My top 10 Heavyweights

[Sweet Science]

Hello to all I'm new here,

It was suggested that I should post my top 10 as a way to introduce myself and express my opinions and tastes.

Thought I'd select my heavyweight list for now.

Really like to hear other peoples opinions and there picks also.

Anyway here goes:

1 Muhammad Ali

2 Joe Louis

3 George Foreman

4 Jack Dempsey

5 Larry Holmes

6 Sonny Liston

7 Mike Tyson

8 Jack Johnson

9 Archie Moore

10 Ezzard Charles

[Luigi1985]

Hello to all I'm new here,

It was suggested that I should post my top 10 as a way to introduce myself and express my opinions and tastes.

Thought I'd select my heavyweight list for now.

Really like to hear other peoples opinions and there picks also.

Anyway here goes:

1 Muhammad Ali

2 Joe Louis

3 George Foreman

4 Jack Dempsey

5 Larry Holmes

6 Sonny Liston

7 Mike Tyson

8 Jack Johnson

9 Archie Moore

10 Ezzard Charles



Tyson is a bit too high, Charles and Moore are both underrated as HW´s, but they are also too high, Liston is a bit too high, Foreman is way too high, Dempsey also, where´s Lewis and Marciano?


Here´s my Top 10 now: (I change it often of course a bit)


1: Ali
2: Louis
3: Marciano
4: Johnson
5: Lewis
6: Holmes
7: Dempsey
8: Frazier
9: Wills
10: Holyfield

[Sweet Science]

I feel Marciano is way too crude to be on the list. He was fortunate to go undefeated as he was around at just the right time (after Louis's prime and before Liston).

As for Lewis, although I respect him as a person (nice guy with impeccable manners). I don't feel he could have lived with some of the true greats. Mike Tyson from 87/88 would have been too much for him. Too quick and powerful, he would have got to test Lewis's chin with alarming regularity. People forget how good he was then. A prime Holyfield would of defeated Lewis also.

Foreman too high? Maybe. I understand he was very crude, however his power was unmatched and he had a good chin even in his first incarnation. He would have battered most of the great heavyweights in history.

[Chaney]

Welcome, Sweet Science. Unfortunately you have joined just after a huge crash on the site, causing us to lose all our archived and richly informative threads! Still, you can be part of the 'rebuilding of ESB.'

My top ten:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Dempsey
5. Holmes
6. Foreman
7. Frazier
8. Liston
9. Tyson
10. Langford

[djb2009]

Hello to all I'm new here,

It was suggested that I should post my top 10 as a way to introduce myself and express my opinions and tastes.

Thought I'd select my heavyweight list for now.

Really like to hear other peoples opinions and there picks also.

Anyway here goes:

1 Muhammad Ali

2 Joe Louis

3 George Foreman

4 Jack Dempsey

5 Larry Holmes

6 Sonny Liston

7 Mike Tyson

8 Jack Johnson

9 Archie Moore

10 Ezzard Charles

Charles and More and no Rocky get bent!!

[Luigi1985]

I feel Marciano is way too crude to be on the list. He was fortunate to go undefeated as he was around at just the right time (after Louis's prime and before Liston).

As for Lewis, although I respect him as a person (nice guy with impeccable manners). I don't feel he could have lived with some of the true greats. Mike Tyson from 87/88 would have been too much for him. People forget how good he was then. A prime Holyfield would of defeated Lewis also.

Foreman too high? Maybe. I understand he was very crude, however his power was unmatched and he had a good chin even in his first incarnation. He would have battered most of the great heavyweights in history.


Tyson looked great and unbeatable against solid competition like Tubbs, Berbick, etc., but against great fighters he did nothing, that´s a fact. What could have been if he would have fought in his prime a prime Lewis for example is just speculation. Fact is, that Lewis title reign was really good and he defeated also some very good fighters like a washed up Holyfield (Lewis was also a bit washed up here), Tua, Golota, Grant, etc. He must be ahead of Tyson, sorry. Although I like Tyson much more than Lewis, but we must be fair. Marciano KO´d all of his HOF- opponents, all 3 were also a bit washed up, but all fights are on tape, and I have all three on tape when they were in their prime, and believe me, there isn´t that much of a difference here. Marciano never was lucky or got a lucky decision win or so, he deserves to be in a Top 10, whether at the 3rd place or at the 9th place, it´s so close to rate great fighters that both places are understandable. Foreman´s best wins are very rare, so to have him that high is IMO a bit hyperbolical...

[Nick Balsamo]

Hello to all I'm new here,

It was suggested that I should post my top 10 as a way to introduce myself and express my opinions and tastes.

Thought I'd select my heavyweight list for now.

Really like to hear other peoples opinions and there picks also.

Anyway here goes:

1 Muhammad Ali

2 Joe Louis

3 George Foreman

4 Jack Dempsey

5 Larry Holmes

6 Sonny Liston

7 Mike Tyson

8 Jack Johnson

9 Archie Moore

10 Ezzard Charles


Lennox Lewis and Rocky Marciano should be there for sure. Archie Moore isn't even Top 20.

Ezzard Charles ranks about 15th or 16th.

If Charles and Moore are there, Joe Frazier should be ahead of them.


Here's my heavyweight list :

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Larry Holmes
4. George Foreman
5. Sonny Liston
6. Lennox Lewis
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Rocky Marciano
9. Jack Johnson
10. Mike Tyson

[Sweet Science]

Thank you for the welcome Chaney.

I look forward to contributing to the debates.

Your list is very highly respectable. I think I should have Langford on mine also. I totally forgot about the Boston Terror

[Luigi1985]

Welcome, Sweet Science. Unfortunately you have joined just after a huge crash on the site, causing us to lose all our archived and richly informative threads! Still, you can be part of the 'rebuilding of ESB.'

My top ten:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Dempsey
5. Holmes
6. Foreman
7. Frazier
8. Liston
9. Tyson
10. Langford


Good list except Langford. Sorry, but Wills beat him 18 times out of 20 (although Langford wasn´t prime), Wills also defeated the better competition, so why have you Langford at 10th and Wills isn´t mentioned? The dwarf-syndrome? :hey

[Nick Balsamo]

Tyson is a bit too high, Charles and Moore are both underrated as HW´s, but they are also too high, Liston is a bit too high, Foreman is way too high, Dempsey also, where´s Lewis and Marciano?


Here´s my Top 10 now: (I change it often of course a bit)


1: Ali
2: Louis
3: Marciano
4: Johnson
5: Lewis
6: Holmes
7: Dempsey
8: Frazier
9: Wills
10: Holyfield

Sonny Liston would knock Evander out. :yep

[Luigi1985]

Sonny Liston would knock Evander out. :yep


No, I wouldn´t believe that this is crystal-clear. Btw, Liston´s resume is too less to rate him that high, beside a for a puncher tailor-made Patterson (and mentally totally haggard thereto) twice, Machen and a totally shot Valdes who has he beaten that justify such a high ranking? Perhaps his brave performances against the murderous puncher Ali?

[janitor]

My list

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhamad Ali
3. Jack Johnson
4. Jim Jeffries
5. Jack Dempsey
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Sonny Liston
8. Lenox Lewis
9. Sam Langford
10. Joe Frazier
11. Larry Holmes
12. Harry Wills
13. Mike Tyson
14. George Foreman
15. Evander Hollyfield
16. James Corbett
17. Joe Walcott
18. Max Schmeling
19. Ezzard Charles
20. Bob Fitzsimmons

[Sweet Science]

Tyson looked great and unbeatable against solid competition like Tubbs, Berbick, etc., but against great fighters he did nothing, that´s a fact. What could have been if he would have fought in his prime a prime Lewis for example is just speculation. Fact is, that Lewis title reign was really good and he defeated also some very good fighters like a washed up Holyfield (Lewis was also a bit washed up here), Tua, Golota, Grant, etc. He must be ahead of Tyson, sorry. Although I like Tyson much more than Lewis, but we must be fair. Marciano KO´d all of his HOF- opponents, all 3 were also a bit washed up, but all fights are on tape, and I have all three on tape when they were in their prime, and believe me, there isn´t that much of a difference here. Marciano never was lucky or got a lucky decision win or so, he deserves to be in a Top 10, whether at the 3rd place or at the 9th place, it´s so close to rate great fighters that both places are understandable. Foreman´s best wins are very rare, so to have him that high is IMO a bit hyperbolical...


In terms of achievements during a fighters career yes I agree with you Lewis and Marciano should be ahead of Tyson. I respect your well thought out opinion and reasoning. However, my criteria for top ten heavyweights, looks more at who would have beaten who in their respective primes. And yes speculation is a large part of that, but then again its just my personal opinion. I beleive Mike Tyson in his prime would have been extremely hard to break down and beat. The great fighters Tyson failed to beat, well he met them at a time when he was just a shadow of himself. Sure, Holyfield and Lewis beat Tyson but could they have beaten Iron Mike Tyson/ Kid Dynamite? He was a different prospect entirely, with good head movement, great speed and timing and that ferocious power and determination.

[Luigi1985]

Damn on my list I forgot Jeffries and had Ali in front of Louis...


Here´s my list:




1: Joe Louis
2: Muhammad Ali
3: Rocky Marciano
4: James J. Jeffries
5: Jack Johnson
6: Lennox Lewis
7: Larry Holmes
8: Jack Dempsey
9: Joe Frazier
10: Harry Wills

[Luigi1985]

In terms of achievements during a fighters career yes I agree with you Lewis and Marciano should be ahead of Tyson. I respect your well thought out opinion and reasoning. However, my criteria for top ten heavyweights, looks more at who would have beaten who in their respective primes. And yes speculation is a large part of that, but then again its just my personal opinion. I beleive Mike Tyson in his prime would have been extremely hard to break down and beat. The great fighters Tyson failed to beat, well he met them at a time when he was just a shadow of himself. Sure, Holyfield and Lewis beat Tyson but could they have beaten Iron Mike Tyson/ Kid Dynamite? He was a different prospect entirely, with good head movement, great speed and timing and that ferocious power and determination.


Every great fighter of history with a chin and with some power would have chances against Tyson, not that I say they beat him for sure, but have a chance, these fighters are for example: Liston, Wills, Ali, Holmes, Marciano, Foreman, etc., IMO a Top 10 list should always contain a mixture of ca. 70 % legacy and 30 % head-to-head- evaluation...

[Sweet Science]

[quote]Every great fighter of history with a chin and with some power would have chances against Tyson, not that I say they beat him for sure, but have a chance, these fighters are for example: Liston, Wills, Ali, Holmes, Marciano, Foreman, etc., IMO a Top 10 list should always contain a mixture of ca. 70 % legacy and 30 % head-to-head- evaluation...[/QUOTE

Sure, Any of the great fighters you mention there would have a chance against Tyson. But likewise Tyson would have a good chance against them also, Except with Ali. He would have frustrated Tyson and killed him (metaphorically speaking).

Just curious, but what number would you rank Foreman and Tyson?

[Luigi1985]

[quote]

Sure, Any of the great fighters you mention there would have a chance against Tyson. But likewise Tyson would have a good chance against them also, Except with Ali. He would have frustrated Tyson and killed him (metaphorically speaking).

Just curious, but what number would you rank Foreman and Tyson?


Of course near the Top10, Foreman perhaps at 12th, Tyson at 14th...

[Luigi1985]

[quote]

Sure, Any of the great fighters you mention there would have a chance against Tyson. But likewise Tyson would have a good chance against them also, Except with Ali. He would have frustrated Tyson and killed him (metaphorically speaking).

Just curious, but what number would you rank Foreman and Tyson?


But I´m curious why you give only Ali a 100 % winning chance, here we see again how overrated he is. Tyson had a great left hook, and we all know that Ali was very unimmunized for these kind of punches, and don´t forget Tyson was a great finisher who could finish him quickly when he would be hurt, and Tyson wasn´t also a wide-swinging and slow fighter like Foreman, he was very quick in his prime...

[Sweet Science]

But I´m curious why you give only Ali a 100 % winning chance, here we see again how overrated he is. Tyson had a great left hook, and we all know that Ali was very unimmunized for these kind of punches, and don´t forget Tyson was a great finisher who could finish him quickly when he would be hurt, and Tyson wasn´t also a wide-swinging and slow fighter like Foreman, he was very quick in his prime...

The reason I rate Ali's chances so highly is that, regardless of his susceptability to being caught with the left hook. In my opinion he had the best chin of any heavyweight ever. Futhermore, his ability to recouperate was astonishing. Even if Tyson caught him and hurt him, he'd have the best chance of recovering and would get up off the canvess to win if necessary. Ali's heart and never say die attitude would have the effect of garlic to a vampire on Tyson.

[Sweet Science]

But I´m curious why you give only Ali a 100 % winning chance, here we see again how overrated he is.

Did you say Ali is overrated? or were you referring to Tyson?

[jyuza]

Hey, seems like you found your way in creating thread. Good thing.

Excuse the critics by the others, I asked you because I was curious to see your top ten (not necessarly heavyweight, could have been P4P).
Very good list by the way, a true contemporain list of the last 40 years.

[UpWithEvil]

Foreman in the top-5 strikes me as being "wacky". He was a mighty slugger, to be sure, but he was crude with questionable stamina. I couldn't imagine him beat, say, Sonny Liston, for example.

[Minotauro]

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. George Foreman
4. Rocky Marciano
5. Jack Johnson
6. Joe Frazier
7. Larry Holmes
8. Sonny Liston
9. Lennox Lewis
10. Jack Dempsey
11. Jersey Joe Walcott
12. Evander Holyfield
13. Jim Jeffries
14. Sam Langford
15. Mike Tyson

[jyuza]

1 Cassius Clay
2 Joe Louis
3 Rocky Marciano
4 Sonny Liston
5 Larry Holmes
6 Jack Johnson
7 George Foreman
8 Lennox Lewis
9 Evander Holyfield
10 Joe Frazier
11 Mike Tyson
12 Jim Jeffries
13 Jack Dempsey
14 Jersey Joe Walcott
15 Ezzard Charles

Ali would have kicked your ass for calling him Clay.

[Sweet Science]

Hey, seems like you found your way in creating thread. Good thing.

Excuse the critics by the others, I asked you because I was curious to see your top ten (not necessarly heavyweight, could have been P4P).
Very good list by the way, a true contemporain list of the last 40 years.

Thanks mate, appreciate it.

My P4P list would have caused even more controversy, and seeing as though I'm new here don't want everyone to think I'm crazy!!!

[Bill1234]

My list

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhamad Ali
3. Jack Johnson
4. Jim Jeffries
5. Jack Dempsey
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Sonny Liston
8. Lenox Lewis
9. Sam Langford
10. Joe Frazier
11. Larry Holmes
12. Harry Wills
13. Mike Tyson
14. George Foreman
15. Evander Hollyfield
16. James Corbett
17. Joe Walcott
18. Max Schmeling
19. Ezzard Charles
20. Bob Fitzsimmons



Whats your reasoning for having Holmes that low, and having guys like Frazier and Liston ahead of him?

Here's my list:

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Rocky Marciano
4. Larry Holmes
5. Jack Dempsey
6. Jack Johnson
7. George Foreman
8. Sonny Liston
9. Joe Frazier
10. Ezzard Charles.

[jyuza]

Thanks mate, appreciate it.

My P4P list would have caused even more controversy, and seeing as though I'm new here don't want everyone to think I'm crazy!!!

Don't worry we have seen much more worse list than that !

[C. M. Clay II]

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Sonny Liston
3. George Foreman
4. Mike Tyson
5. Joe Louis
6. Larry Holmes
7. Joe Frazier
8. Jack Johnson
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Lennox Lewis
11. Evander Holyfield
12. Rocky Marciano
13. Riddick Bowe
14. Floyd Patterson
15. Ezzard Charles
16. Jersey Joe Walcott
17. Gene Tunney
18. Jim Jeffries
19. Ken Norton
20. Sam Langford

:good

[janitor]

Whats your reasoning for having Holmes that low, and having guys like Frazier and Liston ahead of him?


Mainly that they fought better oposition and were more dominant against them.

Having said that I mave placed Holmes in verry select company here.

[Dempsey1238]

1 Louis
2 Ali
3 Johnson
4 Marciano
5 Dempsey
6 Holmes
7 Jeff
8 Lewis
9 Fraizer
10 Sullivan

[heerko koois]

:happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :D 1- leon Spinks
2-Marvin Hart
3-Gerrie Coetzee
4-John Tate
5-bruce Seldon
6-Ingemar Johannson
7-Ezzard Charles
8-Mike Weaver
9-Tony Tubbs
10-Michael Spinks..

