The Best 3 All Time Heavyweights - Primes.

[Bill Butcher]

MUHAMMAD ALI (1966)

JOE LOUIS (1938)

MIKE TYSON (1987)


Put those 3 guys vs each other in any order & you ARE gonna see something really special.

:thumbsup

[Quickhands21]

Tyson
ali
louis this is based on h2h.an natural talent

[Muchmoore]

MUHAMMAD ALI (1966)

JOE LOUIS (1938)

MIKE TYSON (1987)


Put those 3 guys vs each other in any order & you ARE gonna see something really special.

:thumbsup

I have it the same way. With accomplishments weighted the same as h2h it's Ali, Louis, Tyson but in a purely h2h list it's Ali, Tyson, Louis.

[McGrain]

1 - Muhammad Ali

-------------------

2 - Joe Louis

--------------------

3 - Sonny Liston
4 - Lennox Lewis



I'm offering 4 without apology, because I see next to nothing between these two.

[Loewe]

Well, my Top3 are Ali, Louis and Marciano. H2h i think Lewis edges out Ali for the number one spot and Louis coming third.

[Nick Balsamo]

Tyson
ali
louis this is based on h2h.an natural talent

Tyson never beat a great HoF fighter, I don't think he would do too well against other great fighters who can stand up to him. You think Tyson would beat bigger, meaner guys like Liston or Foreman ?

1. Muhammad Ali (1966-67)

Too fast for anyone, pretty underrated power as his punches had sting and often came in rapid succession. His legendary jab and ring awarensss gave in an edge. Could also dance for more than 12 rounds if needed. His movement, lightning fast hands, his Robinson'esque footspeed, amazingly quick reflexes and something we can call his "spider sense" would confuse the opponents most of the time. Add to that, great determination, guile and toughness. He must be the greatest. :yep


2. George Foreman (1973-74)

Surprise surprise ! I know that my choice won't be liked by many people, but I feel that Foreman in his absolute prime, was able to knock out every fighter ever, except Muhammad Ali and maybe Sonny Liston. The irresistible force he showed vs Frazier, Norton and even Ali is jaw dropping. I believe that only Ali could've withstand that amount of punishment he took in The Jungle against the strong, hulking, belting beast that Foreman was. His defense and stamina are an obvious concern but most of the time, it's not a factor as he could finish the job early. A prime, focused and confident pre-Ali Foreman was effective at what he did.. chasing the opponent, towering him and laying the smackdown on him before the fatigue kicked in.


3. Joe Louis (1938-39), the best overall puncher ever at this weight, and perhaps at any weight. His punches were hard and fast and came with uncanny precision and perfect balance on the delivery. He moved in quickly and with concern. He never wasted his energy, each and every move was coldly calculated.You cannot escape his lethal charges... once there's blood in the water, there's no way out. The Schmeling rematch is the single most flawless fight we can look for. A complete shutout and utter destruction. I'm not the biggest Louis fan but he belongs here. Even his tendency to get floored and his "vulnerability" against pure finesse boxers can't make me overlook his incredible punching talent.


Tyson just missed the cut, but prime for prime, considering him "on paper" or ability wise, he must be Top 5 ever.

[Muchmoore]

Tyson never beat a great HoF fighter,

Tyson beat Spinks and Holmes both of whom are in the the HOF. Yeah, they were past their best but so was Frazier who was also tailormade for Foreman.

[Hatesrats]

1. Joe Louis
2. Cassius Clay/Muhammad Ali
3. Mike Tyson

[janitor]

1. Joseh Louis Barrows

2. Muhamad Ali

3a. Jim Jeffries

3b. Jack Johnson

3c. Jack Dempsey

4. The rest.

[Nick Balsamo]

Tyson beat Spinks and Holmes both of whom are in the the HOF. Yeah, they were past their best but so was Frazier who was also tailormade for Foreman.

Yeah, I should've said "prime great HoF fighter in his natural weightclass" :D

Frazier can be tailormade for Foreman but Frazier was closer to his prime than Holmes vs Tyson.

The Ali fight just stopped what could've been a very good reign, something like 7-8 title defene and maybe more.
In that mid-60' to late 70's gap, Foreman owns them all excepted Ali and maybe Larry Holmes. He could also destroy the likes of Frazier, Norton, Quarry, Young (yeah, a prime Foreman would've done it), Lyle and Shavers, which is impressive.

Tyson got beat by the 3 best opponents he faced. An hungry and fearless Evander, a brilliant Buster Douglas and an overmatching Lewis who fought a washed-up version of Iron Mike.. Has Tyson ever showed guts to come back to win a fight ?

