My Top Ten greatest wins of alltime...

First topic message reminder :

Always think the best wins are when you're not only beating a top fighter but a reputation as well...........Winning in the face of adversity before and during is a noble achievement........

1. Ali v Foreman............

2. Holyfield v Tyson.......Tyson was a two time champ who'd just destroyed Bruno and seldon and Holy was coming of a ko defeat...

3. Leonard v Hagler.......P4p number 1 loses to a three year out welterweight..

4. Tunney v Dempsey....Dempsey had a great reputation and Tunney wasn't a heavyweight......

5. Spinks v Qawi..........Qawi was a ferocious beast.........Spinks had lost his Wife a couple of weeks earlier and was crying with his daughter before the fight...When she was asking where Mummy was..

6. Hagler v Hearns.......For most of us Hearns - Duran was a frightening destruction. Not only did Hagler shake off the right but was badly cut and still wouldn't take no for an answer !!

7. Ali v Liston..........Bit like number 1...........Only Ali was much younger........and Liston slightly off peak..

8. Nunn v Tate........A guy who'd just shut out the talented Olajide and won an Olympic gold..Made to look like a complete novice..

9. Corbett v John L Sullivan .......Sullivan was feared throughout America.............Didn't win a round.....

10. Duran v Leonard...........Whilst Leonard fought the wrong fight and a minority thought he won........For a lightweight to move up to welter and win a decision against for me a Top 5 alltimer...............Credit where it's due........

Honorable mentions to Douglas - Tyson..........Sanchez - Gomez.........Braddock v Baer............Turpin v Robbo...........

Interesting perspective hermy, slating the list then admitting you haven't seen a fair proportion of the fights/fighters. I agree with you on a few points but...

Liston was old when he became champion, nothing to suggest he was on the slide against Ali.

Hearns no elite wins above welter? All his elite wins were above welter excepting cuevas. Duran and benitez at light middle? He came into the hagler fight in prime form.

Agree with rodders. Whatever tyson's condition, douglas' performance is a shoe-in top 10 and near the very top for me.

You're quite right milky,, easy to say after the event that Liston was on the slide.

Was Hearn's win over Duran at light middle? In that case I take that back about Tommy. Benitez too? II'd always presumed they were both at welter. Was a good win for Hagler no question but still not convinced it's quite a top ten great win, particularly as it was obvious Tommy didn't believe deep down he could win that fight.

Get Truss' point though about beating a 'reputation.'

I know what you mean, the thing when greats meet, is one of them has to win, it automatically makes it a great win I suppose, but are they the same performance level of a lesser fighter beating a great?

Hagler was a proven middle fighting a guy who looked sensational at light middle but who never reach those heights (hill maybe?) above it.

Same could be said about hearns duran, though Both were emphatic wins against fellow greats.

The times the smaller guy beat the bigger guy with the fab 4, were the most impressive actual wins though... duran beating Leonard and Leonard beating hagler. Given the latter saw both guys a touch past their best, duran's win in Montreal is probably the pick of the bunch.

Having said all that, There's an argument that Leonard hearns 1 was as close as we got to two guys at their best weights (maybe half a weight too low for tommy), and the nature of the comeback elevates the performance.

Depends what slant you wish to put on it I guess!

There is a lot of crap talked about Leonard v Hagler but in the cold light of day we have a three year out Welter upsetting the number 1 fighter in Boxing..

Holy v Tyson....Is there because he had just been squashed off Bowe and not only beat the two belt beast but out fought him...Incredible macho stuff from a guy who was meant to be finished...

Don't see how Holy-Tyson is more impressive than Douglas-Tyson.

A worse boxer beating a better version of the same fighter.

If you can't see it....I'll have to edit my list..

Maybe it's because Tyson's first lost embitters you too much to admit it was great?

To be fair having the likes of Barrera v Naz in there is ridiculous, It was 55-45 match beforehand

Hamed was a 3-1-on betting favourite having opened up at 9-2-on.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Maybe it's because Tyson's first lost embitters you too much to admit it was great?