[GhstDeini05]

A lot of Ali zombies here, huh...

I'm just wondering two things...are people puttin up their top 10 favs or their objective top 10? - I mean my subjective list mirrors my objective more or less but thats just cuz of my general respect for fighters.

And what criteria are your top ten based on? Or should be based on?

I'll come up with my own top ten later but theres a good chance Louis and Ali will top it. Everyone should start off with those two, right?

im out

[heerko koois]

A lot of Ali zombies here, huh...

I'm just wondering two things...are people puttin up their top 10 favs or their objective top 10? - I mean my subjective list mirrors my objective more or less but thats just cuz of my general respect for fighters.

And what criteria are your top ten based on? Or should be based on?

I'll come up with my own top ten later but theres a good chance Louis and Ali will top it. Everyone should start off with those two, right?

im out

no Clay in my top 10.............

[rekcutnevets]

You won't find Jack Dempsey on this list, because he never faced his number one contender, Harry Wills. I like Dempsey, and think he stood a good chance of defeating Wills. This fight was so important because Dempsey still fought when you could argue having two champions, based upon race. You had the best black heavyweight in the world, and the best white heavyweight in the world. Dempsey and Wills needed to face each other to prove who the world's best heavyweight was. I realize that certain situations may have made that fight impossible to make, so I am not penalizing him for not fighting him. Nor can I reward him being that the fight never took place.

10. Mike Tyson

Tyson was the youngest heavyweight champion ever, and had the best blend of speed and power ever seen in a fighter. He came out a winner in twelve title bouts. Tyson had the ability to rank higher on this list, but lacked the discipline. He never bested another elite fighter (Larry Holmes was 37), but Trevor Berbick, James Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Tony Tucker, Larry Holmes, Tony Tubbs, and Frank Bruno were all world titlists at some point in their careers. The knock on Tyson is that he never really overcame adversity in his fights, but when you were as skilled as he was you don't come across adverse situations all that often.

9. Evander Holyfield

Holyfield moved up from the cruiserweight division, where he was also champion, to excel in the heavyweight division like no other fighter moving up from below 200 lbs. has ever done. What he lacked in size, he more than made up for it with courage, determination, chin, and heart. He also had decent strength, a crisp punch, and above average speed. While his boxing skills were always apparent, he reinvented himself after losing his title to Riddick Bowe in 1992. He put on a masterful performance when he beat Bowe to regain his title a year later. He seemed to decline afterwards, losing a disputed decision to Michael Moore. He again rose to championship form, putting on a wonderful boxing display in stopping Mike Tyson, and another solid outing when he stopped Michael Moorer in their rematch. Other notable wins came against Michael Dokes, an aging George Foreman, an aging Larry Holmes, Ray Mercer, and Hasim Rahman.

8. Lennox Lewis

Lennox Lewis barely edges out Holyfield for this spot on the list. Lewis had his flaws, but did not seem overly confused by any style in particular. He had a size advantage over Holyfield. His competition was on par with Holyfield's. Not to mention a win over Holyfield, though I feel Holyfield had started his decline at that point. Lewis had a booming right hand, stiff jab, and has a victory over every fighter he has faced. With sixteen successful title defenses, spread over the course of two reigns, he ranks third amongst the heavyweight champions. He had a suspect chin, and was not always properly motivated for his fights; but only suffered two set backs in spite of these flaws. It would have been nice to have seen how he would have dealt with Riddick Bowe, but he was able to beat one man that had previously defeated Bowe(Holyfield) He also made short work of Andrew Golata. Golata had previously thrown two dominant performances over Riddick Bowe away due to fouls. Lewis also showed the ability to overcome adversity. He was in very close fight with Frank Bruno, and turned it on to stop him in the seventh. He was losing, in my opinion, to Vitali Klitschko; but seemed to be taking the fight over when that bout was stopped due to an awful gash near Klitschko's eye. Other than the aforementioned fighters, notable wins came against Razor Ruddock, Tommy Morrison, Ray Mercer, Shannon Briggs, David Tua, Hasim Rahman, and Mike Tyson.

7. Joe Frazier

Joe Frazier was armed with one the best left hooks in division history, was strong willed, and had the gas to burn. Frazier's most notable wins were against Buster Mathis, Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Ellis, Bob Foster, and Muhammad Ali. It is also important to notice he only lost to two men over the course of his career, both of which make this list.

6. George Foreman

It is tempting to think of Foreman as having two careers, as two different fighters, because of his ten year layoff from boxing in the middle of his career. Also because of his seeming personal tranformation. I don't really buy the make over. I am not saying he is a scam artist, or that he doesn't believe in his ministry. I am referring to the good guy, bad guy routine. I don't believe that Foreman was ever really a bad guy. I think he was perceived that way because of his strong will and savage strength. He brutalized his opponents in a way that it would seem only a thug be capable of. After his ten year retirement he came back near forty, bald, clean shaven, fat, forcing a smile, and perceived by many as a joke. Also perceived was a change of heart. It is hard paint a forty year old smiling fat man as a villian. George Foreman may now be famous for his smile, but he has never been a joke. Foreman posessed a sledge hammer jab, granite chin, dogged determination, and was probably the physically strongest heavyweight champion ever. He looked amateurish at times, but was able to overcome any stylistic shortcomings on most occasions. Before losing his title to Muhammad Ali, he demolished Joe Frazier and Ken Norton. He was involved in one of the greatest heavyweight bouts ever when he knocked out Ron Lyle. He inspired millions when, Foreman age 42, unsuccessfully challenged 29 year old Evander Holyfield for the heavyweight championship. He later went on to become the oldest heavyweight champion in history, 45 years old, when he defeated Michael Moorer. Shannon Briggs found out that a 48 year old Foreman was stil a formidable foe, when he was pummeled and won a disputed decision over him in Foreman's final outing.

5. Rocky Marciano

Marciano had one of the divisions best chins, bone jarring punch, and seemed able to keep coming no matter what.Rocky Marciano's record run of 49 straight wins is, as of this date, still a record. In fact, he never lost as a profesional. You might wonder how a fighter that never lost is not at the top of the list, but his level of competition is what stops him. For the most part, he faced the best he could. Joe Walcott was an excellent fighter, but was 38 years old for their first fight, and 39 in their second. Ezzard Charles may have been the finest light-heavyweight that ever lived, but the smaller man was into his 30's at the time of their fights. Archie Moore is another argument for best light-heavy ever, but was 38 year old out of his division as well. Marciano would probably rank 2 spots higher on this list if he had fought, and defeated (which was possible), Floyd Patterson. If he had faced, and defeated (doubtful), Sonny Liston; he would make an argument for the top spot.

4. Larry Holmes

Larry Holmes tends to be the most underated heavyweight in history. He ranks second in number of consecutive wins, which was 48. He ranks second with his title reign of over 7 years. He also ranks second with number of successful defenses with a more than impressive total of 20. His level of competition was not the best, but he managed to defeat 8 men that held world titles at some point in their careers. Holmes had one of the best jabs ever seen, was an accurate puncher, and was able to pick apart his opponent 69 of the 75 times one was place in front of him. Notable wins came against Ken Norton, Ernie Shavers, Ossie Ocasio, Mike Weaver, Muhammad Ali, Trevor Berbick, Leon Spinks, Gerry Cooney, Tim Witherspoon, James Smith, Carl Williams, and Ray Mercer. Holmes was age 42 when he beat undefeated, 30 year old, Ray Mercer.


3. Jack Johnson

You almost have to rank Jack Johnson highly just on the hell he went through to become champion. It was not easy being black in the early 1900's, and Johnson endured a double dose of hatred. Whites hated Johnson because he was black, and good. Some blacks hated him because he didn't act according to society's standards, and thought that his defiance of the racist majority brought a bad name to all black people. Johnson fought during a time that white fighters could duck black fighters by claiming that they did not believe in fighting people of another race. Johnson had to prove he was the best black heavyweight in the world long before he proved he was simply the best heavyweight. Notable wins came against Sam Langford, Bob Fitzsimmons, Jim Flynn, Tommy Burns, Al Kaufman, Stanly Ketchel, and Jim Jeffries.

2. Joe Louis

Louis may have had the best offensive arsenal in heavyweight history. His power was not that of someone like Mike Tyson, but he could definately hurt you with every punch he hit you with. The closest comparison I can think of at this writing is a heavyweight Julio Cesar Chavez. He has the longest title reign of anyone, over 12 years. He also has more consecutive title defenses than anyone with 26. Notable wins came against Max Baer, Jack Sharkey, James Braddock, Max Schmeling, John Henry Lewis, Billy Conn, and Joe Walcott.

1. Muhammad Ali

Ali may arguably be the most famous athelete ever, but that is not why he ranks at the top of this list. He had a top notch jab, exceptional speed, great chin, a will to win like no other; and he fought during the divisions most competive era. He has the most notable win column of this list with Henry Cooper, Sonny Liston, Floyd Patterson, Ernie Terrell, Zora Folley, Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Ellis, Ken Norton, Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Ron Lyle, and Ernie Shavers.

Note: I just cut and pasted this over from where I had posted it elsewhere. I have since swithched Lewis, and Frazier.
It would now read:
10. Mike Tyson
9. Evander Holyfield
8. Joe Frazier
7. Lennox Lewis
6. George Foreman
5. Rocky Marciano
4. Larry Holmes
3. Jack Johnson
2. Joe Louis
1. Muhammad Ali

[UpWithEvil]

Mike Tyson in the top-10 but no Buster Douglas?

[Dempsey1238]

Well Marciano never face Liston because Liston was in prison at the time, and Liston did not build up a boxing rep. By the time Liston became number 1 contender in 1959, Marciano was WELL into retirement. for about 5 years. Not to mention the Rock would have be nearly 37 or so at the time. If Rocky made a come back vs Liston and lost, I would not hold it against the Rock because 37 is for too old for that the style Marciano applie. I agree a Patterson fight may have happen if Cus was not protection Patterson(He stay clear of a fight with the Rock), But Liston is a bit of a gap imo. It would be like Tyson taking on Kilt or something like that today.

[mr. magoo]

These are irrefutably the greatest of all time

1. James Tillis
2. Steve Zouski
3. Dave Jaco
4. Joe Grim
5. Jack Roper
6. Bobby Crabtree
7. George " scrap iron" Johnson
8. John " big red " Morton
9. Jerry " Wimpy" Halstead
10. Mike " the giant" White

[Bill1234]

These are irrefutably the greatest of all time

1. James Tillis
2. Steve Zouski
3. Dave Jaco
4. Joe Grim
5. Jack Roper
6. Bobby Crabtree
7. George " scrap iron" Johnson
8. John " big red " Morton
9. Jerry " Wimpy" Halstead
10. Mike " the giant" White

What about Butterbean? He is for sure a top 5.

[janitor]

These are irrefutably the greatest of all time

1. James Tillis
2. Steve Zouski
3. Dave Jaco
4. Joe Grim
5. Jack Roper
6. Bobby Crabtree
7. George " scrap iron" Johnson
8. John " big red " Morton
9. Jerry " Wimpy" Halstead
10. Mike " the giant" White

Jack Roper dose not belong on this list. He ocasionaly beat the better fighters of his era which rules him out.

[UpWithEvil]

What about Butterbean? He is for sure a top 5.

He did go the distance with a prime Larry Holmes.

[mr. magoo]

You're an idiot. Jack Roper is way too low. He faced Joe Louis, for Pete's sakes.

I do believe you're correct. How silly of me to give Mr. Roper such a low rating.

[Bill1234]

He did go the distance with a prime Larry Holmes.

Yeah, and knocked him down legit too. He was robbed.

[mr. magoo]

Jack Roper dose not belong on this list. He ocasionaly beat the better fighters of his era which rules him out.

True,

His record was 58-44-10-29, meaning he won about half of his fights. Plus he was Ko'd in the first round on only 7 occasions, which I suppose isn't that many. Therefore, he deserves a far better rating.

[Asterion]

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Larry Holmes
4. Rocky Marciano
5. Lennox Lewis
6. Evander Holyfield
7. Jack Dempsey
8. George Foreman
9. Mike Tyson
10. Joe Frazier

[C. M. Clay II]

He did go the distance with a prime Larry Holmes.

:yep

[McGrain]

Now, you're not saying that Marciano beats Lewis, Foreman, or Tyson, are you?


Have you posted you 10 yet Hank? I bet it would be interesting reading.

[Sweet Science]

Hi. I removed the heavyweights who do not belong in a top ten list and put the correct ranking beside their names. It became a top five list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweet Science
1 Muhammad Ali
3 George Foreman
2 Larry Holmes
4 Sonny Liston
5 Mike Tyson

What does your top ten look like Hank?

[janitor]

True,

His record was 58-44-10-29, meaning he won about half of his fights. Plus he was Ko'd in the first round on only 7 occasions, which I suppose isn't that many. Therefore, he deserves a far better rating.

I know you to be a staunch Jack Roper fan so you will like what I am going to say.

He was a decent fighter.

Like many guys of the era he made his living by consistently fighting guys who were a bit better than him or a lot better. This was not condusive to a prety record. He did however beat some verry good fighters.

If he was fighting today he would be fed a string of tomato cans and the numbers would look good.

[UpWithEvil]

What does your top ten look like Hank?

He actually has Buster Douglas on it twice.

[thunder06]

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Larry Holmes
5. Rocky Marciano
6. Sonny Liston
7. Evander Holyfield
8. George Foreman
9. Joe Frazier
10. Jack Johnson

[ironchamp]

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Rocky Marciano
6. Jim Jeffries
7. George Foreman
8. Mike Tyson
9. Lennox Lewis
10. Jack Dempsey
11. Joe Frazier
12. Evander Holyfield
13. Sonny Liston
14. Joe Walcott
15. Floyd Patterson

[TBooze]

Hello to all I'm new here,

It was suggested that I should post my top 10 as a way to introduce myself and express my opinions and tastes.

Thought I'd select my heavyweight list for now.

Really like to hear other peoples opinions and there picks also.

Anyway here goes:

1 Muhammad Ali

2 Joe Louis

3 George Foreman

4 Jack Dempsey

5 Larry Holmes

6 Sonny Liston

7 Mike Tyson

8 Jack Johnson

9 Archie Moore

10 Ezzard Charles

Welcome, and a 'unique' list, which is no bad thing; mine goes:

30: Tim Whitherspoon
29: Bob Fitzsimmons
28: Jack Sharkey
27: Sam McVey
26: Joe Jeanette
25: Vitali Klitschko
24: Peter Jackson
23: Ken Norton
22: Joe Walcott (Jersey)
21: Gene Tunney
20: Riddick Bowe
19: Floyd Patterson
18: Max Schmeling
17: Ezzard Charles
16: Sammy Langford
15: Harry Wills
14: James Corbett
13: Sonny Liston
12: Joe Frazier
11: Mike Tyson
10: Lennox Lewis
9 James Jeffries
8: Jack Dempsey
7: Rocky Marciano
6: Evander Holyfield
5: Larry Holmes
4: Jack Johnson
3: George Foreman
2: Joe Louis
1: Muhammad Ali

[McGrain]

Ali, Holmes, Foreman, Liston, Tyson, Frazier, M. Spinks, Lewis, Norton, and Holyfield.

No Jeffries?

I take it this is head to head?

[McGrain]

Head to head or in terms of accomplishments Jeffries is nowhere near a proper top 10 list.


But is your list head to head?

BTW, does your disdain for pre-60's fighters extend to other divisions, or is it just a heavyweight thing?

[UpWithEvil]

But is your list head to head?

BTW, does your disdain for pre-60's fighters extend to other divisions, or is it just a heavyweight thing?

I believe he already answered this question under one of his many screen names.

[janitor]

Ali, Holmes, Foreman, Liston, Tyson, Frazier, M. Spinks, Lewis, Norton, and Holyfield.

Some interesting picks to say the least.

Give us your top 20.

[McGrain]

I believe he already answered this question under one of his many screen names.


Is that for sure?

How many does he have?

I understand him feeling like he needs some back up, he does get swamped a lot. Probably as far as some of this patter goes he's not going to get it from somebody who isn't him.

[cross_trainer]

Just add 10 more Ali opponents.

:lol:

[McGrain]

1. Jack Dempsey
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Wladimir Klitschko
4. Rocky Marciano
5. Joe Louis
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Vitaly Klitschko
9. Larry Holmes
10. Evander Holyfield
11. Jack Johnson
12. James J Jeffries
13. Mike Tyson
14. Sonny Liston
15. Joe Frazier
16. Gene Tunney
17. James J Corbett
18. Bob Fitzsimmons
19. Jersey Joe Walcott
20. Ezzard Charles


This is an interesting list. What is it based on? First glance told me head to head but you have Tyson and Liston to low - but if it's achievment or resume why are the Klitschko's so high?

