ODDITIES

It seems strange to me.

I think many would agree Manny Pacquiao is one of the most accomplished fighters of the last 25 years. I think many would say the same thing about Floyd Mayweather. I would agree on both.

But here is what's weird. Can anyone think of any other top 50ish all-time level fighters who would NOT get ranked in the top ten all-time in one of the original eight divisions?

Let's do Manny first.

At flyweight? Not even close
Didn't fight at bantam
At feather? The wins over MAB and JMM are impressive, but top ten all-time at feather means he would have to have done more than men like Sal Sanchez and Jim Driscoll and Johnny Kilbane (the back end of the top ten). I can't see it.
Lightweight? He had a great run at 130 which would count but the back end of the lightweight top ten is guys like Chavez and Ross and Ambers and Ortiz.
Welter? Not even close.

Then for Floyd
Lightweight-Again this would include his 130 run. Same question, is he really as accomplished as Carlos Ortiz and JCC and Barney Ross? I don't think so.
Welter? Nah, nowhere close.

Now I DO think at 130 that Floyd's run was in the top four with Arguello and Elorde and Azumah. Probably belongs second. Manny's 130 run probably gets him into the top ten just because of the names he defeated at that weight.

I don't know what it means, just a pair of oddities.

Marble no matter where its ESPN or here on Ninja you bring it. Very nice job man

badazz091880 wrote:

Marble no matter where its ESPN or here on Ninja you bring it. Very nice job man

Thanks. If the activity level here stays good I think I'm done with the other place. Much more pleasant group here.

good oddity..i myself refuse to recognize 105 0 108 there all flyweights.115 is bantam 122 a feather 130 is a lightweight and sorry 154 is middle..140 has been around for years 168 a new division like cruzier and a needed one..the others is realy BS...the only fighter i can think of ranked in the top 50 in my top 50 anyway and is not ranked in the top ten in his division is charley burley...yet myself i would think it not possible to say he was not a top 50 fighter.

Marble, you're exactly right. However where Manny is concerned, don't tell me you're not salivating over the thought of a Sanchez - Manny trilogy. Same thing with Duran, Pryor and Manny. I don't think the fighters in the respective divisions give him the opportunity to be as great as those you mentioned, but Manny's accumulative effect, as you mentioned, makes him a very special fighter. Floyd Mayweather has a great career but he has no trouble voicing that himself. lol

dmar5143 wrote:

good oddity..i myself refuse to recognize 105 0 108 there all flyweights.115 is bantam 122 a feather 130 is a lightweight and sorry 154 is middle..140 has been around for years 168 a new division like cruzier and a needed one..the others is realy BS...the only fighter i can think of ranked in the top 50 in my top 50 anyway and is not ranked in the top ten in his division is charley burley...yet myself i would think it not possible to say he was not a top 50 fighter.

Burley's a great call. I guess I can find ten welters more accomplished. Huh.

4445Frank wrote:

Marble, you're exactly right. However where Manny is concerned, don't tell me you're not salivating over the thought of a Sanchez - Manny trilogy. Same thing with Duran, Pryor and Manny. I don't think the fighters in the respective divisions give him the opportunity to be as great as those you mentioned, but Manny's accumulative effect, as you mentioned, makes him a very special fighter. Floyd Mayweather has a great career but he has no trouble voicing that himself. lol

If we could take Manny's 135+ technical improvements and cram it back into a 126 pound body and have him face Sal Sanchez???????

I'd cut off my left arm to see that.

lol i would cut off your left arm to see that too..the big IF...but we can fairly think manny vs pryor..im not a fan of dream fights but that one would be a boxing fans delight.

interesting thesis

dmar5143 wrote:

lol i would cut off your left arm to see that too..the big IF...but we can fairly think manny vs pryor..im not a fan of dream fights but that one would be a boxing fans delight.

I can see the compubox guys collapsing after about three rounds and just mumbling "we couldn't keep up."