Yep I was Tyson's greatest fan........

andygf wrote:If Corbett beating Sullivan was included on purely historical grounds, then fair enough. Was it ,on balance, a shocker? No.After (if I remember rightly) a few years of inactivity, Sullivan was not just badly out of shape but a husk of the fighter he previously was.He was considered an unbeatable living legend,true,to the general public.I would guess that as he was "the first" in so many ways, people were not able to comprehend his era ending-as Julius Caesar's fans did !
Reading Pollock's account of the fight, it was actually quite sad to imagine the spectacle of an obese boozed-ravaged man being humiliated.For the record, Pollock didn't think that if they  had  fought  in Sullivan's prime, Corbett would not have had a look-in,and it wasn't as if he didn't rate Corbett, as he wrote a book on his achievements as well!

However, Sully's trainer admitted that at no stage in his career would he have even beaten Peter Jackson

Corbett v O'sullivan was a shocker....Sullivan was heavily favored.....

Developed a technique and brought Boxing into the modern era...

It's a great win...

No one thought Leonard would beat Hagler...........and that win has been steadily puked on too.

Definitely some truth in that truss. Hagler's great decline was barely spotted at the time... And a lot of it is down to Leonard saying he saw something in the Mugabi fight that made him believe.

Had the great Hugh mcilvanney, the man who sees things others don't, spotted hagler's decline, he might not have written a lengthy piece in the Sunday times the week prior to the fight saying what a complete mismatch it was and how he feared for Leonard's safety.

Funnily enough that article got left on the editing floor when his book came out, while the famous 'quiet beating' one didn't. Can't think why... 

Great performance from Leonard to upset the odds, for me they were both a bit past their best and it wasn't a great fight as such but it was a great occasion. Those looking back at it now, knowing the result, possibly don't appreciate the sense of drama that went with it at the time. Hagler the unbeatable beast and Leonard the lamb to the slaughter.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:There is a lot of crap talked about Leonard v Hagler but in the cold light of day we have a three year out Welter upsetting the number 1 fighter in Boxing..

Holy v Tyson....Is there because he had just been squashed off Bowe and not only beat the two belt beast but out fought him...Incredible macho stuff from a guy who was meant to be finished...

Interesting point about Holy, TRUSS. I have often thought that had Bowe stepped into the ring with Tyson after that great win Tyson would have been victorious. I rated Bowe but I just think, like many, that the sheer will of Holyfield was astonishing. However, I don't think that trumps Douglas for me.

DuransHorse wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:There is a lot of crap talked about Leonard v Hagler but in the cold light of day we have a three year out Welter upsetting the number 1 fighter in Boxing..

Holy v Tyson....Is there because he had just been squashed off Bowe and not only beat the two belt beast but out fought him...Incredible macho stuff from a guy who was meant to be finished...

Interesting point about Holy, TRUSS. I have often thought that had Bowe stepped into the ring with Tyson after that great win Tyson would have been victorious.  I rated Bowe but I just think, like many, that the sheer will of Holyfield was astonishing.  However, I don't think that trumps Douglas for me.

I thought Douglas was lucky not to have been counted out..............That's not to say he couldn't have beaten the count... but it was a couple of seconds after 9 that he was fully up........Other referees may not have been so lenient..........But the referee's decision is final and rightly so...What came after was disgraceful !!

But it was a great win..............For me though Holy out-fought the bully.............Buster outboxed him...........

I'm happy with people thinking Buster was a better win...Not for me.

Fair points re holy. He had an inner self belief, and by all accounts was the one guy never intimidated by tyson, going back to incidents with the US amateur team. Infact there's an argument that tyson was a little intimidated by him.

Doesn't alter the fact that Douglas broke the aura of invincibility, and the long count stuff was garbage, but he did cut it fine. The Douglas that turned up that night was a handful for anyone.

milkyboy wrote:Fair points re holy. He had an inner self belief, and by all accounts was the one guy never intimidated by tyson, going back to incidents with the US amateur team. Infact there's an argument that tyson was a little intimidated by him.

Doesn't alter the fact that Douglas broke the aura of invincibility, and the long count stuff was garbage, but he did cut it fine. The Douglas that turned up that night was a handful for anyone.

