Mailbag: Best of the original eight

I watched a couple of DVDs of the late Salvador Sanchez on Saturday, before I saw the live shows on television featuring Vitali Klitschko's knockout of Juan Carlos Gomez and Roy Jones' victory over Omar Sheika.

Sanchez was a wonderful fighter whose life was tragically cut short in 1982 in an auto accident. He was 44-1-1 and one of the great featherweights who ever lived.

That got me thinking of the best fighters in each of the original eight weight classes. I'm picking my choices in each class based on when they were at their best. Feel free to disagree.

• Heavyweight: 1, Joe Louis; 2, Larry Holmes; 3, Muhammad Ali.

• Light heavyweight: 1, Archie Moore; 2, Ezzard Charles; 3, Billy Conn.

• Middleweight: 1, Harry Greb; 2, Marvelous Marvin Hagler; 3, Stanley Ketchel.

• Welterweight: 1, Sugar Ray Robinson; 2, Sugar Ray Leonard; 3, Jose Napoles.

• Lightweight: 1, Benny Leonard; 2, Roberto Duran; 3, Barney Ross.

• Featherweight: 1, Henry Armstrong; 2, Willie Pep; 3, Sandy Saddler.

• Bantamweight: 1, Eder Jofre; 2, Ruben Olivares; 3, Carlos Zarate.

• Flyweight: 1, Jimmy Wilde; 2, Miguel Cantu; 3, Pancho Villa.

There were a lot of difficult choices to make and some of the greatest fighters who ever pulled on a pair of gloves failed to make this list. Let me know what you think.

For now, let's move on to your questions and comments in this week's edition of the boxing mailbag. My answers are in italics.

IMPROVE THE RULES

The ending of the Vitali Klitschko-Juan Carlos Gomez fight on Saturday made me think once again that there should be clearer rules and stricter guidelines about when it's appropriate for a referee to stop a fight. When a fight is not competitive and only becoming less so, that should be justification enough to stop a fight. I can't tell you how many times I've seen fighters who were outmatched to begin with be staggered with one blow, knocked down with another, and then struggle to their feet for the "Can he survive the round?" portion of the fight, which essentially pits a professional athlete against a drunk. That's not sports, and it has no place in boxing. "Can he survive the round?" has a place when two evenly matched fighters are engaged in a close fight. There's no point in it, however, when the fighter on the receiving end of the abuse has lost seven rounds in a row. The three knockdown rule is a relic from a more barbaric era of boxing. Three knockdowns should be the limit in a fight, not a round.

Jason R.
Athens, Ga.

There is nothing more important in boxing than fighter safety, Jason, but I think you're off-base to a certain degree here. The referee's job is to protect the fighter and it doesn't matter whether he's won seven rounds in a row or lost seven in a row. The second the referee feels a boxer is incapable of properly defending himself and is in danger of being hurt, the fight should be stopped. I understand where you're coming from when you talk about a referee giving a fighter a chance to survive a round, but there should not be two standards. If he's hurt, he's hurt and the referee can't worry if he's leading or not if he believes the boxer is in danger. The reason they took the scoring responsibilities away from a referee is so he'd only have to focus on protecting the fighters. Knockdowns aren't an accurate way of determining if a fighter is hurt and so trying to put a limit on them is misguided.

FIGHTING FOR THE TITLE

How was Vitali Klitschko able to come out of retirement after four years and automatically qualify to fight for a belt? This is wrong when there were fighters who active who didn't get a chance.

Mark
Dallas

When he retired in 2005 because he was injured, the WBC named him Champion Emeritus. It guaranteed him an immediate shot at the championship when he returned. The WBC did that because it believed he would come back sooner and didn't want to lose out on a large sanction fee. No one believed he'd be out as long as he was.

BEST BIG MEN EVER?

Is it me or are the Klitschko brothers the most talented heavyweights ever in terms of their height and weight? If we look at it for all the boxers over 6 feet 3 inches and who weighed at least 235 pounds, are they not the best except for maybe Lennox Lewis?

Brandon C.
Houston

George Foreman immediately comes to mind as one who was better than either Klitschko or Lennox Lewis. If we only go by height and not weight, it opens a slew more who exceed either one, starting with Muhammad Ali and Larry Holmes. But there aren't many who combined that height and weight who are superior.

BABY BROTHER IS BETTER

The only thing I disagree with you on in your column on Vitali Klitschko is that I think Vitali is better than his brother Wladimir. I know it has been a few years, but he was beating the hell out of Lennox Lewis before they stopped it on a cut. Vitali has never been remotely close to being beaten, other than that Lewis fight. His brother, on the other hand, has been flat on his back a few times counting rafters in the ceiling.

