By Tracy Callis
Boxing Historian
Fightworld.us Partner

Boxing fans have varied opinions as to which fighters were the greatest of all-time. Younger fans prefer the modern fighters. Older fans prefer the old timers. Other fans have mixed and more diversified views.

Those who favor the modern fighters argue that the men have gotten bigger, faster, and stronger over the years. They also point out that techniques have improved with the passing of time.

Those who favor the fighters of the earlier years contend that the men grew up in tougher times and were "hungrier," more rugged, better disciplined, and better conditioned.

I do not believe that all fighters and athletes necessarily get better with the passing years. Athletes do get bigger, faster, and stronger over time. Techniques improve too. But, that does not mean they are better. Different periods of history impart certain attitudes and practices due to the "temper of the times" and the conditions under which the people live. Athletic skills are affected by mental conditioning and discipline as well as physical attributes and techniques. Consequently, performance peaks and ebbs in different periods of history and fighters are better in some periods than they are in others.

It is my definite belief that different periods of history produce more good fighters than other periods but the very best fighters of all-time from any era could fight with each other on a competitive and "near-equal" basis.

In these rankings, I have included a man in several weight classes if I believe him to be among the greatest at that weight. For what it's worth, here is one man's opinion.

Comments?

[back to top]