give an honest effort to tell all sides of it.

From one of the books I sourced in the Johnson thread:

"At the time, the two best boxers in America-unquestionably -were Joe Gans and featherweight champion Terry McGovern."28 To receive another chance at the top, Gans had to agree to "lay down" against the formidable McGovern.

After the Erne loss and then the Chicago fiasco, the newspapers crucified Gans and nearly ended his career.29 Although most historians say that McGovern was not involved, the evidence shows otherwise, and Gans took the blame for the big fix in Chicago in 1900.

The managers of the two fighters held surreptitious meetings before and after the fight.30 McGovern probably agreed to step aside and not challenge Erne for the lightweight title, and in exchange, Gans would give him a win.

"Terrible" Terry had beaten George Dixon in June of 1900, and one month after that fight, he had beaten Frank Erne - a fight for which Erne would have wanted a rematch in his title quest. McGovern would be Gans' key to Erne.

The Gans-McGovern fight would only add to McGovern's streak of wins until the end of 1901. While Gans was extremely articulate, he was stage-shy and certainly no actor for the cameras on that Friday, the 13th of December, in Chicago.

As the film indicates, his sharp offensive and defensive skills became nothing more than feeble paws at McGovern's punches until he went down in the second round. The next morning, all parties to the fight found themselves in court before the judge. While no one was jailed as a result of the fix, the fight caused such an uproar by a group of Chicago social reformers that city councilmen were pressured into banning public boxing in the Windy City, a ban that existed for over twenty years.

The First Black Boxing Champions: Essays on Fighter’s of the 1800s to the 1920s — Colleen Ay c o c k

I just watched the fight and I agree with your panel. It doesn't even look like some of those blows landed. It's definitely questionable.

[Willie Pep 229]

I never said historians were never wrong, but I think most of them give their due diligence in researching history. Unless an author just has a clear bias and is strictly cheerleading the subject of his book, I think most will give an honest effort to tell all sides of it.

From one of the books I sourced in the Johnson thread:

"At the time, the two best boxers in America-unquestionably -were Joe Gans and featherweight champion Terry McGovern."28 To receive another chance at the top, Gans had to agree to "lay down" against the formidable McGovern.

After the Erne loss and then the Chicago fiasco, the newspapers crucified Gans and nearly ended his career.29 Although most historians say that McGovern was not involved, the evidence shows otherwise, and Gans took the blame for the big fix in Chicago in 1900.

The managers of the two fighters held surreptitious meetings before and after the fight.30 McGovern probably agreed to step aside and not challenge Erne for the lightweight title, and in exchange, Gans would give him a win.

"Terrible" Terry had beaten George Dixon in June of 1900, and one month after that fight, he had beaten Frank Erne - a fight for which Erne would have wanted a rematch in his title quest. McGovern would be Gans' key to Erne.

The Gans-McGovern fight would only add to McGovern's streak of wins until the end of 1901. While Gans was extremely articulate, he was stage-shy and certainly no actor for the cameras on that Friday, the 13th of December, in Chicago.

As the film indicates, his sharp offensive and defensive skills became nothing more than feeble paws at McGovern's punches until he went down in the second round. The next morning, all parties to the fight found themselves in court before the judge. While no one was jailed as a result of the fix, the fight caused such an uproar by a group of Chicago social reformers that city councilmen were pressured into banning public boxing in the Windy City, a ban that existed for over twenty years.

The First Black Boxing Champions: Essays on Fighter’s of the 1800s to the 1920s — Colleen Ay c o c k

You saw a tank job? I didn't! How many times did he kiss the canvas? To me, this argument is as silly as Jack Johnson waiting until the 26 round to tank to Willard.

Something wasn't right with Gans, yes, he looked terrible but he had too many opportunities to stay down. But I am just repeating myself, sorry.

[soul_survivor]

Man some weird lists on here, people trying too hard to be "smart" by not including Ali or dropping him way down. Such boxing historians eh?

