new concept for how to create "lists" of boxing luminaries

[billeau2]

Ok so it hit me..... There are many ways to create a list. What usually trips me up is how exclusinary a list has to be, let me explain: If we create a list of the top ten fighters, then one would assume that we would have ten fighters on the list....But who says?

How about a list of twenty top ten fighters? What about a list that sets fourth a criteria by which a fighter would be considered top ten and then creating a list of twenty fighters?

This is illogical in some respects but I believe by creating a criteria one could conceviably have more than an exact number of fighters on a list designating quality characteristics that distinguish top fighters....opinions?

[bklynboy]

Ok so it hit me..... There are many ways to create a list. What usually trips me up is how exclusinary a list has to be, let me explain: If we create a list of the top ten fighters, then one would assume that we would have ten fighters on the list....But who says?

How about a list of twenty top ten fighters? What about a list that sets fourth a criteria by which a fighter would be considered top ten and then creating a list of twenty fighters?

This is illogical in some respects but I believe by creating a criteria one could conceviably have more than an exact number of fighters on a list designating quality characteristics that distinguish top fighters....opinions?

I actually do that - in the first stage. So, for example if someone was to say "X (Mayweather, Pacquiao, WK, SomeoneElse, take your pick) is, if not the best evah at least in the TOP 10)." I would start listing everyone who I thought was conceivably within the conversation and then whittle it down.

So, for instance: "Mayweather is best" OK. Who's better? Is he better (record and P4P) than Hopkins, RJJ, Hagler, SRL, Duran, Tommy Hearns... and after I get past ten we start whittling it down.

Ultimately I think we can't really do a TOP 10. It's hard enough comparing people of similar eras and similar weights like Duran, SRL, Sweet Pea, Pac and Mayweather and close it impossible to add in fighters from such different eras such as Willie Pep, Harry Greb, Ketchel, Langford and others.

[billeau2]

I actually do that - in the first stage. So, for example if someone was to say "X (Mayweather, Pacquiao, WK, SomeoneElse, take your pick) is, if not the best evah at least in the TOP 10)." I would start listing everyone who I thought was conceivably within the conversation and then whittle it down.

So, for instance: "Mayweather is best" OK. Who's better? Is he better (record and P4P) than Hopkins, RJJ, Hagler, SRL, Duran, Tommy Hearns... and after I get past ten we start whittling it down.

Ultimately I think we can't really do a TOP 10. It's hard enough comparing people of similar eras and similar weights like Duran, SRL, Sweet Pea, Pac and Mayweather and close it impossible to add in fighters from such different eras such as Willie Pep, Harry Greb, Ketchel, Langford and others.

I agree....I know I can't do a top ten.