Top 20 of all times?

[IronDanHamza]

Everyone is entitled to an opinion....It is an argument in the rhealm of possability that Chavez could be compared to Conn. I happen to think Conn was a much better fighter than Chavez, but then again I think Chavez was given a lot of favorite treatment by judges and was totally shown up in some of his fights. I also hate the bastard for not fessing up that he got a gift when Sweet Pea totally owned him...at least he could have been contrite.

Again these lists are problematic because it becomes very nebulous to argue "better" regarding fighters who have some traction...No not Wilder who is not better than Jones, but guys like Chavez compared to guys like Conn.

Some guys are not even that notable but have a reputation as being excellent...for example Michael Moore, a guy who some consider (including myself) perhaps the second or third best light heavy ever.

Many arguments can be made about who goes on such a list thats the reality.

I agree that Chavez is pretty overrated.

No way is he a Top 20 ATG, atleast not in my mind.

That said, he has a much better claim that Jimmy Wilde.

Having Jimmy Wilde in a Top 20 list just completely defies logic to me.

[LacedUp]

I agree that Chavez is pretty overrated.

No way is he a Top 20 ATG, atleast not in my mind.

That said, he has a much better claim that Jimmy Wilde.

Having Jimmy Wilde in a Top 20 list just completely defies logic to me.

Most historians have Wilde somewhere around the 20 mark.

[IronDanHamza]

Most historians have Wilde somewhere around the 20 mark.

And yet no one can actually justify it to me.

You ask for his best wins and you get names like Young Zulu, Bouzini, Mansfield and Cullen as apparent "top rated fighters"

These are guys that are recorded to have losing records or at the very least something close to that.

The only fighter in history who gets over credited for beating British Champions.

It doesn't matter if Jesus Christ made a grand return and said "Jimmy Wilde is a Top 20 ATG" there is still is no logical way of actually justifying it unless you conviently change your criteria specifically for him.

His resume is not even close to Top 20 caliber. It's not even close to Top 50 caliber.

[LacedUp]

And yet no one can actually justify it to me.

You ask for his best wins and you get names like Young Zulu, Bouzini, Mansfield and Cullen as apparent "top rated fighters"

These are guys that are recorded to have losing records or at the very least something close to that.

The only fighter in history who gets over credited for beating British Champions.

It doesn't matter if Jesus Christ made a grand return and said "Jimmy Wilde is a Top 20 ATG" there is still is no logical way of actually justifying it unless you conviently change your criteria specifically for him.

His resume is not even close to Top 20 caliber. It's not even close to Top 50 caliber.

Well, I haven't changed my criteria at all. I also had Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey in my top 20, neither of their resume's are sublime. It is your criteria, based solely on resume, that won't change - which incidentally confuses me about your claim that Roy Jones is top 20 or borderline top 20.

A British flyweight champion wasn't the same as it is now - you simply can't compare it. They were considered the champions, and he beat them all to become the first universally recognized flyweight champion of the world. He was a fighting machine, one of the greatest punchers of all times and went on to beat top bantamweights and featherweights.

And there was no super or light weights back then. so he was often outweighed by quite a few pounds. yet still knocked the opponents out.

Also, this list was made in something like 10 minutes. I just noticed now that I have JCC higher han SRL. That was a big mistake on my part.

[IronDanHamza]

Well, I haven't changed my criteria at all. I also had Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey in my top 20, neither of their resume's are sublime. It is your criteria, based solely on resume, that won't change - which incidentally confuses me about your claim that Roy Jones is top 20 or borderline top 20.

A British flyweight champion wasn't the same as it is now - you simply can't compare it. They were considered the champions, and he beat them all to become the first universally recognized flyweight champion of the world. He was a fighting machine, one of the greatest punchers of all times and went on to beat top bantamweights and featherweights.

And there was no super or light weights back then. so he was often outweighed by quite a few pounds. yet still knocked the opponents out.

Also, this list was made in something like 10 minutes. I just noticed now that I have JCC higher han SRL. That was a big mistake on my part.

My criteria isn't solely resume nor do I have Roy Jones Top 20.

I want to know in what catergory Wilde is better than Roy Jones. Clearly not resume, clearly not skills or ability.

Wildes the only person who gets credit for beating British Chsmpions, including that era.

Of course you're changing your criteria. Resume is part of your criteria isn't it? It's the reason Jones can't be considered amongst close to 20.

Yet Wilde gets a pass for no apparent reason.

[LacedUp]

My criteria isn't solely resume nor do I have Roy Jones Top 20.

I want to know in what catergory Wilde is better than Roy Jones. Clearly not resume, clearly not skills or ability.

Wildes the only person who gets credit for beating British Chsmpions, including that era.

Of course you're changing your criteria. Resume is part of your criteria isn't it? It's the reason Jones can't be considered amongst close to 20.

Yet Wilde gets a pass for no apparent reason.

Well that is the only thing you go back to. In my opinion, greatness is not determined solely on resume; albeit a big part of it.

Jimmy Wilde is arguably the greatest flyweight champion of all times. Many people would like to think he is. So if he's the best in the original flyweight division, I would make an argument that he's in the top 20. How many of the #1 champions of each of the original weightclasses would you not consider a top 20 fighter?

Wilde doesn't get a pass. He fought everyone available, and beat top guys in higher weightclasses - as Roy did in the lightheavyweight divison.