And the one that turned up in the next fight was a handful for 100's

I am always undecided re Sullivan Corbett. Is always a danger of us applying hindsight to these affairs and Truss is right in saying that Sullivan was the favourite, but I do have to wonder whether that was favourite in much the same way Ali’s odds against Holmes were ridiculously shorter than they should have been. We sometimes find it hard to believe Superman can lose, no matter what common sense may tell us. Think with a bit of hindsight there is a definite argument to be made that Corbett got him at the right time. Sullivan had trained himself to a tee for his previous fight with Kilrain and went a full 75 rounds in that one. Genuinely don’t think on the back of that, his life threatening illness and his dissolute lifestyle he had it in him to go to the well for one more time.

Fair play to Corbett who beat him fair and square and moved boxing forward in doing so, but had he been given the opportunity Jackson would have almost certainly done likewise and there were also other guys out there such as Choynski and Goddard who could potentially have also turned the trick. For me I would perhaps file Corbett Sullivan under the significant win column rather than the great win one.

milkyboy wrote:Fair points re holy. He had an inner self belief, and by all accounts was the one guy never intimidated by tyson, going back to incidents with the US amateur team. Infact there's an argument that tyson was a little intimidated by him.

Doesn't alter the fact that Douglas broke the aura of invincibility, and the long count stuff was garbage, but he did cut it fine. The Douglas that turned up that night was a handful for anyone.

That's why its a shame they didn't fight directly after Tyson Spinks. I give Holyfield a great shot at beating an unbeaten training-properly Tysonbecause as you say he was maybe the one fighter who intimidated Tyson,; if it had happened then(post Tyson Spinks,) and Holy had won, then it would have been right up there as one of the greatest wins of all time, as opposed to just a very good win.

ShahenshahG wrote:

milkyboy wrote:Fair points re holy. He had an inner self belief, and by all accounts was the one guy never intimidated by tyson, going back to incidents with the US amateur team. Infact there's an argument that tyson was a little intimidated by him.

Doesn't alter the fact that Douglas broke the aura of invincibility, and the long count stuff was garbage, but he did cut it fine. The Douglas that turned up that night was a handful for anyone.

And the one that turned up in the next fight was a handful for 100's

Well he didn't leave his best work in the gym... or run the risk of being weight drained, that's for sure.

Also is there something an asterix by the Douglas Tyson win?

Douglas being such a heavy underdog that Tyson didn't train properly and maybe having one eye on Holy?

Particularly as Douglas was never to replicate anywhere near that kind of form again...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Corbett v O'sullivan was a shocker....Sullivan was heavily favored.....

Developed a technique and brought Boxing into the modern era...

It's a great win...

No one thought Leonard would beat Hagler...........and that win has been steadily puked on too.

and it will continue to be "puked on", because many people just simply don't believe he deserved the decision regardless of how long he had been out of the ring.

Atila wrote:
and it will continue to be "puked on", because many people just simply don't believe he deserved the decision regardless of how long he had been out of the ring.

Where do you stand on this particular debate Atila?

Rowley wrote:

Atila wrote:
and it will continue to be "puked on", because many people just simply don't believe he deserved the decision regardless of how long he had been out of the ring.

Where do you stand on this particular debate Atila?

115-113 Hagler.

Not an honourable mention but actually in the top ten even top five for me would be Turpin's win over Robinson.

Contrary to popular belief Ray came into the bout in great shape from his tour of Europe.

It was perhaps his adaptability rather than increased fitness that won him the return. And of course a sensational right cross!

Atila wrote:

Rowley wrote:

Atila wrote:
and it will continue to be "puked on", because many people just simply don't believe he deserved the decision regardless of how long he had been out of the ring.

Where do you stand on this particular debate Atila?

115-113 Hagler.

Given that no man alive hates ray Leonard more than Atila, the fact that even he couldn't find a flimsy excuse to give hagler 5 of the rounds tells its  own story... A shut out for leonard;)

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:

Rowley wrote:

Atila wrote:
and it will continue to be "puked on", because many people just simply don't believe he deserved the decision regardless of how long he had been out of the ring.

