All Forums | Boxing

T.E.N. Mag's Boxing's Pound-for-Pound (So bad it's a laugh!)

Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 635
Posts: 18
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 1121
Posted: #1

By Gary Whittaker (2005):
1. Ray Robinson (Walker Smith Jr)
2. Muhammed Ali (Cassius Marcellus Clay)
3. Julio Cesar Chavez
4. Joe  Louis
5. Roy Jones Jr
6. Archie Moore
7. Marvin Hagler
8. Ray Leonard
9. George Foreman
10. Mike Tyson

(For Sugar Ray Robinson & Muhammed Ali: Just a jesture for the layman boxing fan. Most know Ali's story, but many don't know Robinson's)
1. He received his name when he circumvented the AAU's age restriction by borrowing a card from his friend Ray Robinson
2. The Nation gave Clay the name Cassius X. Elijah Muhammad recorded a statement over the phone to be played over the radio that Clay would be renamed Muhammad Ali.

Compare this to Bert Sugar's list:
1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Wille Pep
4. Joe Louis
5. Harry Greb
6. Benny Leonard
7. Muhammad Ali
8. Roberto Duran
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Jack Johnson

We all have opinions on this but it appears "Sugar" Ray Robinson tops most list (rightfully so in my thought) and Muhammed Ali "The Greatest" are both in 99% of list I've seen or heard (Joe Louis seems to be there most the time as well). First, me seeing George Foreman on the list makes me almost have respect for Bert Sugars opinion (atleast his list), which is a thought I'd never consider I would have. I do like the fact Hagler is mentioned having lost only 3 fights (one was a majority decision loss where he fought three weeks earlier winning a 10 UD over undefeated 29-0 Baldwin; two months later he lost a UD being pro only 2 years still; his final loss was a very suspect SD to Leonard and scorecards were | Lou Filippo 115-113 | Dave Moretti 113-115 | Jose Juan Guerra 110-118 | Guerra had Hagler winning only two rounds). Chavez I like the mention, but again his final pick was Tyson. Tyson during his prime (which was only 4 years) I feel was a favorite over almost any fighter. Ali to did have a short prime (losing much speed) after his forced layoff, but unlike Tyson he went on to fight and beat great fighters. Tyson was finished and never beat a good fighter after prison.
To thesoulpurpose: I know we had our debate regarding boxing and Canada, but you living in Montreal must feel ashamed to have this guy representing Montreal sports coverage. Just going off his statements (his list with additions) about boxing makes me realize the man must be blind and clueless.
He stated this about Lennox Lewis: "Lewis will most likely go down as one of the most intelligent, calculated champions ever. But that is not what pound for pound is based on. Lennox was able to capitalize on Tyson’s jail term to reign as champion, then got out before the Klitchko brothers could undo the legacy he has manufactured for himself. He stayed an extra 4 years as an amateur to win a gold metal against younger opponents (Riddick Bowe for the medal bout). He then became champion only because Bowe gave up the title. He backed out of Tyson’s way (accepting a huge multi-million dollar payoff from Don King as payment for Tyson taking his ranking) as he was climbing back up to regain the championship that was handed to him. I believe that history will judge him for the fake that he truly is." Staying to win a Gold Medal is not that rare, and being a whopping 2 years older is such an advantage (LOL). Also as I remember, Bowe made a theatrical show of throwing the WBC heavyweight belt in a bin rather than fight Lewis. Bowe's camp offered an absurd 90-10 split in Riddick's favor, which Lewis denied. I think that offer shows how much Bowe wanted to fight Lewis. Avoiding Tyson was not what I remember either. Lewis fought Vitali Klitschko on short notice due to a pull-out (duing what real champions due). Losing early rounds but connecting and causing Vitali a cut causing 60 stitches won him a stoppage. At 257lbs was Lewis's heaviest ever and he assessed that he was declining and retired (under-estimating Vitali's ability also led to a decision he sometimes questions).
I could continue but we all know where it's going. I'd post a link on the article and his write-up but I will not mislead forum readers as they might skip my write-up and click his link thinking he is an analyst that's accurate and knowledgeable (LOL). I hope many readers get a good laugh from this and any other write-ups of his.