[SuzieQ49]

I have it the same way. With accomplishments weighted the same as h2h it's Ali, Louis, Tyson but in a purely h2h list it's Ali, Tyson, Louis.


tyson accomplished alot. his 1980s title reign was one of the most dominating consistent highly decorative reigns in HW history, He arguebably accomplished more in his 4 year reign than holmes did in his 20 title defense reign.

[McGrain]

tyson accomplished alot. his 1980s title reign was one of the most dominating consistent highly decorative reigns in HW history


How do you think Baer's reign of terror in the HW division compares to Tyson's?

[Loewe]

1. Joseh Louis Barrows

2. Muhamad Ali

3a. Jim Jeffries

3b. Jack Johnson

3c. Jack Dempsey

4. The rest.

It would be interesting to hear your oppinion on Lewis in this case.

[SuzieQ49]

My list is

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Sonny Liston
with tyson a very very close 4th

[SuzieQ49]

How do you think Baer's reign of terror in the HW division compares to Tyson's?


No because baer never had a consistent 4 year window where all he did was fight the best opposition in the world and dominate everyone of them. Baer was insonsistent, he would fight great then lose to a journeyman level fighter.


Tyson from 1986-1990 mopped up 9 title defenses all against top 10 rated fighters and won all the fights cleanly and convinsingly.

baer did not beat any of the black fighters, beat only a couple top white contenders but never beat more than 2 very good fighters in a row, and suffered some emarrasing losses in there.

[Muchmoore]

tyson accomplished alot. his 1980s title reign was one of the most dominating consistent highly decorative reigns in HW history, He arguebably accomplished more in his 4 year reign than holmes did in his 20 title defense reign.

That's why I had him at 3.

But his resume isn't that of Joe Louis, who was HW champ for 11 years with 25 title defenses...

[Quickhands21]

H2h aside,based on greatness and acievements
1-Ali of course
2-Louis
3-Holmes
4-Marciano
5-Lewis

[janitor]

It would be interesting to hear your oppinion on Lewis in this case.

I rate Lewis verry highly.

He beat a large volume of ranked contenders and a superb title reign.

What knocks him out of the 3 bracket is the durability issue. I think that if he had a slightly better chin (even Joe Louis grade) he would have been almost unbeatable.

[McGrain]

IF you imagine Lewis against the whole field, you have to admit that he would drop many KO losses against the best punchers. That's not hating, I rate him at #4 - it's just that the very, very elite wouldn't suffer such losses in my view.

[Muchmoore]

Yeah, I should've said "prime great HoF fighter in his natural weightclass" :D

Frazier can be tailormade for Foreman but Frazier was closer to his prime than Holmes vs Tyson.

The Ali fight just stopped what could've been a very good reign, something like 7-8 title defene and maybe more.
In that mid-60' to late 70's gap, Foreman owns them all excepted Ali and maybe Larry Holmes. He could also destroy the likes of Frazier, Norton, Quarry, Young (yeah, a prime Foreman would've done it), Lyle and Shavers, which is impressive.

Tyson got beat by the 3 best opponents he faced. An hungry and fearless Evander, a brilliant Buster Douglas and an overmatching Lewis who fought a washed-up version of Iron Mike.. Has Tyson ever showed guts to come back to win a fight ?

Yes later in Tyson's career he rallied to beat Botha when he was behind on the cards. But most people simply dismiss this due to Botha not being an elite fighter.

Against Douglas, Tyson was getting beat up bad but in the 8th round he rallied to drop Douglas and possibly would of finished him off had the bell not rang. Tyson went out on his shield.

Tyson losing to Lewis reflects nothing on him in his prime, all he had left was power and it was still enough for him to win the first round and get the title shot in the first place. The Douglas and Holyfield fights do hurt his legacy but it was clear it was not the same Tyson that fought Spinks, Biggs, and Holmes. If you fault Tyson for losing to Douglas, and Holyfield I can fault Foreman for losing to Jimmy Young.

Foreman's win over Frazier overshadows any single win on Tyson's resume, but Tyson's overall body of work overshadows Foremans. Tyson had wins over Spinks, Holmes, Tubbs, Biggs, Ruddock, Bruno, Thomas, Tucker, Berbick, Golota if you want to count him, Stewart, Williams, Bonecrusher Smith who were all solid top ten fighters. Foreman has Frazier, Norton, Moorer, and Lyle. An old Chuvalo and Peralta are OK fighters. Foreman won the title at 45 that's a great accomplishment but Tyson was the youngest HW champ ever at 20, so that evens it out.

[Quickhands21]

Yes later in Tyson's career he rallied to beat Botha when he was behind on the cards. But most people simply dismiss this due to Botha not being an elite fighter.