Where do you stand on this particular debate Atila?

115-113 Hagler.

Given that no man alive hates ray Leonard more than Atila, the fact that even he couldn't find a flimsy excuse to give hagler 5 of the rounds tells its  own story... A shut out for leonard;)

I'm sure that Man_Machine and DC Gov hated Leonard more than me. Though I'll admit, it was close.

Herman Jaggery wrote:You're quite right milky,, easy to say after the event that Liston was on the slide.

Was Hearn's win over Duran at light middle? In that case I take that back about Tommy. Benitez too? II'd always presumed they were both at welter. Was a good win for Hagler no question but still not convinced it's quite a top ten great win, particularly as it was obvious Tommy didn't believe deep down he could win that fight.

Get Truss' point though about beating a 'reputation.'

Hearns didn't believe he could win? Never heard that theory before - Hearns didn't scare or suffer from self-confidence issues. He came to knock out Hagler.

I think it was a great win. Hearns was a great welter but possibly a better light middle. He was at or around his physical peak when he fought Hagler (after which he was never quite the same). He also proved he could win world titles at 160-175. He has some solid wins at 160 and above (and I'm including SRL in those).

hazharrison wrote:

Herman Jaggery wrote:You're quite right milky,, easy to say after the event that Liston was on the slide.

Was Hearn's win over Duran at light middle? In that case I take that back about Tommy. Benitez too? II'd always presumed they were both at welter. Was a good win for Hagler no question but still not convinced it's quite a top ten great win, particularly as it was obvious Tommy didn't believe deep down he could win that fight.

Get Truss' point though about beating a 'reputation.'

Hearns didn't believe he could win? Never heard that theory before - Hearns didn't scare or suffer from self-confidence issues. He came to knock out Hagler.

I think it was a great win. Hearns was a great welter but possibly a better light middle. He was at or around his physical peak when he fought Hagler (after which he was never quite the same). He also proved he could win world titles at 160-175. He has some solid wins at 160 and above (and I'm including SRL in those).

I'm quite content with anyone calling that a great win, and it probably was. I probably just have reservations about it because of Tommy's lack of quality wins at the weight. I don't know, maybe I was being a bit harsh?

Sorry to say it though, but Marv had intimidated Tommy in the run up to their fight. But that's what Marv loved to do to everyone. That's why he hated Ray so much, coz Ray refused to be intimidated!

Atila wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:

Rowley wrote:

Atila wrote:
and it will continue to be "puked on", because many people just simply don't believe he deserved the decision regardless of how long he had been out of the ring.

Where do you stand on this particular debate Atila?

115-113 Hagler.

Given that no man alive hates ray Leonard more than Atila, the fact that even he couldn't find a flimsy excuse to give hagler 5 of the rounds tells its  own story... A shut out for leonard;)

I'm sure that Man_Machine and DC Gov hated Leonard more than me. Though I'll admit, it was close.

I think man machine hated everyone and everything... But yeh he did save a special brand of contempt for Leonard. Jeez, takes me back... we've been bickering on this topic for 10 years!

Leonard Hearns 1 could very well make this list.

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:

Rowley wrote:

Atila wrote:
and it will continue to be "puked on", because many people just simply don't believe he deserved the decision regardless of how long he had been out of the ring.

Where do you stand on this particular debate Atila?

115-113 Hagler.

Given that no man alive hates ray Leonard more than Atila, the fact that even he couldn't find a flimsy excuse to give hagler 5 of the rounds tells its  own story... A shut out for leonard;)

I'm sure that Man_Machine and DC Gov hated Leonard more than me. Though I'll admit, it was close.

I think man machine hated everyone and everything... But yeh he did save a special brand of contempt for Leonard. Jeez, takes me back... we've been bickering on this topic for 10 years!

Yep, I remember those days and I remember how the anti-Leonard stuff started.

Man_Machine, Caesers-Palace and myself were all politely discussing the intricate thought process of scoring a fight, when Caesers mentioned the judges in the Hagler v Leonard fight. You, who must have been following the discussion jumped in and proceeded to call anyone who thought that Hagler had won the fight and Hagler himself, total and utter c#*ts! It was then and only then, that I took the burden on myself to defend Hagler's honour and indeed, my own honour.