 
Covers Rehab
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2004
Posts: 33122
Posted: #2
Thats a solid list





 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #3
I have never even heard of this magazine, but It obviously is bush league,  I read ring magazine and that's it and even that has taken a hit for the worst since de la hoya took over,   as for the top ten of this bush league magazine, I agree that it is is worth a laugh,  I could go on a break down the list but I have no desire to,  It also concerns me when anyone rates archie moore ahead of ezzard charles on their pound for pound lists, don't get me wrong I am a huge fan of archie, one of my all time favorites, but he was not a better, lightheavy or heavyweight than ezzard, probly not a better middleweight either, If you rate archie higher than you are not really paying attention to what happend during that era, charles was the best and it was not that close
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #4
I did not mean that charles was the best fighter of that entire era,( but he was deffinitly  top 3),  I was simply comparing him to the old mongoose and the rest of the fighters that he fought.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 1121
Posted: #5
thesoulpurpose: I like that someone took a stand for Ezzard.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 1121
Posted: #6
Both old timers that helped train me years back were both trying to get a shot with Walcott or Charles. The gym manager/trainer was small for a heavyweight but back then many guys were. My other friends was a big guy and said after 3 rounds he had no stamina. When you hear first hand (in the early 1990s) for me about old time fighting, you got to hear a side that they now show in specials. For instance Sugar Ray Robinson's real name. Back in the day when I fighter who was called upon to fight and say hypothetically was to far away to make it on time, they would contact a friend to use their name and register card back then. This happened a lot more than you can imagine. I was explained they had to did each other favors to survive, and when the fighter who missed his fight took on the guy who stepped in for him next fight if possible. With poor and big families, they needed every dollar so passing up a fight they couldn't make was wasted so they had a fellow boxer take his name and swap a fight or kick back a few dollars. I remember the old equipment and gloves. They showed me how fighters used the laces to rake your face in a clinch or the old leather gloves you could turn after a punch making abrasions, with both these instances helping to cause a cut and you to win.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #7
If you look at his record, their have only been a few fighters in the history of the sport that fought and beat as many good fighters as charles did, It is a shame that when most boxing fans talk about the greatest lightheavyweight of all time, people mention, archie moore, bob foster, roy jones and seem to forget the cincinnati cobra, who in my book is no 1, 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #8
Quote Originally Posted by ZOUK:

Both old timers that helped train me years back were both trying to get a shot with Walcott or Charles. The gym manager/trainer was small for a heavyweight but back then many guys were. My other friends was a big guy and said after 3 rounds he had no stamina. When you hear first hand (in the early 1990s) for me about old time fighting, you got to hear a side that they now show in specials. For instance Sugar Ray Robinson's real name. Back in the day when I fighter who was called upon to fight and say hypothetically was to far away to make it on time, they would contact a friend to use their name and register card back then. This happened a lot more than you can imagine. I was explained they had to did each other favors to survive, and when the fighter who missed his fight took on the guy who stepped in for him next fight if possible. With poor and big families, they needed every dollar so passing up a fight they couldn't make was wasted so they had a fellow boxer take his name and swap a fight or kick back a few dollars. I remember the old equipment and gloves. They showed me how fighters used the laces to rake your face in a clinch or the old leather gloves you could turn after a punch making abrasions, with both these instances helping to cause a cut and you to win.
   back in the day fighters had to prove that they were great, prove their worth before people started making a stink about them, lets use the 40's for example, their were so many great fighters around that if you finally got to the top you had proven that you belonged, nowadays, you got box's like andre berto, paulie malignaggi, sual alvarez, steve molitar(here in canada anyways) who the media jumped on, but had not proven shit,  but the tv networks talk about like their the second coming of ike williams or something, fighters today all want to be superstars, but are not willing to do the things and fight the fighters that they need to in order to do that, they all talk the talk, but very seldom walk the walk. you can start by pointing fingers at the wbc, ibf, wba, ibo, wbo, their is even something called the silver champion now, dimond champ, super champ, until the tv networks, hbo, showtime, espn, stand up and stop reckonizing these corrupt sanctioning bodies than this sport will never be as great as it once was,   one champ per division, ring mag is doing it right, now it's up to the tv networks to make a stand, the fighters as well, stop being fake with your ibo championship walking around like you the champ, you fake motherfuckers,  we need to bring it back to the old school.    If I do make it in the sport of boxing and a change has not been made by that time I give my word, that I will let my voice be heard.  fighters rise up.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 1121
Posted: #9

Where ever there is money, corruption is involved. As boxing grew with TV networks the WBC's president José Sulaimán became more of an involved party (with Don King's control) than being the independent regulator. This was where King created his empire because now with the president of a major organization (when only the WBA was the other, and the IBF then WBO) had total control of rankings. Now with this power, King's fighters rose quickly in rank and allowed for only his fighters to fight for the championship. The only guy that I know and seen live many years ago (and the fight he was dropped in) from the fighters you called "pussys" is Berto. I knew he didn't have power as it may appeared and was going to bet big on Mosley before Berto dropped out to help in Haiti. Berto comes from a tough family (mostly MMA) and honestly he took more shots from Ortiz than I thought he could and he didn't run, but stood and fought (while taking a beating). That fight was the most impressive for me as I knew Berto and what he had offensively, but didn't expect him to take what most fighters couldn't and continue like a champion. I wouldn't classify him as a "box", but if you had claims saying he was over-rated that's a different case. As for the others you named, I don't know them or seen many of their fights besides for Paulie Malignaggi which is a bore. I did make a lot on him in his rematch against Diaz, which if you saw the first fight anyone with analytic boxing ability saw the value on a nice prop for Paulie to win by decision.