[Bummy Davis]

1)Joe Louis
2)Rocky Marciano
3)Ali
4)Dempsey
5)Frazier
6)Foreman
7)Tunney
8)Jeffries+Johnson
9)Walcott and Charles
10 Lewis,Tyson,Holmes,Holyfield
11)Schmeling,Baer,Liston

[McGrain]

1)Joe Louis
2)Rocky Marciano
3)Ali
4)Dempsey
5)Frazier
6)Foreman
7)Tunney
8)Jeffries+Johnson
9)Walcott and Charles
10 Lewis,Tyson,Holmes,Holyfield
11)Schmeling,Baer,Liston

18 squeezed into 11 is impressive!

I think the standout here is Rocky above Ali - how so?

I'd also be interested to hear what leads you to place Tunney above Johnson on a heavyweight list?

[McGrain]

. I think Tyson and Liston were great fighters. But to put them in same category as men like Dempsey, Ali, Klitschko, Louis, Lewis, Holmes, Foreman - would be a travesty. Tyson and Liston had flawed careers and were classic bullies. Holyfield backed Tyson down in their two fights. Ali took Liston's mystique away for good.

I think they were definitely not nice people - not great men, perhaps is a better way to put it - in the way the other fighters you've mentioned may have been. But why hold Tyson's twilight losses and Liston's controversial defeats against them, but not Ali's twilight losses agains him? From a boxing point of view?

[McGrain]

Flabby Gut, get lost. Go to the General Boxing forum where the other Klitschko dicklickers hang out. You don't belong here. Faggot.

He's a fine poster. WOEFULLY inaccurate regarding his opinions of the Kllitshko's, granted, but he tosses up some good posts.

[mr. magoo]

If he was fighting today he would be fed a string of tomato cans and the numbers would look good.



Indeed,

His losses to Eddie Sims ( 22-21-4 ) , Eddie Wenstob ( 11-5-2 ), and Art Sykes ( 10-12 ) are clear indications, that your projections are right on target for how he'd do in a modern era. What's more, I'm going to expand upon that even further by saying that it was lucky for Ali, Frazier, and Foreman, that Jack Roper wasn't fighting during the 70's, or none of those guys would have gotten a sniff of the title...:good

[UpWithEvil]

You kids need to meet by the bike racks after school. No teachers.

But why hold Tyson's twilight losses and Liston's controversial defeats against them, but not Ali's twilight losses agains him?
Does Buster Douglas count as a "twilight loss" for Tyson? He was 30 when he faced Holyfield for the first time - twilight?

[Bummy Davis]

18 squeezed into 11 is impressive!

I think the standout here is Rocky above Ali - how so?

I'd also be interested to hear what leads you to place Tunney above Johnson on a heavyweight list?


I think Marciano had a great prime and got out while still in it, he was the best conditioned over 15 rds and had late power and what a lot of people see as awkwarkness was Marciano's way of breaking a fighters rythym, and also hit you everywhere. Ali was great against the slow giants but lost to Frazier in his prime, he also struggled with smaller men,Jones188,Cooper185lbs,Frazier204lbsSpinks. I used to rate Jeffries and Johnson higher but I think Dempsey was the first Modern champion and had well over 20-30 fights when he won the title, Tunney had a short prime as Heavy but he beat some good fighters on the way up and his victory over Dempsey twice was impressive and Dempsey still had lots of power(his KO over Sharkey) Tunney had fast hands and feet( close second to Ali(Patterson had fastest hands) Maturity is a good thing in the ring but a fighter's weaknesses become transparent the older he gets, Tunney, Marciano got out in there prime and I give them points for not coming back, Jeffries lost points for coming back even after 6 years off and losing 100lbs at the age of 36 it was a bad mistake, Johnson gets a lot of credit for beating Jeffries and Middleweight Ketchel after being floored and Dempsey gets critisized for not fighting Blacks but Johnson did not fight them either after becoming champ because they were not $$$$$ fights.

[mr. magoo]

You are about as lethal as week old lettuce. Also, for your info threatening to kill someone like you did earlier to me has a name. It is called making terroristic threats. Think about it when you are in the prison shower and you drop the soap. The only lesson you can teach anyone is how to put a condom on a carrot. You are a typical loudmouth trashtalking modern american dickhead. That is why you feel threatened when you see eastern european slavs like the Klitschkos, Povetkin, Ibragonov, etc. beating up your beloved fellow loudmouth trashtalkers. Being loud, profane, homophobic, moronic like you is not tough. It just proves that you are a nobody and no one gives a hoot about the vomit you puke onto these forums. You are also stupid and could easily end up in legal trouble if you threaten to kill people.


Excuse me for throwing in my two cents Flabby gut. I realize that this is none of my business, and in all honesty I should probably stay out of it, but I can't help but make a few things clear here. Although, Prime Frazier started this whole thing by opening his mouth and calling you a faggot or whatever, YOU'RE the one, who then suggested that you two guys meet, and throw down. Therefore, it was technically you who brought implied violence into the picture. What's more, your despute is between you and Prime Frazier alone, meaning that all the generalizations reguarding Americans being loud mouth, homophobic, profane, morons are not exactly appreciated by some of the rest of us here....

The fact is, you both are pissed at one another right now, and the likelyhood that either of you will ever meet and trade fists is remote. That being said, why don't we just enjoy the forum for what it was meant to be, and not step on each others toes.....

........Peace........

P.S. Frazier if you're reading this, it would show great character on your part to put this thing to rest and appologize to flabby gut. In all fairness, you really had no right calling him names, when he did nothing to provoke you.....

-Magoo-

[JohnThomas1]

Excuse me for throwing in my two cents Flabby gut. I realize that this is none of my business, and in all honesty I should probably stay out of it, but I can't help but make a few things clear here. Although, Prime Frazier started this whole thing by opening his mouth and calling you a faggot or whatever, YOU'RE the one, who then suggested that you two guys meet, and throw down. Therefore, it was technically you who brought implied violence into the picture. What's more, your despute is between you and Prime Frazier alone, meaning that all the generalizations reguarding Americans being loud mouth, homophobic, profane, morons are not exactly appreciated by some of the rest of us here....

The fact is, you both are pissed at one another right now, and the likelyhood that either of you will ever meet and trade fists is remote. That being said, why don't we just enjoy the forum for what it was meant to be, and not step on each others toes.....

........Peace........

P.S. Frazier if you're reading this, it would show great character on your part to put this thing to rest and appologize to flabby gut. In all fairness, you really had no right calling him names, when he did nothing to provoke you.....

-Magoo-

Pretty decent post mate. Flabby wanted to meet and is now crying wolf.

Anyways, either kiss and make up or meet and give us the youtube link!

:D

[mr. magoo]

Pretty decent post mate. Flabby wanted to meet and is now crying wolf.

Anyways, either kiss and make up or meet and give us the youtube link!

:D

As always,

I appreciate your humor mate. But, let's try not to instigate the situation. lately, we've had a lot of hot heads on the forum, and although I'll admit to being guilty at times myself, it's time to try and behave ourselves. ;)

[JohnThomas1]

As always,

I appreciate your humor mate. But, let's try not to instigate the situation. lately, we've had a lot of hot heads on the forum, and although I'll admit to being guilty at times myself, it's time to try and behave ourselves. ;)

Instigation, or humourisation?

;)

[mr. magoo]

Instigation, or humourisation?

;)

How about Pinklonization, or a Witherspoonerism

[JohnThomas1]

How about Pinklonization, or a Witherspoonerism

LOL!

[McGrain]

Ali did not quit on his stool like Tyson did. He never bit anyone or tried to break anyone's arm.


Never seen anyone put so much emphasis on conduct when composing their lists. Interesting.

I see they ripped all Prime Frazier Did Beat Pr's posts of the thread. Lucky you and I were quoting them, for prosperities sake like. Did he get banned?

[McGrain]

It's not disdain. It's observation.

But your observation results in disdain, no?

[Ramon Rojo]

1. Muhammad Ali

2. Mike Tyson

3. George Foreman

4. Sonny Liston

5. Lennox Lewis

6. Larry Holmes

7. Joe Frazier

8. Ken Norton

9. Joe Louis

10. Ezzard Charles

[McGrain]

8. Ken Norton

9. Joe Louis


Norton above Louis is an interesting one. Care to comment?

[JohnThomas1]

1. Muhammad Ali

2. Mike Tyson

3. George Foreman

4. Sonny Liston

5. Lennox Lewis

6. Larry Holmes

7. Joe Frazier

8. Ken Norton

9. Joe Louis

10. Ezzard Charles

Apart from the placement of Tyson, Foreman, Liston, Norton, Louis and Charles that's a great list

:good

[Ramon Rojo]

Norton above Louis is an interesting one. Care to comment?

I believe Norton would do well head to head with Louis.

Louis´s achievements are better of course.

It always depends what criterias you use when making these lists.

[McGrain]

It always depends what criterias you use when making these lists.


Yeah, i am quite heavily into head to head.

Wouldn't give Norton a snowballs chance in hell v Louis myself! Though you never know.

[Ramon Rojo]

Yeah, i am quite heavily into head to head.

Wouldn't give Norton a snowballs chance in hell v Louis myself! Though you never know.

Norton´s win over Ali didn´t impress you?

[McGrain]

Norton´s win over Ali didn´t impress you?


Very much. I rate Norton, a very good fighter. But with Louis he'd find himself in with a guy properly designed to knock him out. A guy who would be hitting him very hard and accuratley from round one. Norton's chin may be hard to come by but Louis doesn't need to hit a man on the chin to knock him down, and he was a fine finisher.

[janitor]

1. Muhammad Ali

2. Mike Tyson

3. George Foreman

4. Sonny Liston

5. Lennox Lewis

6. Larry Holmes

7. Joe Frazier

8. Ken Norton

9. Joe Louis

10. Ezzard Charles

To say that this list is awfull would be an insult to other people with awfull lists.

[McGrain]

To say that this list is awfull would be an insult to other people with awfull lists.


Why so hard on this one? Louis is to low, Norton and Charles are too high but a case could be made for every fighter in every other placing.

These guys that are missing might be at 11, 12 etc.

[janitor]

Why so hard on this one? Louis is to low, Norton and Charles are too high but a case could be made for every fighter in every other placing.

These guys that are missing might be at 11, 12 etc.

I am sorry but anybody who has Norton over Louis should be horse whipped, covered in treacle and rolled in a heap of coal dust.

[JohnThomas1]

Never seen anyone put so much emphasis on conduct when composing their lists. Interesting.

I see they ripped all Prime Frazier Did Beat Pr's posts of the thread. Lucky you and I were quoting them, for prosperities sake like. Did he get banned?

Looks like they banned him. Interesting.

[McGrain]

I am sorry but anybody who has Norton over Louis should be horse whipped, covered in treacle and rolled in a heap of coal dust.


Education education education! Not whipping.

I think it's an OK list, apart from this strange error.

[McGrain]

Looks like they banned him. Interesting.

Well he did threatened to do murder!

The one drawback to ESB as opposed to a boozer - threatening to kill someone actually has consequences :lol:

I was live for that mad exchange and you could see it spiralling out of control. Just out of nothing.

[McGrain]

I'm pleased that list is quoted after mine. Lewis at 3 has NOTHING on Louis at 9!

:lol:

Yes, you're probably safe.

[Luigi1985]

To say that this list is awfull would be an insult to other people with awfull lists.


Completely agreed, now we have definitely another forum clown...

[janitor]

Education education education! Not whipping.


Tony Blair tried that aproach and look where it got him.

[McGrain]

Tony Blair tried that aproach and look where it got him.

:lol:

Yeah, if he'd gone for the whipping the whole country would be VERY different.

[mr. magoo]

You are absolutely right. Instead of ignoring him I reacted to his insults. I want to say sorry that your great debate about the best heavys of alltime got interupted by the trash me and that guy put here. I'm willing to apologize to him and all of you. Love is too short to go around having enemies. Especially for something like this that is supposed to be fun. I am sorry I made generalizations about americans. That was nonsense on my part. I know there are a lot of really intelligent guys on here (like you Magoo). I am going to read more and post less so I can actually learn something about boxing history. I just admire the way the europeans let their fists do the talking. That's why I prefer guys like Klitschko, Ricky Hatton, Ibraginov, Povetkin, etc. They are throwbacks to when fighters had class. Guys like Marciano, Basilio, Fullmer, Louis, Patterson, Charles, Walcott. Cotto and Mosley are modern fighters who are throwbacks in that sense. They let their fists do the talking, have class, and provide way more exciting fights than hotdogs like Maywhether and Roy Jones Jr.

No Worrys.....Peace......:good

[JohnThomas1]

Nah man I ain't crying wolf. I realized I was dealing with a hysterical hothead when the dude threatened to kill me. In my day people could settle disputes with a simple fistfight. Now people really do kill eachother with guns in many cases. I don't want to start another feud so I'll end with this.

Fair enough mate. Personally i think he was assing about a bit but yeah he made the statement.

[groove]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Liston
4. Foreman
5. Lewis
6. Dempsey
7. Holmes
8. Frazier
9. Tyson
10. Marciano
11. Johnson
12. Holyfield

I don't know how anyone can pick Ezzard Charles or Walcott as top 10. I rate them around the 15 to 20 mark. Where do you rate these fighters?

[JohnThomas1]

Thanks John. Excuse me again please, "Yes mom I said I know my room's a mess! No that guy is not going to kick my a** now. I WAS NOT LOOKING AT PORN! This site is called eastsideboxing. Why don't you believe me now? That hot chick is in that guy's avatar. It is called an avatar ma. Come on mom you are embarrassing the heck out of me. There are people from america, europe, australia on here and you are making a fool out of me in front of them. Why have I never had a date in my life? Because you you have imbued me with such a high self-esteem. Of course I'm being sarcastic." Sorry about that. I hope that big, mean guy doesn't find out where I live. Its okay cause' I'll get my mom to beat him up for me.

:lol:

Just watch out for that Viciousboxer77 or whatever his name is character from gen, man have you seen that guy spar! Hate to meet him on the street corner! :yikes

I'd better do a top 10 soon

:smoke

[Asterion]

( John Thomas: Where do you get all those avatars? )

[JohnThomas1]

( John Thomas: Where do you get all those avatars? )
That one was from my bathroom

:devil

:hey

[JohnThomas1]

Great! I have an idea. Maybe I can pay Viciousboxer77 to fight Prime Frazier really DID beat Pr for me? He can just say he's me and my worries are over. This kid has it. I don't exactly know what IT is but this dude is a phenom. I'm going to ask Vicious what he thinks about this machivellian scheme.

If Prime Frazier is under 6 years old then he's gonna get whupped!

[JohnThomas1]

My revised top twenty heavyweights orf all-time:

1. Viciousboxer77
2. Duane Bobbick
3. Leroy Jones
4. Joe Louis
5. Lorenzo Boyd
6. "Fearless" Frankie Swindell or Frankie "the Tennesse Stud" Swindell
7. Brian Yates
8. Courage Tsabadsllala
9. John Basil Jackson
10. Brian "Mister" Sargent
11. Rocky Pepeli
12. Bobby Hitz
13. Frank Lux
14. Tom Trimm
15. Carleton West
16. Mike Tyson
17. Jack Dempsey
18. Richard Dunn
19. Peter McNeely
20. Dave Jaco

LOL! I hope you find room for that guy Vicious was sparring, i mean schooling :lol:

[dmt]

:lol:

[JohnThomas1]

You're selling Vicious short. With a comprehensive training camp and plenty of sparring he can beat Prime Frazier. After his victory I'm going to reward him with a memorable night on the town in AC. Since I'm too young to gamble his conditions are I have to take him to Applebees for a huge celebatory feast and then buy him a pair of hightops from the Reebok store. It looks like it is a go if Prime Frazier's financial terms can be met. This is going to be bigger than Kimbo Slice and Mercer!

Hahahaha, how can one not chuckle! Personally i love the way Vicious tries to look like Roy Jones, unless my vision is very skewed!

[mr. magoo]

That one was from my bathroom

:devil

:hey

Bullshyte, I don't believe that beauty was ever in your bathroom. My avator was teken in my office mate. :good

[JohnThomas1]

Bullshyte, I don't believe that beauty was ever in your bathroom. My avator was teken in my office mate. :good

Hahahaha, nice orifice you have!

[Doppleganger]

Hahahaha, nice orifice you have!