T.L.
Phoenix

I agree, T.L. But Wladimir has been active and Vitali has not. Had they both been equally as active, I'd have had Vitali 1 and Wladimir 2. By the way, I don't agree with the assessment that Vitali was beating the hell out of Lewis. It was a good fight and Klitschko had started strong. But Lewis was back in the fight and, I think, in command when the cut forced the stoppage.

GOMEZ DIDN'T DESERVE SHOT

I don't think Juan Carlos Gomez deserved the title shot he received on Saturday. Nor do David Haye or Chris Arreola deserve one. The problem, though, is that there are no real heavyweight threats to challenge the brothers. However, I don't believe they would be world champions if the talent of the Nineties (Evander Holyfield, Riddick Bowe, Lennox Lewis, Michael Moorer, Ray Mercer, etc.) were here. As almost everyone knows, their complete dominance of the division is only because of lack of quality challengers. I don't see them beating a prime Holyfield, Lewis, or Bowe. The heavyweight division has been in trouble ever since Lewis left. I don't see much improving any time soon.

Robert
New Orleans

The sanctioning bodies, unfortunately, aren't going away and so you're always going to have the occasional bad challenger. But if they'd implement a rule that required anyone who was going to fight for the title to have had three wins in the previous 15 months against a top 10-rated opponent or one win in the last six months over a top five-ranked opponent, they'd make things a lot fairer. Of course, the sanctioning body rankings are usually a joke and that plan wouldn't guarantee that all challengers would be deserving, but at least it would set a benchmark.

JONES CAN STILL FIGHT

Nice job on your column on Roy Jones Jr., Kevin. People scream for retirement, sometimes for the right reasons, such as when a fighter is impaired and at increasing risk of death or disability. But often, they scream because they've turned their heroes into superheroes. And it feels devastating if Superman can't fly. But I've believed that Roy would need time to come back down to earth and get ready to fight as a normal, in-shape light heavyweight after beating John Ruiz for the WBA heavyweight title in 2003. And again, to regain his confidence after the KO losses to Antonio Tarver and Glen Johnson. But he never looked like an old, shot fighter. He did many good things in the Calzaghe fight, had good reflexes, and took the shots well. Let's see how he adjusts to being a little older, a little less freakishly gifted.

Dan S.
Huntington, N.Y.

He's a lot less freakishly gifted, Dan. And I don't think he can be a dominant fighter. He would get destroyed by Chad Dawson and I think Bernard Hopkins would handle him. I think he'd had problems with Johnson and Tarver. That's not dominant. Now, I do think he's still a solid, professional fighter who will beat most light heavyweights, if he chooses to keep fighting. He had little opposition in his TKO victory Saturday over Omar Sheika, though I thought referee Tommy Kimmons' may have been a bit quick. If Jones keeps picking the right fights, like Sheika, then no problem, but someone will have to step in if he wants to get in with the likes of Dawson. Those days are behind him forever.

NACHO'S BEST

Who do you think is the best boxer Nacho Beristain has ever trained? He has worked with a man who is one of the closest ever to being a perfect boxer in Ricardo "Finito" Lopez and he's currently training Juan Manuel Marquez, who has won multiple belts in different weight classes and still seems in his prime at 35.

Eder P.
Los Angeles

Without question, I'd go with Lopez. He is one of the greatest in any era and of any class. He was 51-0-1 with 38 knockouts with only a technical draw in a fight with Rosendo Alvarez marring his record. Marquez is very good, but Lopez is on an entirely different level.

GIVE WLAD SOME RESPECT

Wladimir Klitschko is 32, and in the best shape of his life. Will he be 36 and past his prime before he makes anyone's pound-for-pound list besides mine? All he does is knock out everyone he fights. When will Wladimir Klitschko finally get the respect he deserves from the press?

Matthew W.
Tulsa, Okla.

I think Wladimir is a very gifted fighter, Matthew, but I don't think he has an argument for being in the top 10. He hasn't had the kinds of wins over quality opponents that those in the top 10 do and he has suspect losses to Ross Puritty, Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster. He's improved greatly since the Brewster loss and I think might make it if he were to score a win over a highly regarded opponent. I give him plenty of respect, though. In my prefight column on his older brother, Vitali, I said Wladimir is without question the top heavyweight in the world. I think that's giving him his due, frankly.

• Can’t get enough of Kevin Iole’s mailbag? Then check out last week’s edition.