As for people taking a stand, I constantly hear after a bad decision from fans that they are done with boxing. Then a few months later they call me and invite me to watch a PPV (all hype) boxing event that I wouldn't even watch if paid. I won't order or support such corruption, unfortunately suffering to watch using online links. On occasion I will order a fight if I made a large wager and expect to gain insight form that fight to carry over to either (or both) fighters future bouts.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 1121
Posted: #10
I'm glad people appreciate comedy (TEN's boxing list, no wonder they are out of business or just very hard to find a copy or website) as this thread and that list had to be or otherwise it's pure science fiction. You have no idea how it hurt to compliment him on Hagler and the fact he did have Chavez (not that I would).
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #11
box was most likely a bad choice of words, in my last moment of insanity, overhyped, overrated loud mouths who have not proven anything,  and in the end  proved (and will prove in the case of sual alvarez) that they were nothing to begin with,   but as far as steve molitor goes, pure box.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #12
the boxing world has been overtaken by these second rate fighters who call themselves champions, these guys go around to their home towns and people call them the champ, hey champ your the man, great fight champ, and this saddens me, these fighters are fake ass mother fuckers and it  pisses me off,  real boxing fans out their know what I am talking about, if you want to find out who the real champs are just pick up a copy of ring magazine, the only boxing resource  that has not lost it's fucking mind.  (hbo is starting to make changes for the better, but their  not  their yet)
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #13
I know that teddy atlas and brian kenny at espn want to completely ignore these so called titles, but trying to convince the network is a different story in itself.                 A NATIONAL COMMISION IS WHAT IS NEEDED. all other sports have them why not boxing.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 1121
Posted: #14
Money, money and more money. The people who run boxing have to keep it fixed with control or they chance losing. I've stated the same about a Federal Commission but each state governs its own. Growing up I wanted to why more than one champ in a weight division was out there (when there wasn't a unification) then I was explained the same reasons college football didn't just do a final 8 team playoff... each bowl game generates money for schools and networks (selling commercials). The only reason Tyson was given unification bouts was Don King knew Tyson could draw huge revenues (being paid 20 million a fight in the 80's & 90's) and he would profit the most. Douglas, Evander then Bowe was the last then (WBO & IBO not included) to have the unification belts Tyson joined. They were split first by Bowe because he refused to fight Lewis (Bowe's camp did offer a 90%-10% split - LOL), then so on. The WBC was not allowed unification bouts with the WBO in the 90s except for one fight that turned out to be a draw (with both title returning to each fighter). For heavyweights Tyson was the action and next was Holyfield. Morrison brought action as well but after Mercer he got little respect. Morrison had a huge payday fight with Lewis yet he continued to book a fight before Lewis versus Michael Bentt who KOd Morrison in the first round. Also, Michael Bentt only had 13 fights and lost two of them (his first and last bout).
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #15
It is all about money, but with a national commision their would be  even more money for the sport, with endorsment deals,commercials, look at the way the nfl is marketed,the nba too,  alot of corperations stay clear of boxing because of the known corruption involved, with a national commision these so called shady characters, would be forced to play by the rules or be banished from the sport,  it would lead to more money in the end, just not for the few people who are standing on the top now, taking them off of their throne would not be easy,(their would most likely be a few people that show up floating in the river, if you know what I mean) but in the end I do think that it will happend,  somewhere in the next 10 years or so,     
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1128
Posted: #16
I also believe that if john mccain had gotten the nod instead of obama, then a national commision would probly be in place now or at least in the works, as he was and still is a huge supporter in getting one in place. (I believe that this is a dec. that the president could make on his own, as in reality the president is simply a puppet who really has no control over anything)
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 1121
Posted: #17
I remember walking out of the sportsbook at Bellagio then reading a statement McCain said regarding federal regulation. That was the point I started reading his information as he wanted to bring regulation and a more even balance to each party in boxing. I think boxing will be second to the legalizing of online poker and sports betting, and possibly the virtual casinos. I know player that make over a million yearly in online poker tournament (heads-up to 25,000 player events) but use to play online blackjack and lose 90% off his poker wins. Logic would tell you that the online site has a valid partial expectation to win as it's in their interest (unlike poker where they take a rake percentage, as well as slots, bingo and horses; money is pooled and the house  takes a percentage then plays it out).
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2011
Posts: 1121
Posted: #18
A National Commission has been echoed since the days I knew would it meant. One good things it could bring is a retirement plan and oversite of financial deals thus helping fighters secure their money and assets, and in the process it provides more money for fighters who have already lost it all and can't fight.
All Forums | Boxing
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.