I think JT was asking did you take her up the office? :p

[JohnThomas1]

I think JT was asking did you take her up the office? :p
:lol:

8====D------

[Muchmoore]

1. Ali
2. Tyson
3. Louis
4. Holmes
5. Liston
6. Marciano
7. Lewis
8. Foreman
9. Dempsey
10. Johnson

7-10 change in order a lot.

[Zakman]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Dempsey
4. Foreman
5. Holmes
6. Marciano
7. Holyfield
8. Johnson
9. Liston
10. Frazier
11. Tyson
12. Jeffries
13. Lewis
14. Walcott
15. Charles
16. Bowe
17. Tunney
18. Schmeling
19. Corbett
20. Baer

[mr. magoo]

Hahahaha, nice orifice you have!

LOL.....

Thanks for the compliment mate...

In the future, you should cover yourself better when using public restrooms..

[Bill1234]

1)Joe Louis
2)Rocky Marciano
3)Ali
4)Dempsey
5)Frazier
6)Foreman
7)Tunney
8)Jeffries+Johnson
9)Walcott and Charles
10 Lewis,Tyson,Holmes,Holyfield
11)Schmeling,Baer,Liston

Reasoning for having Holmes so low, and Frazier and Tunney so high?

[mr. magoo]

Reasoning for having Holmes so low, and Frazier and Tunney so high?


It's all a matter of opinion Bill... Everyone has a different list. There's no reason to get excited about it.

[JohnThomas1]

LOL.....

Thanks for the compliment mate...

In the future, you should cover yourself better when using public restrooms..

Hey, if she wants to lather me with honey who was i to decline. No better cover than that

:D

[Bill1234]

It's all a matter of opinion Bill... Everyone has a different list. There's no reason to get excited about it.

I'm not, I just want to know why he chose to put them ahead of him.

[JohnThomas1]

I'm not, I just want to know why he chose to put them ahead of him.

He probably rates them higher i'd say. He's already told you he doesn't think much of Larry and his reign.

[Bummy Davis]

Reasoning for having Holmes so low, and Frazier and Tunney so high?

I am pretty fixed on my top 4 but the rest can change depended on the films and focus that are fresh in my mind, I do think highly of Tunney because of his two wins over Dempsey, the long count getting up and dropping Jack but Tunney had speed of hand and foot up there with Ali, and Dempsey was still dangerous,also Tunney got out when on top and stayed out.( I heard a lot of story's about Tunney from my grandfather when I was a kid and Tunney was a master boxer and a tough guy and a classy boxer) As far as Frazier I rate him on the night of Ali one and mostly everything leading up to that night, he was never the same after the fame but on that night he beat Ali decisively, so if I rate Ali so high I got to give Frazier some props(on that night he could have fought anyone) Holmes,Tyson,Holyfield,Lewis....I got to sort that out, its a matter of weighing out the strength and weaknesses, I thought I gave Larry a high rating and Walcott also but on the night he fought Louis and the night he fought Marciano, he could have upset anyone or almost upset anyone. Walcott was eratic, hot and cold but on a good night he was a master, and he could crack with either hand

[Bill1234]

I am pretty fixed on my top 4 but the rest can change depended on the films and focus that are fresh in my mind, I do think highly of Tunney because of his two wins over Dempsey, the long count getting up and dropping Jack but Tunney had speed of hand and foot up there with Ali, and Dempsey was still dangerous,also Tunney got out when on top and stayed out.( I heard a lot of story's about Tunney from my grandfather when I was a kid and Tunney was a master boxer and a tough guy and a classy boxer) As far as Frazier I rate him on the night of Ali one and mostly everything leading up to that night, he was never the same after the fame but on that night he beat Ali decisively, so if I rate Ali so high I got to give Frazier some props(on that night he could have fought anyone) Holmes,Tyson,Holyfield,Lewis....I got to sort that out, its a matter of weighing out the strength and weaknesses, I thought I gave Larry a high rating and Walcott also but on the night he fought Louis and the night he fought Marciano, he could have upset anyone or almost upset anyone. Walcott was eratic, hot and cold but on a good night he was a master, and he could crack with either hand


IMO you shouldn't rate by 1 night. That would ranking Tyson only up to his win over Spinks, or Holmes only up to his win over Cooney. I understand your reasoning with rating Frazier high because of that night he beat Ali, but what about the other 3? Manila was a huge legacy fight.

[Bill1234]

He probably rates them higher i'd say. He's already told you he doesn't think much of Larry and his reign.

You know damn well what I meant. Its pretty obvious you don't like me, and you just feel like being a prick.

[JohnThomas1]

You know damn well what I meant. Its pretty obvious you don't like me, and you just feel like being a prick.

I've been asked by a fine member of the forum to go easy on you due to your age and fanboy upbringing so i'll leave it at that

:good

[Bill1234]

I've been asked by a fine member of the forum to go easy on you due to your age and fanboy upbringing so i'll leave it at that

:good

Who was this fine member? Forget about the age too.

[Sizzle]

Ali
Louis
Marciano
Liston
Tyson
Johnson
Foreman
Lewis
Holyfield
Frazier

(Holmes would be next)

[Bummy Davis]

IMO you shouldn't rate by 1 night. That would ranking Tyson only up to his win over Spinks, or Holmes only up to his win over Cooney. I understand your reasoning with rating Frazier high because of that night he beat Ali, but what about the other 3? Manila was a huge legacy fight.


They were all good close fights and Ali walked out of those fights in slightly higher standing than Frazier but Frazier was not the same guy as Ali 1. I do consider Frazier vs Bonavena,Quarry,Ellis,Ramos,Mathis,Machen prior to Ali 1. Tyson was on his way but his mental weakness and the wrong influence derailed him and he dropped from what he could have been to what he became (never got off the floor to win and kind of quit when the going got rough) You know how I feel about Holmes not fighting the best of his era. again I thought highly of Frazier before the Ali fight but he cemented himself as a real good fighter the night of Ali 1, Frazier got sudden fame during the build up and after the win, he was partying with broads, music and everything else and was never the same but that night in the Garden he was in his prime and he beat a prime Ali. As far as Louis, Marciano the both got off the floor to win, fought the best of there time. Ali is top 4 because of him fighting the best of his era's and handling his business. I might be rating Frazier too high but do I move Foreman up to 5, its hard because a young version was beatable, great power but beatable(lacking stamina) many of the top 10 guys could have beaten the young Foreman, the older version was smarter and paced himself but Prime versions of the top 10 could have beaten him too

[robert ungurean]

1 Ali
2 Holmes
3 Dempsey
4 Louis
5 Tunney
6 Liston
7 Johnson
8 Foreman
9 Jeffries
10 Marciano

[Sonny's jab]

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Leoniv Klitschko
4. Ygor Klitschko
5. Vasily Klitschko
6. Boris Klitschko
7. Yuri Klitschko
8. Klit-bangers Red Hot
9. General Forum
10. Gay

[mr. magoo]

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Leoniv Klitschko
4. Ygor Klitschko
5. Vasily Klitschko
6. Boris Klitschko
7. Yuri Klitschko
8. Klit-bangers Red Hot
9. General Forum
10. Gay

This is probably the best list, I have so far seen. I can't imagine why anyone would have bums like Ali, Holmes, Foreman, Frazier, Maciano or louis on them. Pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

I have already constructed a list earlier on this thread, but would like to revise it, given that I firmly believe the following to be the greatest heavyweights ever...

1. Bob Stallings.
2. Walter Santamore
3. Dave Jaco
4. Jack Roper
5. John Morton
6. George " Scrap Iron" Johnson
7. Danny Sutton
8. Rick Keller
9. Joe Grimm
10. Bobby Crabtree

[timmers612]

Janitor, your list is the most interesting to think about. A question mark is Langford in that Wills won all but two of their bouts, those two ko losses to Sam, and he and others felt even in those two he was in command until the one punch ko's. He also stopped Sam. Your thoughts?

[timmers612]

Mr magoo, now now, how could you leave off Ron Stander

[janitor]

Janitor, your list is the most interesting to think about. A question mark is Langford in that Wills won all but two of their bouts, those two ko losses to Sam, and he and others felt even in those two he was in command until the one punch ko's. He also stopped Sam. Your thoughts?

A fair observation.

I don't think that it is fair to say that Langford lost all but two of their fights at least six of them being NCs.

I think that Langford was starting to slip when he met Wills for the first time and was shot by some of their later fights. I also think that he beat better versions of Jeanette and McVea. I am also more impressed with Langford as an all round package.

Having said that I have no problem with anybody who puts Wills over Langford.

[Senya13]

3. Leoniv Klitschko
It's spelled Leonid :)

[Holmes' Jab]

Hello to all I'm new here,

It was suggested that I should post my top 10 as a way to introduce myself and express my opinions and tastes.

Thought I'd select my heavyweight list for now.

Really like to hear other peoples opinions and there picks also.

Anyway here goes:

1 Muhammad Ali

2 Joe Louis

3 George Foreman

4 Jack Dempsey

5 Larry Holmes

6 Sonny Liston

7 Mike Tyson

8 Jack Johnson

9 Archie Moore

10 Ezzard Charles

Welcome to the ESB forums mate, may you stay be a long and enjoyable one.:good

Yeah your list is pretty good- a fair proportion of those guys would feature in my top 10. Charles and Moore were genuinely great fighters, however I personally think they warrant a Top 10 placing based on resume, legacy and "absolute greatness" from a HW perspective. Lennox Lewis is definitely in my Top 10 (ditto Holyfield) whilst Foreman and Johnson don't quite make it (I rate Jeffries ahead of JJ- am prob among a minority in that respect)

I think Tyson is perhaps a wee bit high, though I too have him at the tail end of my list. All 'bout the opinions though hence the reason why forums exist.


1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali/Larry Holmes (can't separate these guys)
4. Rocky Marciano (headto-head he'd be quite a bit lower, however his career record puts him this high)
5. Lennox Lewis
6. Joe Frazier
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Evander Holyfield
9. Mike Tyson
10. Sonny Liston

Nothing I love more than a healthy debate, so feel free to discect and evaluate as you so wish? :good

[Ramon Rojo]

1. Richel Hersisia

2. Fabio Moli

3. Kimbo Slice

4. Tony Halme

5. Tommy Burns

6. Ross Purrity

7. Garing Lane

8. Yacine Kingbo

9. Agustin Corpus

10. Patrick Freeman

[Holmes' Jab]

No way jose could anyone ever lay a glove on a prime-time Agustin Corpus, it just ain't 'appening ;)

:rofl :rofl

[janitor]

1. Richel Hersisia

2. Fabio Moli

3. Kimbo Slice

4. Tony Halme

5. Tommy Burns

6. Ross Purrity

7. Garing Lane

8. Yacine Kingbo

9. Agustin Corpus

10. Patrick Freeman

What has poor Tommy Burns don to be lumped with these guys?

[McGrain]

Anyway:

1) Ali
2) Louis
3) Liston
4) Johnson
5) Lewis
6) Jeffries
7) Frazier
8) Hollyfield
9) Holmes
10) Tyson

I just moved Tyson up from #10 to #11. Foreman was the victim.

[heerko koois]

1- Mike Tyson
2- Larry Holmes
3- Rocky Marciano
4- Evander Holyfield
5- George Foreman
6- M ali/ Clay
7- Joe louis
8- Max Baer
9- Tim Whitherspoon
10- Lennox Lewis

[Sweet Science]

1- Mike Tyson
2- Larry Holmes
3- Rocky Marciano
4- Evander Holyfield
5- George Foreman
6- M ali/ Clay
7- Joe louis
8- Max Baer
9- Tim Whitherspoon
10- Lennox Lewis

Hi Heerko, I'm keen to know why you rank Tim Witherspoon and Max Baer in your top ten? Also that must be the lowest I've seen Ali on anyones list, I'm not dissin' your list or anything i just wouldnt mind hearing your argument for those choices.

[Sweet Science]

Welcome to the ESB forums mate, may you stay be a long and enjoyable one.

Thanks mate much appreciated.

Holmes' Jab, What would your head to head list look like?

[C. M. Clay II]

1- Mike Tyson
2- Larry Holmes
3- Rocky Marciano
4- Evander Holyfield
5- George Foreman
6- M ali/ Clay
7- Joe louis
8- Max Baer
9- Tim Whitherspoon
10- Lennox Lewis

:nut

[heerko koois]

:nut

Prime tyson would have been way too strong for Ali .......:bbb
Ali almost got ko,d by a left hook from Frazier !!
Clay almost got ko,d by a left hook from Cooper....
Ali got hammered by Holmes.......
Ali lost to the limited Leon Spinks....
Ali lost to Berbick ......
Ali lost bigtime to Norton......

Face it he was / is way overrated...............:hi:

[mr. magoo]

Prime tyson would have been way too strong for Ali .......:bbb
Ali almost got ko,d by a left hook from Frazier !!
Clay almost got ko,d by a left hook from Cooper....
Ali got hammered by Holmes.......
Ali lost to the limited Leon Spinks....
Ali lost to Berbick ......
Ali lost bigtime to Norton......

Face it he was / is way overrated...............:hi:

I'm sorry Heerko, but none of these, are very good reasons for justifying your list. Ali getting dropped by Frazier, after a near 4 year layoff, plus getting floored by a seasoned Henry Cooper when he was 20 years old, does not say much for what Tyson would or wouldn't do to him. Ali getting beat by Holmes is meaningless, given that he was 38 years old, and hadn't fought in two years. What's more, Holmes is rated higher by many than Tyson is.

Ali is commonly rated higher than most fighters, due to his legacy and accomplishments, and not necessarily how he'd do against fighters head to head. Although Tyson had an outstanding career, particularly in his earlier days, Ali's accomplishments vastly outway anything that Tyson ever did.

[Sweet Science]

Prime tyson would have been way too strong for Ali .......
Ali almost got ko,d by a left hook from Frazier !!
Clay almost got ko,d by a left hook from Cooper....
Ali got hammered by Holmes.......
Ali lost to the limited Leon Spinks....
Ali lost to Berbick ......
Ali lost bigtime to Norton......

Face it he was / is way overrated...............

Please tell me you've been smoking crack!

I rate a prime Tyson higher than most people, however, theres no way he would have beaten Ali and to claim Ali is way overrated is just absurd.

Questioning his chin is just plain crazy, Ali had the best chin in heavyweight history. Furthermore, his ability to recouperate when hurt was simply astounding. I can't think of a heavyweight who fought better quality opposition throughtout his career. Ali would beat every heavyweight who ever lived head to head.

[Bummy Davis]

I respect all opinions and like to hear them because its always hard to see the big picture, In regard to Ali a lot of fighters were unknown until he fought them and when they beat him they became stars. Ali was the greatest to the non boxing fan but many feel he lost to Young,Norton, and a lot of his fights were stopped quick. I lived the era and Foreman was a young powerhouse but in there with a fighter who could survive the early rounds he was exposed, Lyle was never a power puncher but exposed a few of George's weakness and so did Young, Ali got the major credit. One thing I will say about Ali is that he delt with a lot of different stlyles and other than Joe Louis he fought the best variety, both men had there weakness but most of the time found a way to win but a lot of Ali's opponents were overated

[Holmes' Jab]

Thanks mate much appreciated.

Holmes' Jab, What would your head to head list look like?

No prob.

Head-to-head list? Well, it's perhaps someway different to my ATG list. I'd say it would look something like this:

1. Larry Holmes
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Sonny Liston
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Joe Louis
6. Mike Tyson
7. Jack Johnson
8. Rocky Marciano
9. Joe Frazier
10. George Foreman

[jyuza]

Prime tyson would have been way too strong for Ali .......:bbb
Ali almost got ko,d by a left hook from Frazier !!
Clay almost got ko,d by a left hook from Cooper....
Ali got hammered by Holmes.......
Ali lost to the limited Leon Spinks....
Ali lost to Berbick ......
Ali lost bigtime to Norton......

Face it he was / is way overrated...............:hi:

What Ali showed in the Frazier fight was inhuman. That left hook would have decapited any other heavyweight but Ali stood up and fought back.

So I still rank Ali as the best heavyweight ever.

[jyuza]

No prob.

Head-to-head list? Well, it's perhaps someway different to my ATG list. I'd say it would look something like this:

1. Larry Holmes
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Sonny Liston
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Joe Louis
6. Mike Tyson
7. Jack Johnson
8. Rocky Marciano
9. Joe Frazier
10. George Foreman

Joe Louis behind Lewis ?

You do remember Lewis got KO'd by Mc Call and Rahman do you ?

[Sweet Science]

No prob.