Just think, if you had only approached the subject with a little bit of decorum and politeness, we would probably have not spent all our time bickering. So really, all the bickering and arguments was all due to you.

... You sound like my wife! I was right about the c*nts bit though;)

Milky has always been a trouble causer. We only keep him round here to make the other wum's feel intelligent.

That's me. The gift that keeps on giving.

Bob Lawsons win over Jack Johnson is worth a shout.

Could we give an honourable mention for Greb's win over Walker in view of Mickey going on to hold the middleweight title for five years?

It's been mentioned but a mention for Greb's win over Tunney from me too.

I may be shot down for this but I always thought Benn's win over G-Man a great, great  win.

Think coxy mentioned benn McClellan, hermy. It's an interesting one, how you rate it depends on a few factors really. How much do you rate McClellan? I rate him better than most on here. How much do you feel the fight was influenced by mcclellan's injury and when in the fight you think the effects of that began? That's Hard to say with any confidence. It was also mcclellan's first fight at super middle.

Whatever your thoughts on the above, what is indisputable is benn's bravery that night, and fairly indisputable that the beating he took finished him as a fighter.

It's undoubtedly a great win, it comes with a couple of caveats and I guess that... And the aftermath... are why maybe it sometimes gets overlooked.

Apologies Milky, I forgot to mention that Coxy had already mentioned it. Definitely comes with a couple of caveats though. Perhaps Truss should do a list of top ten great wins but specifically with no caveats whatsoever. That would be more challenging, as it seems most in fact do seem to have an asterix alongside. You know some say Ray trained horizontally for his first fight with Randy. Even so he did find time to fit in what was it, six fights along the way. Real fight time keeps you just as sharp as good training if not sharper I would suppose!

Im Not that big a pedant hermy, just pointing out you're not do left field with your suggestion... Even if it was coxy;)

There is a suggestion that ray treated his euro tour as a jolly, but I guess you can point to the troubles Turpin gave him in the return, to prove it certainly wasn't all down to that.

True about caveats though, you can find them to excuse most defeats and trash most wins.

Atila wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:

Rowley wrote:

Atila wrote:
and it will continue to be "puked on", because many people just simply don't believe he deserved the decision regardless of how long he had been out of the ring.

Where do you stand on this particular debate Atila?

115-113 Hagler.

Given that no man alive hates ray Leonard more than Atila, the fact that even he couldn't find a flimsy excuse to give hagler 5 of the rounds tells its  own story... A shut out for leonard;)

I'm sure that Man_Machine and DC Gov hated Leonard more than me. Though I'll admit, it was close.

I think man machine hated everyone and everything... But yeh he did save a special brand of contempt for Leonard. Jeez, takes me back... we've been bickering on this topic for 10 years!

Yep, I remember those days and I remember how the anti-Leonard stuff started.


Man_Machine, Caesers-Palace and myself were all politely discussing the intricate thought process of scoring a fight, when Caesers mentioned the judges in the Hagler v Leonard fight. You, who must have been following the discussion jumped in and proceeded to call anyone who thought that Hagler had won the fight and Hagler himself, total and utter c#*ts! It was then and only then, that I took the burden on myself to defend Hagler's honour and indeed, my own honour.

Just think, if you had only approached the subject with a little bit of decorum and politeness, we would probably have not spent all our time bickering. So really, all the bickering and arguments was all due to you.

I argued that Hagler deserved the nod (in a close fight) and the 606 flaming torches came out.

It was probably the usual charmingly diplomatic way you put your point across haz. 

The BBC board vote on the scoring had over 100 voters and it was near as damn it 50:50. It was a close fight, a few points either way, no-one can really argue with.

I save my bickering for those that claim it was a robbery...  Or a quiet beating. 

no-one can really argue with

I had it 118-110

In all seriousness some muppets from the press had it 117-111 or something crazy for both fighters.

See Truss, even in your "golden" (spit) 80s there were useless tosspots summarising on boxing.

milkyboy wrote:It was probably the usual charmingly diplomatic way you put your point across haz. 