Against Douglas, Tyson was getting beat up bad but in the 8th round he rallied to drop Douglas and possibly would of finished him off had the bell not rang. Tyson went out on his shield.

Tyson losing to Lewis reflects nothing on him in his prime, all he had left was power and it was still enough for him to win the first round and get the title shot in the first place. The Douglas and Holyfield fights do hurt his legacy but it was clear it was not the same Tyson that fought Spinks, Biggs, and Holmes. If you fault Tyson for losing to Douglas, and Holyfield I can fault Foreman for losing to Jimmy Young.

Foreman's win over Frazier overshadows any single win on Tyson's resume, but Tyson's overall body of work overshadows Foremans. Tyson had wins over Spinks, Holmes, Tubbs, Biggs, Ruddock, Bruno, Thomas, Tucker, Berbick, Golota if you want to count him, Stewart, Williams, Bonecrusher Smith who were all solid top ten fighters. Foreman has Frazier, Norton, Moorer, and Lyle. An old Chuvalo and Peralta are OK fighters. Foreman won the title at 45 that's a great accomplishment but Tyson was the youngest HW champ ever at 20, so that evens it out.
Great post!

[janitor]

That's why I had him at 3.

But his resume isn't that of Joe Louis, who was HW champ for 11 years with 25 title defenses...

Tyson gets sold short in one key respect.

Although his title reighn was short he actualy beat a huge volume of ranked contenders.

If you ranked the heavyweight champions based on how many curently ranked contenders they beat Tyson would be one of the best (honestly). He was beating the kind of ranked contenders that make up parts of some all time greats resumes late into his career.

To put what I am saying in perspective, the "shell of Mike Tyson" was still beating guys like Golotta.

How many fighters beat guys like that when they were shells?

[Chinxkid]

MUHAMMAD ALI (1966)

JOE LOUIS (1938)

MIKE TYSON (1987)


Put those 3 guys vs each other in any order & you ARE gonna see something really special.

:thumbsup

Maybe what you're saying is that in their primes they are interchangable, and that if we want to throw in a series of three all bets are off.

[Muchmoore]

Tyson gets sold short in one key respect.

Although his title reighn was short he actualy beat a huge volume of ranked contenders.

If you ranked the heavyweight champions based on how many curently ranked contenders they beat Tyson would be one of the best (honestly). He was beating the kind of ranked contenders that make up parts of some all time greats resumes late into his career.

To put what I am saying in perspective, the "shell of Mike Tyson" was still beating guys like Golotta.

How many fighters beat guys like that when they were shells?

Great post. People say Tyson was simply a shooting star, but when he was at his best for those 4 years he beat as many or more good fighters as pretty much anyone else in history.

I also agree with your Golota example, Tyson had little of the technique, body work, hand speed, stamina of the 80s but still was beating ranked and highly regarded fighters late into his career.

I'm just saying that due to Louis having the huge amount of title defenses/longevity on top/beating a huge number of ranked contenders and staying dangerous while old like Tyson (Louis was much better as he got older, actually), puts him above him in terms of just his overall resume/accomplishments. Head to head Tyson knocks him out imo.

[Bokaj]

1. Ali 1966-67. Just too fast and skillful. Unreal in some regards.
2. Lewis late 90's. It feels like a toss-up between Louis and Lewis, but I'll go with Lewis just to stand out a bit. No one with that size, strength and power has ever been as skillful as Lewis. Could lose focus, but I'm working from the assumption that everyone brings their A-game here.
3. Louis 1939-1942. Perfect punching machine. Deadly finisher. Like Lewis he was a killer in rematches as well.


Liston or Tyson could perhaps occupy a slot if they hadn't shown such failings when faced with adversity (especially when it comes to Tyson). Since more or less every match-up against other ATG:s would include a serious risk for adversity this is a bad defect to have in these kind of scenarious.

[Muchmoore]

Liston or Tyson could perhaps occupy a slot if they hadn't shown such failings when faced with adversity (especially when it comes to Tyson).

Why in the world more with Tyson? Liston lost his title by quitting on his stool after 6 rounds against a lighthitting Clay. Tyson had to get beat on for 10 rounds by Douglas and he still rallied to knock Douglas down late in the fight and went out like a champion. The Tyson of the 90s was mentally weak, yes, but the young Tyson pre prison never showed me that he crumbled or had any failings when faced with adversity...

[round15]

Jack Johnson. Even if some people say Jeffries wasn't prime or that he took a dive against Willard, Johnson was ahead of his time and is arguably the best defensive heavyweight of all time.

Joe Louis. His title reign atop the heavyweight division for nearly 12 years is still unchallenged to this date. He had some close calls and controversial decisions with Conn, Galento and Walcott, but he's arguably right beside Johnson as the best heavyweight of all time.

