hahahahahaha you have lsot all credibility man. so cruyff was not as great as schiafino and puskas also not ebcause they did not win the big one ? i explained it a few times gonna say it again. you also can run in soem bad luck or have som good luck. how a bout a player from a small nation ? he will never ever achieve somethign with hsi nations becasue its small. example george best (not sayign best ransk amongst the gusy you mentioned also not sayign eh doesn't. just an example)
in terms of pound for pound rankings louis and ali don't rank amonsgt the 10 best ever imo. memebrs of the top 10 (in no particular order) sugar ray robinson harry greb henry armstrong ezzard charles roberto duran
Given this has now evolved into a boxing thread, Joe Calzaghe retired have won every one of his 46 fights. Apparently after Rocky Marciano, Ji Won Kim, Terry Marsh, Pichit Sitbangprachan, Harry Simon, Ricardo Lopez, Michael Loewe and Sven Ottke did likewise.
I have my opinion, you have yours. That's all. And I don't base my opinion on whether "something is worth talking about it" or not in this forum. Just the facts as I see them. And I bet you and everyone here have a different set of facts.
Well I was thinking mainly on all time greats none of those boxers are considered all time greats other than maybe finito lopez. Calzaghe fought his entire career in europe vs nobodies. []__[]
That's right. Those great nobodies Roy Jones Jr and Bernard Hopkins were beaten in the Welsh mining towns of New York and Las Vegas.
I said in response to somebody else: "I have my opinion, you have yours. That's all. And I don't base my opinion on whether "something is worth talking about it" or not in this forum. Just the facts as I see them. And I bet you and everyone here have a different set of facts." Seems clear enough to me.
LOL you actually going to give Calzaghe credit for an old over the hill Jones that lost three straight fights two by KO before fighting him? Plus the Hopkins fight was a gift since he lost in the eyes of the majority of neutral fans. []__[]
I mostly have no problem with the names you mentioned though I find it curious that in your opinion Louis and Ali aren't even top ten material yet Ring Magazine ranked them three and four all time. I recognize it is your opinion but I am curious as to why the arguably two best heavyweights of all time aren't even pound for pound in the top ten.
I am really not sure what they themselves can do. It's not like they can control the quality of their opponents. Today's heavyweight division is more full of punchers than actual technical boxers. Also the further back you go you will see differences in the fight game with regards to the frequency in which fighters fought and little of it had to do with the financial aspect like it does today. I personally feel the two are solid technical boxers albeit lacking in as all around skills (jab, ability to punch with both hands and variety of angles from which they can punch....uppercuts hooks, straight, looping....) Put them in the heavyweight division in the 80's and I think they definitely had the punchers chance to win titles though if their opponents had the jaw to sustain that kind of power then they would have problems. While many consider the 80's the hay day for the heavyweight division it wasn't so much due to the abundance of great fighters, it was more to do with the more rounded skill set those guys tried to fight with. The truth is that boxing is one of the few sports in which you can make comparisons of how certain fighters would perform in different times. In time I believe the Klitschko brothers will get their due.
Since this thread has taken a turn (even Comme acknowledged and contributed) it is worth noting that boxing may be the only sport where losses or lack/frequency of titles is not necessarily held against the legend of an individual fighter.
From my point of view, I think these are the South American who had a greater impact than Schiaffino: Pelé (3 World Cups) Diego Maradona (1 World Cup) Alfredo Di Stéfano (0 World Cups) Garrincha (2 World Cups) Zico (0 World Cups) Ronaldo (2 World Cups) Lionel Messi (0 World Cups) José Manuel Moreno (0 World Cups) Zizinho (0 World Cups) Didí (2 World Cups) Romário (1 World Cup) And these are the South American who I'd rate at a similar ratio: Rivelino (1 World Cup) Adolfo Pedernera (0 World Cups) Ronaldinho (1 World Cup) Rivaldo (1 World Cup) Héctor Scarone (1 World Cup) Daniel Passarella (2 World Cups) Elías Figueroa (0 World Cups) Teófilo Cubillas (0 World Cups) Omar Sívori (0 World Cups) Leonidas (0 World Cups) José Leandro Andrade (1 World Cup) Jairzinho (1 World Cup)
Very good list Peru. Again, I am not so sure of Laeonidas, and Pedernera... but to my experience talking to many of older "brazilian fans in Brazil" they rated them higher than Schiaffino and about the same as Zico Zizinho ...
What makes you think that Zizinho had categorically a greater impact? If I look at old encyclopaedias, Schiaffino receives more space and praise. Maybe because he played in Europe. About Zizinho it isn't said that he was the best Brazilian before Pelé came along btw. This is said about Friedenreich; seen as the best Brazilian forward of all-time until Pelé arrived.
You might want to clarify your opinion then as all you've posted is that scores matter and everything else is basically irrelevant. Idle talk as you put it. It seems to me like you came in with a big statement and then backed down citing different opinions. Fair enough, it only makes implications of the weakness of your initial point.
like the title says pound for pound. its tough to make the top 10 for a heavyweight because mostly they only fight in heavyweight division. take for exampel guys like duran or greb or armstrong multiple champons in different divisons when the divisions where still filled with strong opponents. i have no problem with people ranking ali or louis in the top 10 only in my mind they rank between 10 and 20 on a pound for pound list. for example a guy like benny leonard or willie pep or a guy like archie moore the old mongest deserves a top 10 spot more then ali or louis.
Very good list but I would but Schiaffino at least on par with Zizinho (the Uruguayan also reached another WC semifinal and won a couple of Copa Americas). Jairzinho is a tad overrated, don't forget he was basically irrelevant at WCs 66 and 74. Arthur Friendenreich is a better choice. I would include Sastre, N Santos, Varela, Fillol and possibly Bochini in that second group.
From the perspective of the popularity, probably because he was a 40's player and, as many South American of that decade (Moreno, Pedernera, Loustau, Pontoni, Danilo Alvim, Perucca or Jair (da Rosa)), weren't widely covered by European in a time of war. By the way, I'm not sure what old encyclopedias are you referring, but I couldn't say many reliable sources refers to Friedenreich as the best Brazilian forward until Pelé emerged, especially since he's often first considered a player of an amateur era without superb skills and the appearance of Leonidas at 30's, the first Brazilian forward who reached world prestige and introduced to Brazil the idea of a fantasy player with great technical skills, tricks and moves. What I know, first Leonidas and then Zizinho were considered the best Brazilian players of all-time before Pelé wherever I read or hear. There are also some European journalists at that time like Giordano Fatori and Willy Meisl that after the 1950 World Cup surrendered to Zizinho and a chapter with the Spanish coach, referee and journalist Pedro Escartín in the book Lo de Brasil fue así... that portrayed Brazil as art football on the feet of Zizinho, the greatest Brazilian player of all-time. https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/player-profile-zizinho.232236/ http://www.theguardian.com/news/2002/feb/12/guardianobituaries.alexbellos