How many people agree?

Question

that it makes sense to wait until a fighter is retired to rank them[as i do]?

Answer 1

Firstly hows it going Smitty havent seen you on here for a while, hope everything is ok with you.

As for the question i would agree in 99% of cases but certain fighters i think can be ranked before they retire in my eyes after they have moved on from the weight division that they are going to most recognised for. Two that spring to mind are Toney and Hopkins neither will ever fight at Middle again and whatever they do now wont tarnish their reputations as great Middleweights. I completely agree though that the fighter has to of retired if you are going to rank him on an alltime pound for pound list.

Answer 2

Wait till you can tell that they are done what they are going to do in the sport. Holyfield is still fighting, but seriously when considering him for all time status, you wouldnt take anything into account after Lewis, he would have to be judged from the Lewis fight back.

Answer 3

no it does not. rank defines a boxer as how well they box as they fight. hence how a boxer can move up and down in rank

Answer 4

It's very wise to wait. A lot of people tend to buy into the hype of a fighter. Or was is marketed to them. There have been many cases in which people never live up to their ill advised and unearned rank as "great". Guys that come to mind are Donald Curry, Micheal Nunn, Duane Bobick, Jerry Cooney, Meldrick Taylor, and the always conterversial Mike Tyson. There are many more, but I'd be here all day.

*Curry came up after Leonard's reign. He unified the title and was considered the best pound for pound in the world. Six months later Honeyghan TKo'd him in six. Curry never again was the golden boy

*Nunn was unbeatable, defeating Curry, Starling & Barkley.

Tooney Ko'd him in 11. He was never again the same.

*Bobick - billed as the "great white hope" he had some good wins against ranked opponents, then got crushed by Norton on national TV. He never again was a serious contender.

*Cooney destroyed Norton on national TV. Then fought 13 tough rounds before he was TKo'd by Holmes. Again he never was the same.

*Taylor was actually a real good fighter. He was beating the great Chavez until he got caught and KO's with 2 seconds left in the fight. Although I wouldn't say he was exposed, he was never again great.

* Tyson - regardless of the excuse makers, he was exposed by Douglas. Some people still say he was the best of his era, but in reality, he was KO'd in his 3 biggest fights.

The only time i think it's OK to rank a fighter is for a guy like Hopkins or Roy Jones. Their peak was great & if they lose now it doesn't affect what they accomplished in the past.

Similiar situations: Ali, Duran, Holyfield, Holmes, Foreman, Leonard, Hearns, Joe Louis, Sugar Ray Robinson. All and more fought too long and lost to fighters not nearly their equal. That doesn't diminish what they did in their prime.

Answer 5

suppose