Anyway, I do enjoy making these lists and had my top 50 listed on a thread a long, long time ago. I looked to review that but sadly all my threads pre-2018 seem to have been deleted, which is very odd. Not sure if that is the case for everyone...any who I can't put in the time and effort I did all those years ago but this is my list with the limited resources and time I have right now:

Criteria - skill set (As seen by the eye as often as possible, written about if footage is unavailable but this is not held with the same esteem), career achievements (champions beaten, championships held, more diluted for fighters of the 21st century so only count top level champions and not paper belts), career peak and career prime compared to contemporaries, notable wins and impact on the sport.

So lets go:

1. "Sugar" Ray Robinson
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Henry Armstrong
4. Willie Pep
5. "Sugar" Ray Leonard
6. Marvin Hagler
7. Roberto Duran
8. Julio Cesar Chavez
9. George Foreman
10. Evander Holyfield
11. Manny Pacquiao
12. Bernard Hopkins
13. Lennox Lewis
14. Ezzard Charles
15. Archie Moore
16. Benny Leonard
17. Sam Langford
18. Joe Louis
19. Floyd Mayweather
20. Oscar De Le Hoya

[GhostofDempsey]

You saw a tank job? I didn't! How many times did he kiss the canvas? To me, this argument is as silly as Jack Johnson waiting until the 26 round to tank to Willard.

Something wasn't right with Gans, yes, he looked terrible but he had too many opportunities to stay down. But I am just repeating myself, sorry.

Watching the entire fight it doesn’t appear Gans threw any punches with conviction. The knockdown punches he took all looked like glancing blows with the exception of one. A dive is a tricky thing, and a KO has to look convincing, this one didn’t look so compelling to me. It looks more like he makes the ten count in the last knockdown and the ref calls the fight. Either way, there was a consensus that he took a dive and the video footage doesn’t look like he got hit with blows that were strong enough to drop him so many times.

FWIW, Langford and Blackburn were much larger and hit way harder than McGovern, they couldn’t KO Gans.

[JAB5239]

If you think the McGovern fight was a work, you don't know Boxing. We have the fight footage. Only an idiot with no fighting experience would watch that and perpetuate the myth that it was a work. McGovern the Featherweight was better than Langford the Welterweight plain and simple.

At this point, similar to the Dempsey discussion, you're clearly scrambling to save face. I've clearly illustrated that Langford cherry-picked opponents.

- Gans had just beaten Holly (who'd soon, himself, beat Langford) the DAY BEFORE. He was the better man before fading... still he heard the final bell. Not something he could say against McGovern when fully prepared and fresh.

- Walcott was the smaller man - that's indisputable. And while not as busy, inflicted the greater damage. The fight was a draw. Kid Lavigne faired a whole lot better than that.

- The Ketchel fight was 6 Rounds. Only an idiot would try to make a definitive conclusion based on how two fighters stack up based on 6 rounds. In your typical slimey fashion you try to peddle the lie that Langford decisively won... or at least any competitiveness is to be explained by Sam Sand-bagging it. Without footage there's no reason to say that. Ketchel made a fine account of himself, even having been overcome by alcohol and drugs - he'd step away from Bixing to sober up. Ironically, this effort to save his career cost him his life.

- O'Brien and McFadden were finished and should've been long-sunce retired.

- Wills and Norfolk were green.

There's no dis*****g these facts. It is also indisputable that those going to sell the legacy of Langford wil repeat these "feats" to inflate Langford's career. Because a generation-spanning career with 300+ fights, Lanford has surprisingly few big name wins, and a lot of losses to less than stellar opponents.

If you rank Langford top 10 you're inconsistent if you don't also rank Calzaghe, Camacho and Satterfield.

Again, Langford was a very good fighter, and one of the very best of his day. But his legacy has been grossly blown out of proportion. More importantly, there have been many fighters better than him who deserve recognition and to have their story told.

Lol, I don't know boxing? That's rich coming from the Yahoo who rates Fury the greatest heavyweight of all time. I'm tired of wasting time with you. You're a troll, and I'm done even trying to have a logical conversation with you. You have NOTHING for me or anyone else in this section.

[JAB5239]

LOL, you've clearly never fought.

So was Schmeling-Louis a work?
Fury-Wilder?
Ruiz-Joshua?
Tarver-Jones?
McCall-Lewis?
Ingo-Patterson?