Head-to-head list? Well, it's perhaps someway different to my ATG list. I'd say it would look something like this:

1. Larry Holmes
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Sonny Liston
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Joe Louis
6. Mike Tyson
7. Jack Johnson
8. Rocky Marciano
9. Joe Frazier
10. George Foreman

Thanks for getting back to me Holmes' Jab.

Thats a very interesting Head2Head list.
I feel Holmes is aways underrated and his skills not fully appreciated by non purists as they don't think he was as exciting as some etc. But kind of like Hopkins he did everything very well. I do disagree with him beating Ali, though I feel it would have been an extremely close and maybe somewhat technical fight. With Ali prevailing mainly due to his speed. However, there is no doubt the Jab of Holmes would have caused Ali problems.

[Holmes' Jab]

Joe Louis behind Lewis ?

You do remember Lewis got KO'd by Mc Call and Rahman do you ?

Louis is higher all time, however I think Lewis matches up better against more fighters regarding head-to-head combat. At his best (this being the key point)

The McCall punch was a good'un and though Lennox was on shaky legs he was, perhaps, hard done by not being allowed to continue. Rahman I defeat was a case of being out of shape, arrogantly overconfident and underestimating his opponent- a rare off night. Head-to-head is surely the best version of each respective fighter? No?

[jyuza]

Louis is higher all time, however I think Lewis matches up better against more fighters regarding head-to-head combat. At his best (this being the key point)

The McCall punch was a good'un and though Lennox was on shaky legs he was, perhaps, hard done by not being allowed to continue. Rahman I defeat was a case of being out of shape, arrogantly overconfident and underestimating his opponent- a rare off night. Head-to-head is surely the best version of each respective fighter? No?

Oh you were talking about skills ? No problem with that :good

[Swedish81]

Originally Posted by heerko koois
Prime tyson would have been way too strong for Ali .......:bbb
Ali almost got ko,d by a left hook from Frazier !!
Clay almost got ko,d by a left hook from Cooper....
Ali got hammered by Holmes.......
Ali lost to the limited Leon Spinks....
Ali lost to Berbick ......
Ali lost bigtime to Norton......

Face it he was / is way overrated...............:hi:

Your arguments are terrible. First of all, Ali was old and sick vs Holmes and Berbick so those fights doesn't count. It's not fair, that's it.
He was starting to get sick agains Spinks and he strongly underestimated him which of course he only had himself to blame but he beat him easily in the rematch.
"Ali lost bigtime to Norton" Yeah he lost, but you poured a little too much sauce on the taco. Bigtime :rofl

I don't know what you mean with almost. Almost got Ko'ed, almost this and almost that. You can make an argument that he ALMOST got knocked out but it's very weak because he didn't got knocked out, that's a fact.
That is what being great is all about. Name as many fighters as you can who would've got up from Fraziers left hook, it's not many.

[Irish Steel]

Hi IM new here too, so i thought this wouldbe my first post in this thread.


My list is 40% Record 40% achievements, and 20% head to head




1. Jack Dempsy. I have him here at number one because he practically 'paved the path' for heavyweight boxing, and pretty much changed the way we look at boxing today. He was a great athlete, and he IMO, is the first boxer to use a style that resembled ours. With great handspeed, and footwork, power, and agility, he was a force to be reckoned with.


2. Rocky Marciano. (bare with me, because i think that this seems like an anti marciano forum) He has an amazing record, and is one that most likely wont be beaten. I also rate him this high because he had a great chin, mixed with superb power. And I think head to head, can defeat just about any heavy weight in history.


3. Joe Louis.



4. Gene Tunney


5. Ali- Before I spark an outrage, let me explain why. I personally think he is outrageously over rated. But none the less, is still a very great heavyweight. He didnt have an exceptionally great record, and i think head to head can be beaten my a fair amout of boxers. But his achievemnets were amaziong, dont get me wrong.


6. Lewis



7. Jeffries. An amazing athlete. Escpecially in his time period. If he was that great years agoi, when training, and medicine werent great, he would be a super man with todays technology. Head to head, i rate him higher almost everyone.



8. Holyfield-Holmes


9. Frazier-Foreman


10. Tyson. Youngest Champ ever. An all around great boxer, could have been one of the best. I believe he lost his edge during the bruno fight. IM not sure whether it wasnt a great style matchup or training issues, but he didnt beat bruno like he beat everyone else.

[C. M. Clay II]

Hi IM new here too, so i thought this wouldbe my first post in this thread.


My list is 40% Record 40% achievements, and 20% head to head




1. Jack Dempsy. I have him here at number one because he practically 'paved the path' for heavyweight boxing, and pretty much changed the way we look at boxing today. He was a great athlete, and he IMO, is the first boxer to use a style that resembled ours. With great handspeed, and footwork, power, and agility, he was a force to be reckoned with.


2. Rocky Marciano. (bare with me, because i think that this seems like an anti marciano forum) He has an amazing record, and is one that most likely wont be beaten. I also rate him this high because he had a great chin, mixed with superb power. And I think head to head, can defeat just about any heavy weight in history.


3. Joe Louis.



4. Gene Tunney


5. Ali- Before I spark an outrage, let me explain why. I personally think he is outrageously over rated. But none the less, is still a very great heavyweight. He didnt have an exceptionally great record, and i think head to head can be beaten my a fair amout of boxers. But his achievemnets were amaziong, dont get me wrong.


6. Lewis



7. Jeffries. An amazing athlete. Escpecially in his time period. If he was that great years agoi, when training, and medicine werent great, he would be a super man with todays technology. Head to head, i rate him higher almost everyone.



8. Holyfield-Holmes


9. Frazier-Foreman


10. Tyson. Youngest Champ ever. An all around great boxer, could have been one of the best. I believe he lost his edge during the bruno fight. IM not sure whether it wasnt a great style matchup or training issues, but he didnt beat bruno like he beat everyone else.

Hello, Luigi's alt.:hi:

[Bummy Davis]

Hi IM new here too, so i thought this wouldbe my first post in this thread.


My list is 40% Record 40% achievements, and 20% head to head




1. Jack Dempsy. I have him here at number one because he practically 'paved the path' for heavyweight boxing, and pretty much changed the way we look at boxing today. He was a great athlete, and he IMO, is the first boxer to use a style that resembled ours. With great handspeed, and footwork, power, and agility, he was a force to be reckoned with.


2. Rocky Marciano. (bare with me, because i think that this seems like an anti marciano forum) He has an amazing record, and is one that most likely wont be beaten. I also rate him this high because he had a great chin, mixed with superb power. And I think head to head, can defeat just about any heavy weight in history.


3. Joe Louis.



4. Gene Tunney


5. Ali- Before I spark an outrage, let me explain why. I personally think he is outrageously over rated. But none the less, is still a very great heavyweight. He didnt have an exceptionally great record, and i think head to head can be beaten my a fair amout of boxers. But his achievemnets were amaziong, dont get me wrong.


6. Lewis



7. Jeffries. An amazing athlete. Escpecially in his time period. If he was that great years agoi, when training, and medicine werent great, he would be a super man with todays technology. Head to head, i rate him higher almost everyone.



8. Holyfield-Holmes


9. Frazier-Foreman


10. Tyson. Youngest Champ ever. An all around great boxer, could have been one of the best. I believe he lost his edge during the bruno fight. IM not sure whether it wasnt a great style matchup or training issues, but he didnt beat bruno like he beat everyone else.


Not so far fetched and a brave post on this site, Good argument for putting Dempsey # 1, I got the same top 3 but put Louis 1st but Cant argue with you

[McGrain]

Welcome to ESB.



My list is 40% Record 40% achievements, and 20% head to head




1. Jack Dempsy. I have him here at number one because he practically 'paved the path' for heavyweight boxing, and pretty much changed the way we look at boxing today. He was a great athlete, and he IMO, is the first boxer to use a style that resembled ours. With great handspeed, and footwork, power, and agility, he was a force to be reckoned with.

You're going to have to keep an eye out for HomicidalHank, he really rags on Dempsey and anyone who rates him! For me you have him far to high, though everything you say about him is true - though i think you should hold your comments to Heavyweight boxing rather than boxing in general.


2. Rocky Marciano. (bare with me, because i think that this seems like an anti marciano forum) He has an amazing record, and is one that most likely wont be beaten. I also rate him this high because he had a great chin, mixed with superb power. And I think head to head, can defeat just about any heavy weight in history.

I don't think he did have great chin - he was dropped a few times by punchers who were less than stellar. Having said that he always got up and always won - hard to ask for more than that! So having him here on achievments is reasonable I guess - but I find you head to head claim a bit odd.


3. Joe Louis.

I have this guy at #2, nice to see you rate him. Can't take a man seriously unless he had Louis in his top five and you got some explaining to do if his not in your top 3, I think.



4. Gene Tunney

Now, why is he in here? You've allocated 80% to achievment and record - Tunney's aren't very deep though, are they?! Not at heavyweight.


5. Ali- Before I spark an outrage, let me explain why. I personally think he is outrageously over rated. But none the less, is still a very great heavyweight. He didnt have an exceptionally great record, and i think head to head can be beaten my a fair amout of boxers. But his achievemnets were amaziong, dont get me wrong.

I have him at #1 - most guys have him at #1 or #2. I think you have to work hard to justify such a low rating for him and I think that your claim that "he didnt have an exceptionally great record" is outrageous - the guy has more ATG's on his resume than any other heavyweight, doesn't he?

[UpWithEvil]

You know jackshit
Perfesser Clownshoes! So kind of you to ride your unicycle over to this thread!

Foreman was an Olympic champion
WATCH OUT PETE RADEMACHER!

and a two time world heavyweight champion
WATCH OUT FLOYD PATTERSON!

He had a terrific jab, a good defense, and was a precise puncher who knew how to get maximum leverage in his punches.
He was a lumbering sluggard with questionable stamina who could be outboxed. Jimmy Young had Foreman stepping on his tongue after 6 rounds, as would any of the all-time great scientific heavyweights from Tunney onward.

Precision punching? Maybe on Joe Frazier and King Roman in one-sided drubbings. Once Big George started getting hit in return the precision dropped away in favor of wider, more powerful, more obvious blows. His toe-to-toe fight with a fearless brawler in Ron Lyle had less technique than Max Baer vs. a fighting kangaroo. Any of the all-time great precision punching heavyweights would exploit those wide openings and find Foreman's chin early.

What's wacky is NOT putting Foreman in your top five greatest heavyweights.
I'm just not prepared to move Jimmy Young in to the top-20.

Foreman doesn't have the chops to beat top-5 ATG heavyweights, every one of which could give you 15 hard rounds. Foreman could give you 4 hard rounds, which might be enough to put away most fighter, but not the best of all time. I could see Foreman in the top-10, but the top-5 is rarified air to be inhaled by more skilled fighters.

[Holmes' Jab]

Hi IM new here too, so i thought this wouldbe my first post in this thread.


My list is 40% Record 40% achievements, and 20% head to head




1. Jack Dempsy. I have him here at number one because he practically 'paved the path' for heavyweight boxing, and pretty much changed the way we look at boxing today. He was a great athlete, and he IMO, is the first boxer to use a style that resembled ours. With great handspeed, and footwork, power, and agility, he was a force to be reckoned with.


2. Rocky Marciano. (bare with me, because i think that this seems like an anti marciano forum) He has an amazing record, and is one that most likely wont be beaten. I also rate him this high because he had a great chin, mixed with superb power. And I think head to head, can defeat just about any heavy weight in history.


3. Joe Louis.



4. Gene Tunney


5. Ali- Before I spark an outrage, let me explain why. I personally think he is outrageously over rated. But none the less, is still a very great heavyweight. He didnt have an exceptionally great record, and i think head to head can be beaten my a fair amout of boxers. But his achievemnets were amaziong, dont get me wrong.


6. Lewis



7. Jeffries. An amazing athlete. Escpecially in his time period. If he was that great years agoi, when training, and medicine werent great, he would be a super man with todays technology. Head to head, i rate him higher almost everyone.



8. Holyfield-Holmes


9. Frazier-Foreman


10. Tyson. Youngest Champ ever. An all around great boxer, could have been one of the best. I believe he lost his edge during the bruno fight. IM not sure whether it wasnt a great style matchup or training issues, but he didnt beat bruno like he beat everyone else.

First of all welcome to the wierd, wild, wacky and wonderful world of ESB forums mate, I'm sure you'll enjoy and participate in many of the debates and topics which are raised, both here and in the off topic lounge.

Wow interesting list. The only time I've ever seen Ali as low was in Stewbear's list (someone who hasn't been seen around these parts for a while). Jeffries is great of course, though I think a bit high here- I've got him just outside my Top 10 (at #11), ditto Tunney (#15). Holmes, Lewis and Tyson deserve to be a slight bit higher, Dempsey lower (in my view). I'll post my list, praise or critically maul as you wish:

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali/Larry Holmes (constant tussle for 2nd)
4. Rocky Marciano (Achievements put him here, head-to-head he's lower)
5. Lennox Lewis
6. Joe Frazier
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Evander Holyfield
9. Mike Tyson
10. Sonny Liston

[jyuza]

Welcome

[Irish Steel]

Welcome to ESB.



Now, why is he in here? You've allocated 80% to achievment and record - Tunney's aren't very deep though, are they?! Not at heavyweight.

Yes i guess your right. I completely forgot about him not being in the HW for his whole career, and i took into account his light heavy days. My bad.




I have him at #1 - most guys have him at #1 or #2. I think you have to work hard to justify such a low rating for him and I think that your claim that "he didnt have an exceptionally great record" is outrageous - the guy has more ATG's on his resume than any other heavyweight, doesn't he?


Yes I think he did. But in my opinion he fought in the most overrated era in boxing history! Now that i think, I should have put him in front of tunney, so he would now be at #4

[Bill1234]

You know jackshit. Foreman was an Olympic champion and a two time world heavyweight champion. He had a terrific jab, a good defense, and was a precise puncher who knew how to get maximum leverage in his punches. Wacky? What's wacky is NOT putting Foreman in your top five greatest heavyweights. The man was a physical marvel.

LOL yeah, Foreman was real precise in the 70's. Terrific jab??? It was good yeah, but not "terrific".

[C. M. Clay II]

Yes I think he did. But in my opinion he fought in the most overrated era in boxing history! Now that i think, I should have put him in front of tunney, so he would now be at #4

Doesn't matter, it was still the best era in heavyweight history and Ali dominated that era, and on top of that when he was past his prime. No way he should be lower than number 2.:good

[heerko koois]

It's a ridiculous list. Why care about his reasoning?

hey Mr know it all.......My top 10 is as good or better than yours....
do you really think that there is any top 10 list that is perfect ?
I rank boxers in periods ...Tyson is the best ever in the period 1985- 1989...Holmes had his heyday from 1978- 1984............
and so on ...:twisted:

[Sweet Science]

1- Mike Tyson
2- Larry Holmes
3- Rocky Marciano
4- Evander Holyfield
5- George Foreman
6- M ali/ Clay
7- Joe louis
8- Max Baer
9- Tim Whitherspoon
10- Lennox Lewis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Homicidal Hank
It's a ridiculous list. Why care about his reasoning?

hey Mr know it all.......My top 10 is as good or better than yours....
do you really think that there is any top 10 list that is perfect ?
I rank boxers in periods ...Tyson is the best ever in the period 1985- 1989...Holmes had his heyday from 1978- 1984............
and so on ...

Heerko, you must admit your list is extremely unconventional to say the least. I know you're entitled to your opinion but I have to agree with Hank, it's just a ridiculous list, sorry but I have to tell it like it is.

[janitor]

He had a terrific jab, a good defense, and was a precise puncher

You have lost me here.

[Holmes' Jab]

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Marciano
5. Lewis
6. Jeffries
7. Johnson
8. Liston
9. Frazier
10. Holyfield
11. Wills
12. Dempsey
13. Foreman
14. Tyson
15. Corbett
16. Langford
17. Schmeling
18. Bowe
19. Walcott
20. Charles

A good list, but Tyson is too low and no Floyd Patterson? In my view he'd rank around about where the likes of Corbett and Langford are in your list.

Nice to see Wills and Langford there. I suppose you could make a case for putting Peter Jackson among the Top 20 as well. Sadly he never got his warranted title shots so we'll never know :-(

[mr. magoo]

Whether judged on a head-to-head or a legacy basis, Joe Louis cannot be ranked above Muhammad Ali.

Ali was never knocked out. Louis was twice knocked out, both times brutally, and once when he was prime. Ali was more durable.

Ali regained the world championship twice after losing it. Louis lost the championship and never regained it. Ali's experience allowed him to dominate the division late into his career.

