The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #141456   Message #3256057
Posted By: MGM·Lion
13-Nov-11 - 06:37 AM
Thread Name: BS: The Greatest Boxer
Subject: RE: BS: The Greatest Boxer
Honestly can't see your point, Tunesmith. I an afraid you seem utterly confused to me. It is not an 'artificial' division; it is to ensure that only those with an equal chance are matched. Otherwise the situation, e.g. to adopt your own example, whereby Paterson could be put in the ring v Robinson, would be absurd. So you cannot compare, in terms of 'greatness', fighters in different weight divisions; you can only judge by the achievements, within any division, of those fighting those who with whom are evenly matched. No rule of "greatness" demands that only the putative theoretical winner of a contest that never existed, or could have existed, can be considered ~~ otherwise, as I say, you are in an apples/oranges situation.

How you then try to adjudicate between the greatest flyweight, the greatest welterweight, the greatest heavyweight {or for that matter between the greatest miniaturist and the greatest painter of huge frescoes} then becomes the matter for fine judgment ··· or else the thread title must be made more category·within·category-specific, surely?.

~M~