Those are smaller gloves. No mouth pieces.

Fights play out like that in every UFC event. Hisining behind 12oz pillows distorts reality.

You've clearly never fought before. Professional boxers use 8 and 10oz gloves. That's neither here nor there, just exposing your ignorance.

[JAB5239]

That was interesting; first time I watched the fight.

The obvious question: if Gans is in the tank why did he keep getting up?

You are correct the first knock down punch seems to wrap around Gans head.

The second KD at the end of round 1, along the ropes, looks to be a hard smash to the face. I wonder why the referee was looking over at Gans corner when the KD occurred?

I wonder if Gans was (distracted) looking there as well. I couldn't tell.

The first KD of the second round looked to be a clean shot to the face as well, as was the second KD of the second round, but then the rest of the KDs are a mix of hits and misses.

Gans showed little to no offence.

But again why would a tanked (crossed) fighter keep getting up. There were certainly enough clean shots that Gans could have just stayed down if he wanted to.

I agree there are lots of questions surrounded this. I wish I had concrete answers to give, but I don't. One thing I keep reflecting on is why were the press and so many others so adamant that Gans threw the fight? It was a racially charged era where blacks often had to throw fights to ensure they would keep getting fights. I had a book about black fighters that talked about this. It happened right up until the 50's and 60's. My point is, wouldn't the press want to hail McGovern's victory as triumphant instead of besmirching it by calling it a fix? Or maybe they just had a better view to make the call. I don't know. All I know is it HAS been called into question.

[JAB5239]

Ortiz has beaten nobody and that’s your get out of jail card GTFOH gumbo.
As I said you should be kept away from a boxing forum if you really are trying put Tyson fury on the same level as Ali or Lennox Lewis in the all time P4P list....fury is nowhere near that list and your a ****ing idiot for even trying to defend it....now get your ass up the gym and get fit gumbo

.......perfect!

[JAB5239]

you're new here so i want to bear with you. You need to understand there is a forum rule against ranking filipino fighters on the atg lists.

It's mayweather's genetic connection, albeit distance connection, to the philippine islands that disqualifies him from the list. In short he has filipino blood so he's out. Sorry.

I don't think it's fair either, but there a few really strange posters on here and they have some stange rules.

......lmao.......

[JAB5239]

I never said historians were never wrong, but I think most of them give their due diligence in researching history. Unless an author just has a clear bias and is strictly cheerleading the subject of his book, I think most will give an honest effort to tell all sides of it.

From one of the books I sourced in the Johnson thread:

"At the time, the two best boxers in America-unquestionably -were Joe Gans and featherweight champion Terry McGovern."28 To receive another chance at the top, Gans had to agree to "lay down" against the formidable McGovern.

After the Erne loss and then the Chicago fiasco, the newspapers crucified Gans and nearly ended his career.29 Although most historians say that McGovern was not involved, the evidence shows otherwise, and Gans took the blame for the big fix in Chicago in 1900.

The managers of the two fighters held surreptitious meetings before and after the fight.30 McGovern probably agreed to step aside and not challenge Erne for the lightweight title, and in exchange, Gans would give him a win.

"Terrible" Terry had beaten George Dixon in June of 1900, and one month after that fight, he had beaten Frank Erne - a fight for which Erne would have wanted a rematch in his title quest. McGovern would be Gans' key to Erne.

The Gans-McGovern fight would only add to McGovern's streak of wins until the end of 1901. While Gans was extremely articulate, he was stage-shy and certainly no actor for the cameras on that Friday, the 13th of December, in Chicago.

As the film indicates, his sharp offensive and defensive skills became nothing more than feeble paws at McGovern's punches until he went down in the second round. The next morning, all parties to the fight found themselves in court before the judge. While no one was jailed as a result of the fix, the fight caused such an uproar by a group of Chicago social reformers that city councilmen were pressured into banning public boxing in the Windy City, a ban that existed for over twenty years.

The First Black Boxing Champions: Essays on Fighter’s of the 1800s to the 1920s — Colleen Ay c o c k

The Erne fight WAS the key. How did I forget that?