Ali lost his title to full-sized heavyweights (Frazier, Spinks, and Holmes), whereas Louis lost his title to a man who weighed only 184 lbs, in actually a beefed up career light heavyweight.

Louis defended his title six more times than Ali (19 vs. 25), but Ali's title defenses were against infinitely better opposition - Liston, Patterson, Williams, Folley, Lyle, Frazier, Norton, and Shavers. Louis faced no fighter as champion reasonably regarded as a top 10 heavyweight. Indeed, I don't rank any opponent Louis faced as champion in the top 20 all-time heavyweights.

Louis won the championship against a journeyman (Braddock), whereas Ali won the championship the first and second times against all-time great heavyweights (Liston and Foreman), two fighters I (and many others) would pick to beat Louis.

Louis was floored numerous times in his career (Schmeling, Braddock, Galento, Baer, Walcott), whereas Ali was floored only three times - the first two times when he was a young fighter, and the last time by all-time great Frazier.

Film of both fighters show that Ali's jab was superior, his foot movement was superior, and his reflexes and overall speed were superior.

The tale of the tape shows that Ali was taller, bigger, and had a longer reach.

Ali was an Olympic champion.

There is no rational basis to rank Joe Louis ahead of Muhammad Ali on any substantive top-ten list, whether head to head or legacy.

An outstanding post, and one that I agree with completely.

Although I have a fair amount of respect for Joe Louis, his career accomplishments cannot even remotely be compared to that of Ali's, on any level. As you mentioned, Louis's competition was 10 leagues below most of what Ali faced between 1964 and 1980.

Needless to say, there are a few posters on this forum who will argue against my claims, as always, but the fact is, Baer, Braddock, Schmeling, Galento, Conn, Walcott and numerous others from the 30's and 40's would not even have been ranked contenders in the 60's and 70's. What most people fail to recognize, ( or just don't want to, ) is that the sport of boxing under went massive evolutionary changes over a 30 year period between 1940 and 1970. Although you can always find exceptions to the rule, the average fighter was bigger, stronger, faster, better trained, and placed boxing ahead as is first career, rather than something he did on the side. The doors to black and hipanics fighting, and getting fair opportunities in the sport were also opened wider during this period.

[dmt]

An outstanding post, and one that I agree with completely.

Although I have a fair amount of respect for Joe Louis, his career accomplishments cannot even remotely be compared to that of Ali's, on any level. As you mentioned, Louis's competition was 10 leagues below most of what Ali faced between 1964 and 1980.

Needless to say, there are a few posters on this forum who will argue against my claims, as always, but the fact is, Baer, Braddock, Schmeling, Galento, Conn, Walcott and numerous others from the 30's and 40's would not even have been ranked contenders in the 60's and 70's. What most people fail to recognize, ( or just don't want to, ) is that the sport of boxing under went massive evolutionary changes over a 30 year period between 1940 and 1970. Although you can always find exceptions to the rule, the average fighter was bigger, stronger, faster, better trained, and placed boxing ahead as is first career, rather than something he did on the side. The doors to black and hipanics fighting, and getting fair opportunities in the sport were also opened wider during this period.Walcott and Schmeling would not be ranked contenders in the 60's and 70's :lol:

[mr. magoo]

Walcott and Schmeling would not be ranked contenders in the 60's and 70's :lol:

That's right......They wouldn't........

[McGrain]

Whether judged on a head-to-head or a legacy basis, Joe Louis cannot be ranked above Muhammad Ali.

What an astonishing claim. Most guys on ESB would have both in his top 3. Given that that is the case and that the difference between 1 and 10 is probably not great when talking about the absolute top 1% of heavyweight division I find it unlikely that this absolute can be seen as acurate.

Ali was never knocked out. Louis was twice knocked out, both times brutally, and once when he was prime. Ali was more durable.

Ali was certainly more durable - arguably the most durable ever. Louis was never KO'd in his prime. Louis' prime came during his title reign. See Schmeling I V Schmeling II.

Ali regained the world championship twice after losing it. Louis lost the championship and never regained it.

Or, "Louis reigned as champion for longer". Neither is relevant, really.


Louis lost his title to a man who weighed only 184 lbs, in actually a beefed up career light heavyweight.

Joe Louis did not lose the title. He retired as champ. You know the cirumstances of his return and have chosen to ignore it for your own purposes.

Louis defended his title six more times than Ali (19 vs. 25), but Ali's title defenses were against infinitely better opposition - Liston, Patterson, Williams, Folley, Lyle, Frazier, Norton, and Shavers. Louis faced no fighter as champion reasonably regarded as a top 10 heavyweight. Indeed, I don't rank any opponent Louis faced as champion in the top 20 all-time heavyweights.

Agreed, though I've generally found you so dismissive of Louis era heavyweights it's obvious you drastically underate them overall.

I have Schmeling in my top 20.


Louis won the championship against a journeyman (Braddock), whereas Ali won the championship the first and second times against all-time great heavyweights (Liston and Foreman), two fighters I (and many others) would pick to beat Louis.

Braddock was not a journeyman. He can only be shaded as such if you are considered accurate in your assesment of the era's heavyweights. You aren't. Braddock was insanely brave - he took an incredible beating in the ring that night, he also dropped Louis in the first round. Though it was probably more sensible financially to throw it.

It is fair to pick Liston v Louis - I personally pick Louis to win, which I feel is also sensible. I do not think it is sensible to pick Foreman v Louis. But you are right, many people do. Many people also do the opposite, no?

Overall, Ali fought the better competition.

Louis was floored numerous times in his career (Schmeling, Braddock, Galento, Baer, Walcott), whereas Ali was floored only three times - the first two times when he was a young fighter, and the last time by all-time great Frazier.

Louis was probably more vulnerable; he was certainly there to be hit more.

I love your double standard in describing Ali as "a young fighter" when dropped by Cooper (agreed) and Louis as "in his prime" when dropped by Schmeling and Braddock.

Film of both fighters show that Ali's jab was superior, his foot movement was superior, and his reflexes and overall speed were superior.

Film also shows that Louis hit harder, was a better combination puncher, had more technical ability in punching and could punch to the body and throw a proper uppercut.


Ali was an Olympic champion.

And?

There is no rational basis to rank Joe Louis ahead of Muhammad Ali on any substantive top-ten list, whether head to head or legacy.

I actually agree - if you want to submit that Louis ranks above Ali, you must demonstrate why Louis would have beaten Ali in the ring. I feel he could have done it - but conversely I have Ali at #1, and Joe at #2.

[Irish Steel]

Louis won the championship against a journeyman (Braddock
.


First of all, I dont think a heavyweight champion of the world can be considered a journeyman.

Not to mention, he beat Max Baer, which many of you have in your top ten, or 20. Not only that, but he destroyed Max, and won with an UD, and on top of that, Braddock was the 10-1 Underdog... Joe Louis also said that he was the most courageous fighter he ever faught.


Second of all, watch cinderella man.:cool:

[TBooze]

I've heard this line before. If this is true, then there are no such things as journeymen.

Leon Spinks became champion because he fought Ali at the right moment in Ali's career and caught Ali undertrained. If Leon Spinks can become champion by beating Muhammad Ali, then a journeyman can become champion.

Let me put the matter more clearly: If James J. Braddock is not a journeyman then the term journeyman doesn't mean anything at all.

Why do they call Braddock the "Cinderella Man" if he wasn't a journeyman?

Of course Braddock was a journeyman.

You win the Heavyweight Championship of the World you are no longer a journeyman, but the best fighter in the world, that is until you lose your championship.

When your career is reviewed when you retire, then you can be considered a journeyman overall.

Neon Leon may be considered a journeyman, but Braddock most certainly was not.

As well as beating some heavyweight contenders to get a shot at Baer, Braddock was at one time the #1 contender to Tommy Loughrans 175lbs crown with four defeats in 46 fights; IMO hardly the numbers and indeed resume of a journeyman...

[McGrain]

I've heard this line before. If this is true, then there are no such things as journeymen.

Leon Spinks became champion because he fought Ali at the right moment in Ali's career and caught Ali undertrained. If Leon Spinks can become champion by beating Muhammad Ali, then a journeyman can become champion.

Let me put the matter more clearly: If James J. Braddock is not a journeyman then the term journeyman doesn't mean anything at all.

Why do they call Braddock the "Cinderella Man" if he wasn't a journeyman?

Of course Braddock was a journeyman.

With respect, you are well of.

If a poor person becomes a millionare he ceases to be poor.

Does this mean there are no poor people?

Journeyman can be a transient state, just as any other descriptive term can be. That doesn't mean it doesn't exsist.

[McGrain]

Just because I kill and cook a goose doesn't mean that it is no longer a goose.

That's right. "Goose" is not a transcient descritptive term, Peeping It.

Is it?

[TBooze]

Do you really believe that when you win the heavyweight championship you really are the best fighter in the world?

Well of course, when you win that championship in theory no one can beat you.

That is a given, and why still it is most prestigious Championship in Sports.

[McGrain]

Battle of the bad analogies (no offense to either of you).

In boxing, journeymen are fighters who are experienced but are inconsistent. They are stepping stones on the road to the championship. Sometimes a journeyman - because of a weak division or a weak champion or a fluke - become champion. This does not change the fact that they are experienced but inconsistent or the fact that they were and will again become stepping stones. Ever hear of the spoiler? The Cinderella Man? Therefore, they remain journeymen.

Braddock fits the bill perfectly. He was a journeyman who became champion because he fought a clown, a weak champion with little skill, and he beat him in a weak era of the division's history. Braddock could not have been champion under any other circumstances. It's surprising that he lasted eight rounds against Louis. It's even more surprising that he knocked Louis down. (Jersey Joe Walcott is another fighter who fits the bill perfectly. Walcott was also a spoiler.)


Are you speaking to me?

Regardless of your low opinion of those men who reached the absolute pinacle of their chosen profession the anaology of journeyman and poor is absolutley proper.

To be poor you muse meet certain criteria - lack of money - to be a journeyman you also have to meet certain criteria. You've laid them out not to badly above, but in your ignorance you're applying them to the wrong fighters.

By acquiring money you cease to be poor.

By meeting certain criteria you can cease to be a journeyman. By establishing yourself as better than the man who holds the heavyweight championship - and therefore the man at the absolute pinacle of your sport - you achieve this. It's obvious, really. There are other ways, but lording it over an entire division and then taking on the very best is the most straight forward way to do it.

You show a worrying disdain for boxing when you refer to Max Baer as a "clown". It astonishes me that a so called knowledgable fan would say such a thing. Even if he is as weak as you make out - he's not - he still gets in there with the very best in the business to make a fight of it. He deserves more than you give him.

Domino Rally Action Alley in affect.


Goose - cooked goose is a terrible analogy. Goose is not a changeable state, whether it's cooked or not. A journeyman can change.

[McGrain]

Yours is a terribly analogy, McGrain. Poverty is a social position. If you are no longer poor it means you have left that social position. A journeyman has a record. He doesn't leave that record when he wins the championship. That record stays with the fighter for his life. Either he consistently wins or he doesn't.

This is nonsense. Fighters have distinct phases to their career. They can leave the journeyman phase behind by becoming champion, and even a great fighter. When Dick Tiger arrived in the US he had a journeyman's record. When he left he was the ex-middle and light heavyweight champ of the world, and an ATG. You would descirbe Tiger as a journeyman upon arriving in the states. Even you must see that he is not one when he goes.

When a life-long criminal has murdered somebody, is he no longer a convicted murderer when he leaves prison? Of course he's a convicted murderer. He has a record. So he does something wonderful - saves the life of a baby - that doesn't change the fact that he led a life of crime and was convicted of murder. Of course not.

I don't really know what you are on about here, it seems a little insane. Yes he would be a murderer. Glen Johnson was no longer a journeyman when he lifted the Light-Heavyweigh championship of the world.

We aren't talking about poor people and social class. We are talking about athletes and their records. When an athlete is inconsistent, he is a journeyman.

What an incredible claim. Do you realise this makes Luis Ronaldo a journeyman footballer? And Dick Tiger a journeyman boxer? And Lloyd Marshall a journeyman boxer? Wow.

Both of your analogies are bad, but yours is worse, McGrain, because you have confused class category with the record of an individual's achievement. Pep's doesn't sound as sophisticated, but at least it's closer to the point.

As far as you are concerned yes; because you are labouring under the impression that Journeyman is an irreversable state. You couldn't be more wrong if you set out to make a mistake.

[McGrain]

Somebody can't admit when they're wrong - or when they're trying to deny the meaning of words because they don't like the way it makes their favored stars look.

Well done for answering my points in the last thread about Journeyman status so thoroughly.

I may be wrong, Hank, but you haven't show it.

I don't favour any stars, as much as it is in my power. Nice boundless accusation though, about par for your course.

[mr. magoo]

[quote=TBooze]You win the Heavyweight Championship of the World you are no longer a journeyman, but the best fighter in the world, that is until you lose your championship.


Why don't we just simplify things a bit by saying that James Braddock sucked, and so did Max Baer. Therefore, Braddock kept his journeyman status despite winning a title. I'm so bored of this tired and over reiterated argument. Braddock was a guy who had 25 career losses, and who frequently boxed while being injured and under nurished for pete sake!!!! Furthermore, what does this say about Max Baer who lost to him? Lastly, Joe Louis was floored not only by James Braddock, but quite possibly the worst version of Braddock ever!!!! The guy hadn't fought in 2 years, and was coming off a career of constantly being injured.

After going through this shit time and time again, I can only come up with 3 irrefutable facts:

1. Louis's competition was inferior to that of most linear champions

2. Braddock, Baer, Carnera, Sharkey, and numerous others of that period, were basically Journeyman who rose to the top of the sport by virtue of circumstances that weakened the division during the 30's.

3. Louis was a protected champion, who for 12 years faced smaller, weaker, lesser acheiving caucasion fighters with horribly sub par records, while a lot of good African American fighters such as Elmer Ray, Turkey Thompson and a number of others were forced to basically sit on the side lines without title shots.... People talk about Holmes not fighting Page or Thomas. People also mention Frazier possibly being guilty of not fighting Norton, Shavers and some of the other big hitters of the 70's. Others have brought up Marciano not fighting Valdez or Sullivan neglecting to face Peter Jackson. And yes, Dempsey not fighting Harry Wills. The main difference between these guys and Louis, is that they only had one or two guys that they didn't face during their perspective reigns. Louis was protected for 12 years, and for the most part through 25 defenses. He fought all but two black men during that period. One of whom, was a former light heavyweght who lost to Braddock, making him nothing special. The other was a 34 year old veteran who had lost maybe 11 fights, and who basically kicked Louis' ass in their first meeting.

[McGrain]

If you struggle for the early part of your career, then come alive and win a title and hang on to it for awhile in an era of outstanding competition then you are not a journeyman.

Congratulations on giving up this small concession at the expense of contradicting your earlier statement.

Seriously.


However, if you are inconsistent across your entire career, whether you win a title or not, you are a journeyman. James J. Braddock is the quintessential journeyman. He was inconsistent across his entire career. If Braddock isn't a journeyman, then there is no such thing as a journeyman.

Well your saying this doesn't make it so - but if I am presented with these two choices then I say there are no journeymen. The idea of labelling a former heavyweight champion as such is more ridiculous IMO. Though it's a terrible conundrum in that both selections are pretty shabby.

They didn't call him the Cinderella Man for nothing, people.

You keep saying this. Do you know actually know the story of Cinderella? It's about a person who is held down by enviroment only to triumph against the odds despite overwhelming odds - she reaches the very top of the tree.

As an analogy for your "Braddock as ultimate journeyman" angle, it's a pretty shocking analogy.

But, alas, Braddock floored the Bomber! So he can't possibly be a journeyman! Braddock beat Max Baer, who was defeated by - guess who? - the Bomber! So he can't possibly be a journeyman!

I think you accusing someone else of ciruclar logic may be the funniest thing i've ever read on ESB, and there are some real clowns in the lounge.

Just like Galento can't be a bum because he knocked Louis down and had him in trouble. Oh no, because then Louis looks bad. We have to make Braddock and Galento into special fighters so that Louis can be a special fighter, one who we can rank up there with Ali - maybe even over Ali.

Not "special fighters" Hank. Just not "bums" and "clowns" as you keep insisting. It's ugly. And for some reason it all seems to come back to Ali for you, over and over again. Then you accuse other people of not being balanced!

If your point is "Ali's competition is better than Louis'" congrats, you win some sort of prize possibly. No-one will argue. This is the 2nd time i've said so tonight. If your argument is, "Everyone Louis fought and everyone Marciano fought was a journeyman/old/rubbish", grow up.

