Skill level, record and ability of both the fighter and the fighter's opposition play a role. Also length of career, amount of fights, and social impact outside the ring. Few if any will ever equal Ray Robinson in the ring, and no one will equal Jack Johnson, Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali for social impact outside the ring. Time frame and political circumstances will never be the same as what Johnson, Louis and Ali lived through. Ali would have done much the same as Joe against Joe Louis's opposition, most likely better than Joe did. The real question is how would Joe Louis have fared against the likes of Liston, Foreman and Frazier.
I consider Sugar Ray Robinson the best to have ever laced up the gloves, and Ali the best heavyweight of all time.
In naming the greatest boxer of all time there are certain categories that most everyone agrees upon: physical attributes, technical skill, level of opposition, longevity, record, and dynamic victories. Consistently boxing critics say that Muhammad Ali and Sugar Ray Robinson are the first or second best boxer of all time.
In comparing the two Robinson fought more than 3 times as many bouts, won world titles in two weight divisions and if not for heat exhaustion, would have won in a third weight division. He clearly bests Ali in regards to technical skill, longevity, level of opposition, and dynamic victories. Ali only narrowly bests Robinson in record (based on a slightly higher win percentage) and in regards to physical attributes (due to his pre-ban speed and coordination). If these were the only things to account for, Sugar Ray Robinson would be the greatest of all time with Ali as a close second. However, Ali is the first boxer to truly understand that he was an entertainer reliant upon his image in order to spellbind. He first used his wit and brashness in wooing the public with his image, then further endeared himself to fans after sticking to his principles through his boxing ban. Finally, after losing to Frazier and Norton upon his return, he used his hard-won image and sleight of hand in order break the rules by consistently holding skilled opponents behind the neck whenever tired and never being deducted a point.
In the end, many would credit Ali as the GOAT, but any boxing purist with respect for the rules could never call anyone but Robinson the GOAT.
I say someone who's a champion with a descent record and someone who took the challenge. not someone who's always cherry picking opponents or fight catch weights.
to be a true champion you must be willing to take on the most difficult match up for you.
How can you measure who's the greatest boxer?
Technique? Boxing glove size have changed several times the last 100 years, what worked in bare knuckle boxing doesn't now [& viceversa].
Film? Some guys like Buster Douglas looked godly in 1 fight but the rest of their career sucked.
Title victories? Today you have almost twice as many weight divisions than you had 60 years ago, you also have 4 recognized belts in each division [back then it was only 1] so it's much easier to be a champion now than then. Archie Moore could have been a 9 division champion with today's weight divisions!
Opposition? How can you compare opposition from different eras? Styles is also a factor. Ex; Ali did great against ko machines but had problems with small intelligent boxers [Cooper, Doug Jones], how would Ali have done if he had to fight Joe Louis opposition [ small intelligent boxers Billy Conn or Schmeling]?
Should you also consider what they did outside the ring?
Thoughts?