I think that Manny isnt in the top 10 in any yet, doesnt stick around long enough

Floyd is in at 130, and honestly, yes it sounds crazy, but if he kees it up he could work his way into the echelon of 147, he has already beaten 3 undisputed champs (2 if you dont count Shane) , and added some good pets along the way. lets say he beats Manny at welter, well then damn, would have him around the cusp possibly of the deep welter division

Very good post as usual marble.
Its a little weird. Thats one of the problems with having so many weights. In order to make a mark on boxing history now at the lower weights you have to move up in weight.

soonermark890 wrote:

Very good post as usual marble.
Its a little weird. Thats one of the problems with having so many weights. In order to make a mark on boxing history now at the lower weights you have to move up in weight.

I am beginning to believe this is a real commentary on the depth of the sport at the moment.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Very good post as usual marble.
Its a little weird. Thats one of the problems with having so many weights. In order to make a mark on boxing history now at the lower weights you have to move up in weight.

I am beginning to believe this is a real commentary on the depth of the sport at the moment.

Explain please. LOL what do you mean by depth.

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Very good post as usual marble.
Its a little weird. Thats one of the problems with having so many weights. In order to make a mark on boxing history now at the lower weights you have to move up in weight.

I am beginning to believe this is a real commentary on the depth of the sport at the moment.

Explain please. LOL what do you mean by depth.

That in days past divisions often had 6-8 well known and highly respected fighters, proven entities, who were a threat to anybody every time out. So a champ could make a great name by beating 4-5 of those guys to get his title shot, win the title, defend against 1-2 of those guys and by them 3-4 guys have done enough to supplant half of the original 6-8 as well known, highly respected guys. For example in 1979 the welters were Leonard champ and then Benitez, Cuevas, Duran, Hearns and Ranzany. Who the heck needs to move divisions? That's two years worth of good fights right there. By 1981, Roger Stafford and Milt McCrory and Donald Curry had come into the mix.

Look at divisions today. How many even have three guys that you'd say one could make a serious rep by beating? 112 maybe? 126 maybe? 140 certainly. 147 certainly. 168 probably. But that's it. So guys HAVE to move between divisions because there just isn't sufficient depth in most divisions to keep a guy there.

It's especailly scaqry that that can be true with guys fighting only 2-3 times a year.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Very good post as usual marble.
Its a little weird. Thats one of the problems with having so many weights. In order to make a mark on boxing history now at the lower weights you have to move up in weight.

I am beginning to believe this is a real commentary on the depth of the sport at the moment.

Explain please. LOL what do you mean by depth.

That in days past divisions often had 6-8 well known and highly respected fighters, proven entities, who were a threat to anybody every time out. So a champ could make a great name by beating 4-5 of those guys to get his title shot, win the title, defend against 1-2 of those guys and by them 3-4 guys have done enough to supplant half of the original 6-8 as well known, highly respected guys. For example in 1979 the welters were Leonard champ and then Benitez, Cuevas, Duran, Hearns and Ranzany. Who the heck needs to move divisions? That's two years worth of good fights right there. By 1981, Roger Stafford and Milt McCrory and Donald Curry had come into the mix.

Look at divisions today. How many even have three guys that you'd say one could make a serious rep by beating? 112 maybe? 126 maybe? 140 certainly. 147 certainly. 168 probably. But that's it. So guys HAVE to move between divisions because there just isn't sufficient depth in most divisions to keep a guy there.

It's especailly scaqry that that can be true with guys fighting only 2-3 times a year.

Exactly. This was what I was saying I just can not put it like you. LOL

they move up in divsions cause theres one every 3 lbs soo i dont view that as a crieteria to establish yourself..example if you were a welter in the 50s you fought a few middleweights also but went in at 151 or 152..why would you want to move up..gaviln saxton basilio bratton ortega demarco vince martinez gil turner issac logart joe micelli del flanagan chico vejar billy graham and a half dozen others that i cant remember tonight..the divison was deep big time...and they fought each other..no need to move up for fights..