Truth, people, there's truth, and it's inconvenient, and magoo has it down with respect to Louis' competition. Scrawny white boys thrown to the Dark Destroyer.

This is nasty - i'm certian you're no racist but please clarify this for me.


It's a padded record. And even with the string of journeymen and bum, Louis still manages to get in all kinds of trouble.

He fought the best around - you want more, take up writing.

[mr. magoo]

But, alas, Braddock floored the Bomber! So he can't possibly be a journeyman! Braddock beat Max Baer, who was defeated by - guess who? - the Bomber! So he can't possibly be a journeyman!

Just like Galento can't be a bum because he knocked Louis down and had him in trouble. Oh no, because then Louis looks bad. We have to make Braddock and Galento into special fighters so that Louis can be a special fighter, one who we can rank up there with Ali - maybe even over Ali.



Agreed,

What I find to be so ironic, is that the same fans who build up guys like Galento, Baer ,Braddock, and Schmeling, are the same people who tear Tyson apart for losing to Douglas. Tell me something, if James Buster Douglas is a journeyman by most people's standards, then what the hell is James Braddock or Tony Galento?

[Dempsey1238]

Schmeling was no journeyman. He was a pretty good fighter.

[mr. magoo]

Schmeling was no journeyman. He was a pretty good fighter.

Galento and Braddock were the ones who I implied as being Journeyman in that paragraph.

[TBooze]

[quote]


Why don't we just simplify things a bit by saying that James Braddock sucked, and so did Max Baer. Therefore, Braddock kept his journeyman status despite winning a title. I'm so bored of this tired and over reiterated argument. Braddock was a guy who had 25 career losses, and who frequently boxed while being injured and under nurished for pete sake!!!! Furthermore, what does this say about Max Baer who lost to him? Lastly, Joe Louis was floored not only by James Braddock, but quite possibly the worst version of Braddock ever!!!! The guy hadn't fought in 2 years, and was coming off a career of constantly being injured.

After going through this shit time and time again, I can only come up with 3 irrefutable facts:

1. Louis's competition was inferior to that of most linear champions

2. Braddock, Baer, Carnera, Sharkey, and numerous others of that period, were basically Journeyman who rose to the top of the sport by virtue of circumstances that weakened the division during the 30's.

3. Louis was a protected champion, who for 12 years faced smaller, weaker, lesser acheiving caucasion fighters with horribly sub par records, while a lot of good African American fighters such as Elmer Ray, Turkey Thompson and a number of others were forced to basically sit on the side lines without title shots.... People talk about Holmes not fighting Page or Thomas. People also mention Frazier possibly being guilty of not fighting Norton, Shavers and some of the other big hitters of the 70's. Others have brought up Marciano not fighting Valdez or Sullivan neglecting to face Peter Jackson. And yes, Dempsey not fighting Harry Wills. The main difference between these guys and Louis, is that they only had one or two guys that they didn't face during their perspective reigns. Louis was protected for 12 years, and for the most part through 25 defenses. He fought all but two black men during that period. One of whom, was a former light heavyweght who lost to Braddock, making him nothing special. The other was a 34 year old veteran who had lost maybe 11 fights, and who basically kicked Louis' ass in their first meeting.

To start off with the damage to Braddocks right hand was such, he benefited from a long break in ring action.

Louis beat everyone that mattered; John Henry Lewis was a respected fighter and yet Louis destroyed him with ease. Walcott was a fighter we rarely see today; a man who learnt his trade though the years, making himself better at 34 than he was at 24. Yes fight one was not Louis' finest hour, it would seem even Louis knew this, but it does not hide fact, Louis was comming to end of his career and still one the rematch by KO.

[cuchulain]

Lennox Lewis and Rocky Marciano should be there for sure. Archie Moore isn't even Top 20.

Ezzard Charles ranks about 15th or 16th.

If Charles and Moore are there, Joe Frazier should be ahead of them.


Here's my heavyweight list :

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Larry Holmes
4. George Foreman
5. Sonny Liston
6. Lennox Lewis
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Rocky Marciano
9. Jack Johnson
10. Mike Tyson

My list is very similar in content and order.

I don't go back past Louis, the sport was too different for meaningful comparisons.

The List is head-to head, and at prime.

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. George Foreman/Lennox Lewis
4.
5. Larry Holmes/Rocky Marciano
6.
7. Sonny Liston
8. Mike Tyson
9. Joe Frazier
10. Vitali Klitschko

[McGrain]

Coming from a person who changes the standard definition of a thing because that thing is inconvenient to his argument....

What "standard definitiions" have I changed Hank? You've accused me of this and i've explained it - what standard definitions?

As Bearden puts it: "They called him The Cinderella Man, but that was after the Ball. Prior to winning the championship from Max Baer he was a washed up fighter who was always on the low side of the odds when he stepped into the ring, a boxer who'd lost one third of his fights."

Again, I think you're failing to understand the point you are trying to explain. Prior. Prior to winning the championship. I have no idea what you are trying to prove with this quote - that you may be wrong?

Braddock was a journeyman. "No, he wasn't, because he won the title." But before he won the title, was he considered a journeyman? "Worse, they said he was washed up, a bum."

:lol:


Max Baer didn't take Braddock seriously - who did? - and didn't train and clowned his way through the fight. Braddock - on a fluke - was awarded the title. And that erases his record? That changes everything? He's no longer a journeyman (let's at least give that)?

There is no point in discussing Baer with you. I've heard you describe him as a "bum" and as a "clown" and "utterly unskilled". In this area you are deficient in your understanding to an extent where it's almost impossible to engage you.

This is also whey nowhere in this argument have I raised any fights Braddock won - even the Baer fight itself - because I know what your response will be. To paraphrase - "he was rubbish". Braddock was a very brave fighter who was handed an earned chance and took it. According to Baer he took the fight seriously. Also according to Baer he hurt his deadly right hand in the fight - though, gentleman that he is (and possibly accuratley) he suggested he would have lost it anyway.

Your entire argument hangs on world title challengers and actual champioins being bums and useless. It actually makes me dizzy trying to understand the roof of your arrogance.

Max Baer, by not taking Braddock seriously, changed the past. Who would have thought that Max Baer's clowning is a time machine.

If I had a time machine I would go back and waste less time asking you to clarify your muddy points in this thread (including an unpleasant racial one), you've answered less than half of them.

[janitor]

Galento and Braddock were the ones who I implied as being Journeyman in that paragraph.

I don't think that either of them can be considered journeymen.

They both got to the top of the rankings by beating other ranked contenders. Therfore they were world class fighters of the period.

[McGrain]

Factoring "head to head" in your rankings is silly and pointless. It's all a big guessing game. For all you know, Liston loses to Braddock, Ruiz, Sullivan, etc.

Stop wasting your time (and mine) with this bullshit and rank fighters how they should be ranked.


Your very confident for a new poster who has never posted here before ever...

I like the head to heads. It's fun.

[McGrain]

I'm new to the site.


That's right.

[Holmes' Jab]

Prime Frazier.... :hi:

:D

[mr. magoo]

[
quote=McGrain]Your very confident for a new poster who has never posted here before ever...

He's new to the concept of posting under a different name.

[McGrain]

[He's new to the concept of posting under a different name.


:lol:

[hopkinsfan07]

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Evander Holyfield

[McGrain]

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Evander Holyfield

This list is straight out of the top drawer in my view.

No Tyson? He just broke into mine at #10.

No Foreman? He just dipped out of mine at #11/

And where do you rate Jeffreis? I'm interested in Johnson but no Jeffries.

[brooklyn1550]

No order, but here are the guys in my top 10

Joe Louis
Muhammad Ali
Larry Holmes
Jack Dempsey
Jack Johnson
Rocky Marciano
George Foreman
Lennox Lewis
Evander Holyfield
Joe Frazier

Here are the honorable mentions
Sonny Liston
James Jeffries
Mike Tyson
Ezzard Charles
Gene Tunney
Jersey Joe Walcott
John L. Sullivan
James Corbett
Harry Wills
Max Schmeling
Sam Langford
Bob Fitzsimmons
Max Baer

[Muchmoore]

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Evander Holyfield

Very good list but Tyson should be in there if you have Liston there and Johnson should go down to the bottom half of the top ten.

[hopkinsfan07]

This list is straight out of the top drawer in my view.

No Tyson? He just broke into mine at #10.

No Foreman? He just dipped out of mine at #11/

And where do you rate Jeffreis? I'm interested in Johnson but no Jeffries.

i have Jeffries in 12th

i put forman in becauce George beat badly every fighter of the Golden age, with the exception of Ali. George destroyed Frazier and Norton 1x by KO. Ali lost to Norton and struggled with Joe losing once. George came back in the 90's ( another great generation of fighting) and won the heavyweight championship at 45,

i have not got tyson in becuse i dont feel he even beat anyone great larry holmes was past it Tony Tucker, Michael Spinks ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) and Frank Bruno ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) were good but never really great his lost to Douglas was embarrassing for him he also quit against Holyfield

[McGrain]

i put forman in becauce George beat badly every fighter of the Golden age, with the exception of Ali. George destroyed Frazier and Norton 1x by KO. Ali lost to Norton and struggled with Joe losing once. George came back in the 90's ( another great generation of fighting) and won the heavyweight championship at 45,

i have not got tyson in becuse i dont feel he even beat anyone great larry holmes was past it Tony Tucker, Michael Spinks ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) and Frank Bruno ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) were good but never really great his lost to Douglas was embarrassing for him he also quit against Holyfield

I have Tyson in on the head to head - hard to score him at less than a 40% against any fighter except Ali, who I think would do him.

Totally missed Foreman on your list, don't know why!

Anyway, nice one.

[hopkinsfan07]

what is your top ten anyway McGrain

[McGrain]

what is your top ten anyway McGrain

Well, you'd actually find it earlier in this thread, but as you ask (any excuse)

1) Ali
2) Louis
3) Liston
4) Johnson
5) Lewis
6) Jeffries
7) Frazier
8) Holmes
9) Hollyfield
10) Tyson
----------------
11) Foreman
12) Dempsey
13) Marciano

I do have a habit of changing things around.

Nice avatar man.

[cross_trainer]

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. John L. Sullivan
4. James J. Jeffries
5. Tom Cribb
6. Lennox Lewis
7. Max Schmeling
8. Mike Tyson
9. Tom Johnson
10. Jem Mace


This was very difficult. Period 1750-2007, excluding the pioneers like Broughton. Rated according to accomplishments in their own era.

[hopkinsfan07]

Well, you'd actually find it earlier in this thread, but as you ask (any excuse)

1) Ali
2) Louis
3) Liston
4) Johnson
5) Lewis
6) Jeffries
7) Frazier
8) Holmes
9) Hollyfield
10) Tyson
----------------
11) Foreman
12) Dempsey
13) Marciano

I do have a habit of changing things around.

Nice avatar man.

good list im glad you rate Liston and Lewis high most i fell underate them i have Marciano 11th and Dempsey 13th so are lists are very close only thing i am against is were you place Holmes but still great list

[McGrain]

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. John L. Sullivan
4. James J. Jeffries
5. Tom Cribb
6. Lennox Lewis
7. Max Schmeling
8. Mike Tyson
9. Tom Johnson
10. Jem Mace


This was very difficult. Period 1750-2007, excluding the pioneers like Broughton. Rated according to accomplishments in their own era.

Very good, brave list.

I'm chasing these guys now, got that Bare Fists for starters. He references The Illiad in the new Intro, I love that fight.

[cross_trainer]

Queensberry only:

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. James J. Jeffries
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Max Schmeling
6. Mike Tyson
7. Larry Holmes
8. Rocky Marciano
9. Jack Johnson
10. Jack Dempsey

[TBooze]

9. Tom Johnson

Sure he came up short against Naseem, but you still take him to beat Foreman!!!




:rofl








Come on mate, play the game, we know you are darn good, but we are talking Queensberry Rules...

[McGrain]

good list im glad you rate Liston and Lewis high most i fell underate them i have Marciano 11th and Dempsey 13th do are lists are very close only thing i am against is were you place Holmes but still great list

Yes; our lists are pretty similair. Holmes' position is problematic - but shuffling 6-11 is tough for me, they move a lot. Holmes is on a down Tyson is on the up just now.

If you want to see my Middlweight top ten it's in my Charley Burley and Bernard Hopkins thread a bit further down the page.

[McGrain]

Queensberry only:

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. James J. Jeffries
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Max Schmeling
6. Mike Tyson
7. Larry Holmes
8. Rocky Marciano
9. Jack Johnson
10. Jack Dempsey

Another good one - let's hear about Schmeling's high placement (I have him at 15).

Jeffreis above Johnson?

[McGrain]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Lewis
4. Holmes
5. Johnson
6. Foreman
7. Tyson
8. Dempsey
9. Liston
10. Marciano
11. Frazier
12. Holyfield
13. Jeffries

I am questioning whether Rock is top 10 or not. I have him anywhere between 6 and 12 honestly.

Personally I can't see the rock anywhere in that list but at the bottom. It's a nice one though. I'd always see Jeffries above some of these guys, too.

[hopkinsfan07]

Queensberry only:

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. James J. Jeffries
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Max Schmeling
6. Mike Tyson
7. Larry Holmes
8. Rocky Marciano
9. Jack Johnson
10. Jack Dempsey

Schmeling in 5th what are your reasons for this i had him at 17th in my list of 20

[cross_trainer]

Schmeling in 5th what are your reasons for this i had him at 17th in my list of 20

This is the one I expected some problems with. :D

Schmeling probably should have won the second Sharkey fight--he certainly was the more effective fighter--remained a pretty good champion during his reign, and holds the single greatest win in heavyweight history over anyone (prime or near prime Joe Louis). It outranks Joe Frazier's win over Ali by a slight margin. Great counterpuncher as well.

He was, moreover, prevented from facing Braddock, which he had a right to, and probably would have won.

(Come to think of it, Frazier should rank higher based on this criteria as well).

[cross_trainer]

Sure he came up short against Naseem, but you still take him to beat Foreman!!!




:rofl








Come on mate, play the game, we know you are darn good, but we are talking Queensberry Rules...

That's why I gave you two lists.

I rate Hamed as #4 on my heavyweight list for defeating Johnson, by the way. It's just that he's invisible.

[TBooze]

I think it is time In put this debate to rest:rofl

My top 40

40: Cleveland Williams
39: Zora Foley
38: Tommy Burns
37: Michael Spinks
36: James Douglas
35: James Braddock
34: George Godfrey
33: Jimmy Bivens
32: Max Baer
31: Jerry Quarry
30: Tim Whitherspoon
29: Bob Fitzsimmons
28: Jack Sharkey
27: Sam McVey
26: Joe Jeanette
25: Vitali Klitschko
24: Peter Jackson
23: Ken Norton
22: Joe Walcott (Jersey)
21: Gene Tunney
20: Riddick Bowe
19: Floyd Patterson
18: Max Schmeling
17: Ezzard Charles
16: Sammy Langford
15: Harry Wills
14: James Corbett
13: Sonny Liston
12: Joe Frazier
11: Mike Tyson
10: Lennox Lewis
9 James Jeffries
8: Jack Dempsey
7: Rocky Marciano
6: Evander Holyfield
5: Larry Holmes
4: Jack Johnson
3: George Foreman
2: Joe Louis
1: Muhammad Ali

[cross_trainer]

I think it is time In put this debate to rest:rofl

My top 40

40: Cleveland Williams
39: Zora Foley
38: Tommy Burns
37: Michael Spinks
36: James Douglas
35: James Braddock
34: George Godfrey
33: Jimmy Bivens
32: Max Baer
31: Jerry Quarry
30: Tim Whitherspoon
29: Bob Fitzsimmons
28: Jack Sharkey
27: Sam McVey
26: Joe Jeanette
25: Vitali Klitschko
24: Peter Jackson
23: Ken Norton
22: Joe Walcott (Jersey)
21: Gene Tunney
20: Riddick Bowe
19: Floyd Patterson
18: Max Schmeling
17: Ezzard Charles
16: Sammy Langford
15: Harry Wills
14: James Corbett
13: Sonny Liston
12: Joe Frazier
11: Mike Tyson
10: Lennox Lewis
9 James Jeffries
8: Jack Dempsey
7: Rocky Marciano
6: Evander Holyfield
5: Larry Holmes
4: Jack Johnson
3: George Foreman
2: Joe Louis
1: Muhammad Ali


Good list. :good

[McGrain]

This is the one I expected some problems with. :D

Schmeling probably should have won the second Sharkey fight--he certainly was the more effective fighter--remained a pretty good champion during his reign, and holds the single greatest win in heavyweight history over anyone (prime or near prime Joe Louis). It outranks Joe Frazier's win over Ali by a slight margin. Great counterpuncher as well.