The BBC board vote on the scoring had over 100 voters and it was near as damn it 50:50. It was a close fight, a few points either way, no-one can really argue with.

I save my bickering for those that claim it was a robbery...  Or a quiet beating. 

Still say Hagler lost that fight.............Rather than Leonard winning it......

What kind of muppet fights orthodox for the first part of the fight.............Allowing Leonard who must have been as nervous as hell to relax into the fight !!..........

If Marv didn't have an inferiority complex he probably wins that fight...............Same against Duran he nearly blew that trying to show the Panamanian he was more than a ferocious brawler....

Don't try to out smart...Smarter fighters !!.

Some good picks on here, from my own viewpoint I would include:

Benn vs Eubank 1 - Remember the build up and not many thought Eubank had any chance, was unbeaten but nobody felt he was good enough. Benn was a machine and likely to show up the boxer who looked down on boxing. Remember being gobsmacked at the end.

Braddock vs Baer - Should never have got that win but overcome the odds (they should make a film about that).

Turpin vs Robinson - lots of excuses about SRR being out of shape but then the same could be said of Turpin in the rematch.

Pacman vs ODLH / Hatton - Both for me, remember thinking the same thing for both. ODLH and Hatton are just too big, Pacman won't be able to take the extra weight in their punches. Will be brave but stopped late.

Agree with Ali vs Liston, Tyson vs Douglas and Ali vs Foreman

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:It was probably the usual charmingly diplomatic way you put your point across haz. 

The BBC board vote on the scoring had over 100 voters and it was near as damn it 50:50. It was a close fight, a few points either way, no-one can really argue with.

I save my bickering for those that claim it was a robbery...  Or a quiet beating. 

Still say Hagler lost that fight.............Rather than Leonard winning it......

What kind of muppet fights orthodox for the first part of the fight.............Allowing Leonard who must have been as nervous as hell to relax into the fight !!..........

If Marv didn't have an inferiority complex he probably wins that fight...............Same against Duran he nearly blew that trying to show the Panamanian he was more than a ferocious brawler....

Don't try to out smart...Smarter fighters !!.

Its the great irony of it Truss. For all the bleating by marv and his fans, he only has one person to blame for leaving it close. I suspect he knows it too. Great fighter, but for whatever reason, he fluffed his lines.

milkyboy wrote:Its the great irony of it Truss. For all the bleating by marv and his fans, he only has one person to blame for leaving it close. I suspect he knows it too. Great fighter, but for whatever reason, he fluffed his lines.

But if it's Hagler's fault that he lost the fight, why is it held up as a great win for Leonard?

Because Welters who've been out for three years don't often beat P4P number 1 middleweights..

... As the great mcilvanney said before the fight, it was a mismatch. If he said it, it must have been. For Leonard to get past the first bell was an achievement, regardless of marv's attempts to engineer his own downfall 

milkyboy wrote:... As the great mcilvanney said before the fight, it was a mismatch. If he said it, it must have been. For Leonard to get past the first bell was an achievement, regardless of marv's attempts to engineer his own downfall 

Well Mcilvanney was wrong. Whoever thought that Leonard couldn't put up a fight didn't think logically. Ali came back after a long lay off and beat a top contender in Quarry, old Joe Louis came back and lasted the distance with Charles so it should be of no surprise that a younger, great fighter should at least put on a show, even if he was rustier.

I looked at Hagler at the time kinda like Larry Holmes before he fought Michael Spinks. Number one in his divison, the clear champ, but on the way down and no longer likely to be able to beat everyone in his division.

Atila wrote:

milkyboy wrote:... As the great mcilvanney said before the fight, it was a mismatch. If he said it, it must have been. For Leonard to get past the first bell was an achievement, regardless of marv's attempts to engineer his own downfall 

Well Mcilvanney was wrong. Whoever thought that Leonard couldn't put up a fight didn't think logically..

That is just crap, Mate.....

In his last fight before Hagler...Leonard was decked and struggled with trial horse Kevin Howard....Then he's out for three years and doesn't even take a tune up....

Hagler was a huge favorite and rightly so..

Complete baloney !!