However, there are quite a few fighters I would have liked Roy to fight. Amongst others Bernard Hopkins again, steve collins, chris eubank, joe calzaghe (earlier), nigel benn etc.

Now, I'm not saying that he was ducking these guys at all - just that I'd liked to see him fight them.

I'm also not saying that Roy Jones wasn't great. Because he's in the top 3 of my personal favourites of all times. I also just said in the other thread that I think he was a top 50 kind of fighter - off the top of my head. Had never given him any thought as he is still fighting. If I break it down, he might end up in top 30-35. Who knows. I have Shane Mosley around 60-70, Floyd/pacman around 50 and I concede that Roy Jones is greater than those guys.

[IronDanHamza]

Well that is the only thing you go back to. In my opinion, greatness is not determined solely on criteria; albeit a big part of it.

Jimmy Wilde is arguably the greatest flyweight champion of all times. Many people would like to think he is. So if he's the best in the original flyweight division, I would make an argument that he's in the top 20. How many of the #1 champions of each of the original weightclasses would you not consider a top 20 fighter?

Wilde doesn't get a pass. He fought everyone available, and beat top guys in higher weightclasses - as Roy did in the lightheavyweight divison.

However, there are quite a few fighters I would have liked Roy to fight. Amongst others Bernard Hopkins again, steve collins, chris eubank, joe calzaghe (earlier), nigel benn etc.

Now, I'm not saying that he was ducking these guys at all - just that I'd liked to see him fight them.

I'm also not saying that Roy Jones wasn't great. Because he's in the top 3 of my personal favourites of all times. I also just said in the other thread that I think he was a top 50 kind of fighter - off the top of my head. Had never given him any thought as he is still fighting. If I break it down, he might end up in top 30-35. Who knows. I have Shane Mosley around 60-70, Floyd/pacman around 50 and I concede that Roy Jones is greater than those guys.

Exactly it's a big part of it that's why I keep going back to it.

What does it matter if they were the best that time had to offer? Clearly that time was awful then of that's truley the case.

I don't think Jimmy Wilde's the greatest Flyweight of all time at all.

So Roy Jones doesn't get ranked ahead of Wilde because he didn't fight every body? Despite the fact his resume is worlds better and he's clearly on a different level on regards to skill and ability.

I think that's completely flawed. That's like having Hopkins ahead of Robinson at MW because Hopkins fought everybody and Robinson didn't fight Burley or Cocoa Kid.

The fact remains that his resume is not even close to Top 20. Every other fighter in the Top 20 beat a great fighter atleast once. Jimmy Wilde barely beat any good ones.

Zero HOF'ers, best wins are laughable.

[Welsh Jon]

Exactly it's a big part of it that's why I keep going back to it.

What does it matter if they were the best that time had to offer? Clearly that time was awful then of that's truley the case.

I don't think Jimmy Wilde's the greatest Flyweight of all time at all.

So Roy Jones doesn't get ranked ahead of Wilde because he didn't fight every body? Despite the fact his resume is worlds better and he's clearly on a different level on regards to skill and ability.

I think that's completely flawed. That's like having Hopkins ahead of Robinson at MW because Hopkins fought everybody and Robinson didn't fight Burley or Cocoa Kid.

The fact remains that his resume is not even close to Top 20. Every other fighter in the Top 20 beat a great fighter atleast once. Jimmy Wilde barely beat any good ones.

Zero HOF'ers, best wins are laughable.

Aren't Memphis Moore and Joe Lynch in the hall?

Wilde fought about a dozen fights in the US and Canada, he didn't just beat up British champs.

[IronDanHamza]

Aren't Memphis Moore and Joe Lynch in the hall?

Wilde fought about a dozen fights in the US and Canada, he didn't just beat up British champs.

Joe Lynch yes, not sure on Moore.

Forgot about that but Lynch is a lower end HOF'er.

I'm not saying he just beat up British Champions. What I'm saying is he's the only fighter that seemingly get's overly credited for beating British Champions.

Which again tells you how poor his resume is. Which, it really is poor.

[Welsh Jon]

Joe Lynch yes, not sure on Moore.

Forgot about that but Lynch is a lower end HOF'er.

I'm not saying he just beat up British Champions. What I'm saying is he's the only fighter that seemingly get's overly credited for beating British Champions.

Which again tells you how poor his resume is. Which, it really is poor.

Just checked. Moore was induced in 2010.

Earlier you said you doubted Wilde really did beat the best flyweights in the world. I doubt this for 2 reasons:

Firstly in an era when the best boxers tended to fight each other why would Wilde be so lauded if he did the opposite?

Secondly, why would he avoid the best flyweights in the world only to take on the best batams in the world? He fought 3 HoF Bantamweights in Memphis Moore, Jo Lynch and Pete Herman. Yes all lower end HoFers but they represent the best Bantamweights of the time. Who was he avoiding at Flyweight that made fighting these guys the easy option and why haven't we heard of them?

The conventional wisdom is he destroyed the best fighters in his division and then went looking for bigger fights against the best bantams in the world and I don't see any evidence to suggest that this is incorrect.

I can understand you saying he has not got a good enough resume to be ranked in the top 20 p4p, but how can you say his resume is a joke? He beat 2 HoF batams weights both of whom outweighed him by around 15lbs. Some joke.