He was, moreover, prevented from facing Braddock, which he had a right to, and probably would have won.

Interesting and ferocious logic.

Problem is, every other guy on the list would hand Schmeling his head 9/10. Secondly, i feel you're overating the version of Louis that Schmeling beat. But if you're happy with near peak, I am too.

I think the Ali Frazier beat was a better fighter. Louis is THE example of a fighter who was better as soon as he got that belt around his waste.

Agree that Schmeling should've got his shot, and would have been favourite.

[TBooze]

That's why I gave you two lists.

I rate Hamed as #4 on my heavyweight list for defeating Johnson, by the way. It's just that he's invisible.

Excuse my language but f*** you, we both know Naseem is pick'em against Ali.

Sure some will say I said this because of the bubbles in my head, others will point out the three bottles of wine I have had this evening, but we know I have a point!:good

[McGrain]

I think it is time In put this debate to rest:rofl


Tell you what, for such a long list, there's not much to object to here.

Foreman's far, far to high though:D

[cross_trainer]

Interesting and ferocious logic.

Problem is, every other guy on the list would hand Schmeling his head 9/10. Secondly, i feel you're overating the version of Louis that Schmeling beat. But if you're happy with near peak, I am too.

I think the Ali Frazier beat was a better fighter. Louis is THE example of a fighter who was better as soon as he got that belt around his waste.

Agree that Schmeling should've got his shot, and would have been favourite.

Thanks. It's debatable whether Louis or Ali were the better win, but I'd go with Louis. He seemed to be a bit closer to his heavyweight peak, and proved it by decimating everybody else for quite some time after Schmeling destroyed him. It was also the more decisive victory--Frazier won a clear but close decision, Schmeling dominated Louis and knocked him out.

Not sure that the rest of the top 10 would defeat Schmeling...of course, that's what they said Joe Louis would do as well. ;)

[hopkinsfan07]

were do you guys have Gene Tunney and Harry Wills on your lists

[TBooze]

Good list. :good

Thank you

[McGrain]

were do you guys have Gene Tunney ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) and Harry Wills ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) on your lists

Those boys are the elephant in my particular room.

Thanks for bringing them up.

Gene Tunney, low teens.

Wills, not high enough my friend. That's the only answer I can give right now.

[TBooze]

were do you guys have Gene Tunney ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) and Harry Wills ([Only registered and activated users can see links]) on your lists

Tunney #21 (once had him #7) Wills #15.

[Lostmykeys]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Foreman
4. Holmes
5. Lewis
6. Liston
7. Holyfield(His use of steroids might take him off my list. havent decided)
8. Tyson
9. Dempsey
10. Marciano

[McGrain]

7. Holyfield(His use of steroids might take him off my list. havent decided)

Nothing proven of course. Well.

You have a solid list there.

[TBooze]

Tell you what, for such a long list, there's not much to object to here.

Foreman's far, far to high though:D

But I love redemption and Foreman redeemed himself 20+ years after the Rumble in the Jungle... That is what define as redemption, thus he is so highly rated in my rankings.

[McGrain]

But I love redemption and Foreman redeemed himself 20+ years after the Rumble in the Jungle... That is what define as redemption, thus he is so highly rated in my rankings.

Where your own persomal criterea are concerned, you can't be faulted. Any other examples on your heavyweight list?

[DapSugar]

Muhammad Ali
Lenox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Joe Frazier
Joe Louis
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Evander Hollyfield
Jack Dempsey
Sonny Liston:vonnecunt

[McGrain]

Muhammad Ali
Lenox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Joe Frazier
Joe Louis

Many of the screens have a black background, so posting in black may not be the thing!

Nice list but let's hear about why you have Frazier and Tyson listed above Louis.

[TBooze]

Where your own persomal criterea are concerned, you can't be faulted. Any other examples on your heavyweight list?

Well #1 with Ali redeeming himself from the Frazier defeat.

Louis redeeming himself, his race and country from Schmeling is a close #2

[hopkinsfan07]

My top 20

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Evander Holyfield
11th. Rocky Marciano
12th. James Jeffries
13th. Jack Dempsey
14th. Gene Tunney
15th. Jersey Joe Walcott
16th. Ezzard Charles
17th. Max Schmelling
18th. Jersey Joe Walcott
19th. Sam Langford
20th. Jack Sharkey

[TBooze]

My top 20

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Evander Holyfield
11th. Rocky Marciano
12th. James Jeffries
13th. Jack Dempsey
14th. Gene Tunney
15th. Jersey Joe Walcott
16th. Ezzard Charles
17th. Max Schmelling
18th. Jersey Joe Walcott
19th. Sam Langford
20th. Jack Sharkey

:shock: You have all the right fighters; just they are all pretty much in the wrong place!!! ;)

[hopkinsfan07]

:shock: You have all the right fighters; just they are all pretty much in the wrong place!!! ;)

20: Riddick Bowe


errrrr maybe you should have a look at your list first

[TBooze]

[color=#ffffff]


errrrr maybe you should have a look at your list first

Who the hell are you to throw my words back at me? :hey

Stop being defensive and answer my criticism with a positive response rather than a negative defensive question... Or have you something to hide? ;)

[hopkinsfan07]

Who the hell are you to throw my words back at me? :hey

Stop being defensive and answer my criticism with a positive response rather than a negative defensive question... Or have you something to hide? ;)

i have not got them all in the wrong places you have thats why i highlighted the fact that you have Bowe at 20

and what could i have to hide what is that all about

[Muchmoore]

My top 20

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Evander Holyfield
11th. Rocky Marciano
12th. James Jeffries
13th. Jack Dempsey
14th. Gene Tunney
15th. Jersey Joe Walcott
16th. Ezzard Charles
17th. Max Schmelling
18th. Jersey Joe Walcott
19th. Sam Langford
20th. Jack Sharkey

No Tyson?! Dempsey also should move up at least 3-4 spots too.

How do you justify putting Jack Sharkey and Gene Tunney on your list and not Tyson even on it? He had ten title defenses, was youngest ever champion, and was a two time champion. Those accomplishments definently warrant at least a top 15 ranking, and I havent even mentioned head to head!

Tyson head to head is even a greater fighter than he is when talking about accomplishments, almost everyone agrees to this. He demolished tall, clever boxers like Larry Holmes, Tyrell Biggs, Pinklon Thomas, Tony Tucker, Carl Williams, and Tony Tubbs. He destroyed one of the greatest light heavyweight champions Michael Spinks, destroyed big tough punchers in Bonecrusher Smith, Frank Bruno, and Andrew Golota. He also stopped Berbick, a guy who went the distance with a peak Holmes, in 2 rounds.

How does that put him below 20th on an ATG list?

[hopkinsfan07]

No Tyson?! Dempsey also should move up at least 3-4 spots too.

How do you justify putting Jack Sharkey and Gene Tunney on your list and not Tyson even on it? He had ten title defenses, was youngest ever champion, and was a two time champion. Those accomplishments definently warrant at least a top 15 ranking, and I havent even mentioned head to head!

Tyson head to head is even a greater fighter than he is when talking about accomplishments, almost everyone agrees to this. He demolished tall, clever boxers like Larry Holmes, Tyrell Biggs, Pinklon Thomas, Tony Tucker, Carl Williams, and Tony Tubbs. He destroyed one of the greatest light heavyweight champions Michael Spinks, destroyed big tough punchers in Bonecrusher Smith, Frank Bruno, and Andrew Golota. He also stopped Berbick, a guy who went the distance with a peak Holmes, in 2 rounds.

How does that put him below 20th on an ATG list?

that was genuine mistake missing tyson i will edit my list
but i said earlyer in this thread my reason for tyson not being top ten

[TBooze]

i have not got them all in the wrong places you have thats why i highlighted the fact that you have Bowe at 20

and what could i have to hide what is that all about

Clever spin Mr Blair, answer a close question with an open answer, that way, you do not have to defend yourself!:p

[hopkinsfan07]

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Evander Holyfield
11th. Rocky Marciano
12th. James Jeffries
13th. Jack Dempsey
14th. Mike Tyson
15th. Gene Tunney
16th. Jersey Joe Walcott
17th. Ezzard Charles
18th. Max Schmelling
19th. Jersey Joe Walcott
20th. Sam Langford

[TBooze]

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Larry Holmes
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Lennox Lewis
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Evander Holyfield
11th. Rocky Marciano
12th. James Jeffries
13th. Jack Dempsey
14th. Mike Tyson
15th. Gene Tunney
16th. Jersey Joe Walcott
17th. Ezzard Charles
18th. Max Schmelling
19th. Jersey Joe Walcott
20th. Sam Langford


Actually for all your spin that is a pretty good list IMHO.

[hopkinsfan07]

that was just me adding tyson lol

[hopkinsfan07]

Well, what´s with Jersey Joe Walcott beeing 2 times on your list?

ahh thats why i missed out tyson becuse i copy and pasted the wrong name lol

[Lostmykeys]

Do any of you guys think Holyfield should be excluded because of the steroid issue?

[McGrain]

Do any of you guys think Holyfield should be excluded because of the steroid issue?


Not yet, no.

As of now these allegations are unproven. Moslty.

[Hank]

Marciano
Dempsey
Louis
Tyson

the rest

most overated--Ali

[NickHudson]

The brightest flames burn out the quickest.

Tyson was a staggering force of nature aged 18-25.

After that he was gone.

LLs candle never really got going, so his athleticism aged very well.

When his peers were punch drunk, he accepted morally cheap, legacy-building fights with them...

I know I keep beating up on Lewis but I feel strongly that he is sneaking into company he doesnt really belong with.

You kids need to meet by the bike racks after school. No teachers.


Does Buster Douglas count as a "twilight loss" for Tyson? He was 30 when he faced Holyfield for the first time - twilight?

[Zakman]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Dempsey
4. Foreman
5. Holmes
6, Marciano
7. Holyfield
8. Johnson
9. Liston
10. Frazier
11. Tyson
12. Jeffries
13. Lewis
14. Langford
15. Walcott
16. Charles
17.Bowe
18. Tunney
19. Schmeling
20. Corbett
21. Baer
22.Wills
23.Sharkey
24.Patterson
25.Johansson

[Amsterdam]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Dempsey
4. Foreman
5. Holmes
6, Marciano
7. Holyfield
8. Johnson
9. Liston
10. Frazier
11. Tyson
12. Jeffries
13. Lewis
14. Langford
15. Walcott
16. Charles
17.Bowe
18. Tunney
19. Schmeling
20. Corbett
21. Baer
22.Wills
23.Sharkey
24.Patterson
25.Johansson

This is actually the best list that I have seen in a long time and everyone has to note that this is one of the FEW lists that have Lewis in a reasonable spot, I only disagree with three things -

Tyson deserves a lower top 10 spot for that magnificent 80's bulldozer run of his, not to mention a few fair wins after that.

Dempsey's a few notches too high, but a case can be made for that region in the top 10 due to his effect on the sport, sure.

Patterson shouldn't be ranked under Wills.

[Zakman]

This is actually the best list that I have seen in a long time and everyone has to note that this is one of the FEW lists that have Lewis in a reasonable spot, I only disagree with three things -

Tyson deserves a lower top 10 spot for that magnificent 80's bulldozer run of his, not to mention a few fair wins after that.

Dempsey's a few notches too high, but a case can be made for that region in the top 10 due to his effect on the sport, sure.

Patterson shouldn't be ranked under Wills.

Thnaks for the feedback guy. I tend to be unsure about exactly where to rank Patterson - he's sure NOT top 20 like some suggest - because of the chin issue, and the gnerally piss poor opposition. Wills is a lot better than many give him credit for. Some suggested he was the best of the "black dynamite" fighters (clearly I don't agree as you can see I have Langford considerably higher).

Another thing I struggle with is Jeffries. Reading up on him both here and in some articles and books leads me to believe that in his prime, he was really a fighter ahead fo his time, I sometimes think about swithcing him with Johnson, but that's a tough call.

Tyson is clearly borderline top ten, and I have considered switching him with Frazier. Considering I rank Dempsey as highly I as I to at least partially on these grounds, I may just do that. Jackj Dempsey is horribly underrated today - in his time, and for many years after, he was considered the best of all time. Until the guys who actually saw him started to die offf, most people ranked him ahead of Louis. I really think the "GOAT" debate should be a three way affair.

[NickHudson]

I would have to agree with this analysis whole-heartedly. It is fair, rational and hard to dispute.

As for my TOP10 - I have Ali clear #1, Louis clear #2 and then it is a shit-fight that changes on an hourly basis!

Whether judged on a head-to-head or a legacy basis, Joe Louis cannot be ranked above Muhammad Ali.

Ali was never knocked out. Louis was twice knocked out, both times brutally, and once when he was prime. Ali was more durable.

Ali regained the world championship twice after losing it. Louis lost the championship and never regained it. Ali's experience allowed him to dominate the division late into his career.

Ali lost his title to full-sized heavyweights (Frazier, Spinks, and Holmes), whereas Louis lost his title to a man who weighed only 184 lbs, in actually a beefed up career light heavyweight.

Louis defended his title six more times than Ali (19 vs. 25), but Ali's title defenses were against infinitely better opposition - Liston, Patterson, Williams, Folley, Lyle, Frazier, Norton, and Shavers. Louis faced no fighter as champion reasonably regarded as a top 10 heavyweight. Indeed, I don't rank any opponent Louis faced as champion in the top 20 all-time heavyweights.

Louis won the championship against a journeyman (Braddock), whereas Ali won the championship the first and second times against all-time great heavyweights (Liston and Foreman), two fighters I (and many others) would pick to beat Louis.

Louis was floored numerous times in his career (Schmeling, Braddock, Galento, Baer, Walcott), whereas Ali was floored only three times - the first two times when he was a young fighter, and the last time by all-time great Frazier.

Film of both fighters show that Ali's jab was superior, his foot movement was superior, and his reflexes and overall speed were superior.

The tale of the tape shows that Ali was taller, bigger, and had a longer reach.

Ali was an Olympic champion.

There is no rational basis to rank Joe Louis ahead of Muhammad Ali on any substantive top-ten list, whether head to head or legacy.

[Amsterdam]

Thnaks for the feedback guy. I tend to be unsure about exactly where to rank Patterson - he's sure NOT top 20 like some suggest - because of the chin issue, and the gnerally piss poor opposition. Wills is a lot better than many give him credit for. Some suggested he was the best of the "black dynamite" fighters (clearly I don't agree as you can see I have Langford considerably higher).


I agree, Patterson is not a top 20, but I'd personally place him at 21, which is above Wills. It also has to be noted that whipping up a top25 is more difficult than a simple "cliche' top 10 list" that most of the current generation of fans can do without regard for encompassing all aspects of the history of the division, this is part of the reason why they can't comprehend that Lennox is not a top 10.

Another thing I struggle with is Jeffries. Reading up on him both here and in some articles and books leads me to believe that in his prime, he was really a fighter ahead fo his time, I sometimes think about swithcing him with Johnson, but that's a tough call.

I have Jeffries at #13 and Lennox at #12, so I rank him about the same as you do. Debatable places don't matter much because you can justify a Jeffries even at #10, but also all the way to #15 depending on how much credit you want to give he and his era specifically. He was an innovator, so I give him the spot above Charles and Walcott, whom were great but had issue's.

Tyson is clearly borderline top ten, and I have considered switching him with Frazier.

I can't see a top 10 list without Joe Frazier personally. Frazier can be legitimately ranked anywhere from 7-10, but he definitley belongs in that bracket.

I personally have Foreman at #5 for comparison and Frazier at #8. Then I have Mike Tyson at #10 and interestingly enough, Sonny Liston at #9 just like you do.

Considering I rank Dempsey as highly I as I to at least partially on these grounds, I may just do that. Jackj Dempsey is horribly underrated today - in his time, and for many years after, he was considered the best of all time. Until the guys who actually saw him started to die offf, most people ranked him ahead of Louis. I really think the "GOAT" debate should be a three way affair.

Well, my top 15 list reads as:

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Larry Holmes
4. Jack Dempsey
5. George Foreman
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Evander Holyfield
8. Joe Frazier
9. Sonny Liston
10. Mike Tyson
11. Jack Johnson
12. Lennox Lewis
13. James Jeffries
14. Joe Walcott
15. Ezzard Charles

I guess I have Dempsey near the same spot, but for some reason I am just feeling that he's out of the top 5, but I can't justify it.:think

I regard him well for his time, he was the first true swarming destroyer and he blew spectators away.