Rocky Marciano. Nobody can argue with perfection. Yeah, the Louis he beat was far past his prime, Archie Moore had him in trouble and some thought Charles deserved the nod in their contest, but Marciano has done what others still haven't done in their careers.

[Bokaj]

Why in the world more with Tyson? Liston lost his title by quitting on his stool after 6 rounds against a lighthitting Clay. Tyson had to get beat on for 10 rounds by Douglas and he still rallied to knock Douglas down late in the fight and went out like a champion. The Tyson of the 90s was mentally weak, yes, but the young Tyson pre prison never showed me that he crumbled or had any failings when faced with adversity...

I don't see why post-prison Tyson would be weaker. Usually you get mentally stronger with age.

He floored Douglas and KO'd Botha, but he would always have a punchers chance. When things started to get rough for him they just went rougher. I wouldn't say he crumbled exactly, but often it seemed like he just went through the motions when he stopped believing in his chances too win.

[Loewe]

Yes later in Tyson's career he rallied to beat Botha when he was behind on the cards. But most people simply dismiss this due to Botha not being an elite fighter.

Against Douglas, Tyson was getting beat up bad but in the 8th round he rallied to drop Douglas and possibly would of finished him off had the bell not rang. Tyson went out on his shield.

Tyson losing to Lewis reflects nothing on him in his prime, all he had left was power and it was still enough for him to win the first round and get the title shot in the first place. The Douglas and Holyfield fights do hurt his legacy but it was clear it was not the same Tyson that fought Spinks, Biggs, and Holmes. If you fault Tyson for losing to Douglas, and Holyfield I can fault Foreman for losing to Jimmy Young.

Foreman's win over Frazier overshadows any single win on Tyson's resume, but Tyson's overall body of work overshadows Foremans. Tyson had wins over Spinks, Holmes, Tubbs, Biggs, Ruddock, Bruno, Thomas, Tucker, Berbick, Golota if you want to count him, Stewart, Williams, Bonecrusher Smith who were all solid top ten fighters. Foreman has Frazier, Norton, Moorer, and Lyle. An old Chuvalo and Peralta are OK fighters. Foreman won the title at 45 that's a great accomplishment but Tyson was the youngest HW champ ever at 20, so that evens it out.

Hm, you knock Foreman for beating an old Chuvalo but count Holmes. A bit strange imo. the other thing i want to correct is that Tyson isn´t the youngest hw champ, that´s still Patterson. When Tyson won the linear title he was older than Patterson when he won the title.
Beside this, solid post :good

[OLD FOGEY]

Based on resumes:

1. Joe Louis

2. Muhammad Ali

3. Rocky Marciano

(Louis gets it this month--next month I may go back to Ali--Lennox Lewis I have at #4, Larry Holmes at #5)

[McGrain]

OF, sorry to re-tread old ground so recently trammled, but you are ranking Louis above Ali based upon his win resume?

[Muchmoore]

Hm, you knock Foreman for beating an old Chuvalo but count Holmes. A bit strange imo. the other thing i want to correct is that Tyson isn´t the youngest hw champ, that´s still Patterson. When Tyson won the linear title he was older than Patterson when he won the title.
Beside this, solid post :good

I didn't knock Foreman for beating Chuvalo, I said it was an OK win, which it was. An old Holmes was a better win than an old Chuvalo.

The only reason Patterson won the "linear" title earlier was because there were less belts and Spinks was fighting guys like a coked up Cooney and dropping belts rather than fight Tyson.

Even if your going to be harsh on him, he was still the youngest ever beltholder in history which is a great accomplishment...

[Muchmoore]

Jack Johnson. Even if some people say Jeffries wasn't prime or that he took a dive against Willard, Johnson was ahead of his time and is arguably the best defensive heavyweight of all time.

Joe Louis. His title reign atop the heavyweight division for nearly 12 years is still unchallenged to this date. He had some close calls and controversial decisions with Conn, Galento and Walcott, but he's arguably right beside Johnson as the best heavyweight of all time.

Rocky Marciano. Nobody can argue with perfection. Yeah, the Louis he beat was far past his prime, Archie Moore had him in trouble and some thought Charles deserved the nod in their contest, but Marciano has done what others still haven't done in their careers.

Strange list. What's your reasoning for there being no Ali?

[OLD FOGEY]

OF, sorry to re-tread old ground so recently trammled, but you are ranking Louis above Ali based upon his win resume?

Superior dominance. When he retired in 1948 at 34, Louis had proven himself superior to all his opposition either in the first match or in a rematch.

At the same age, Ali had not really proven himself better than Norton over the course of three fights. And there was also Jimmy Young. I have not reseen the Young fight in a number of years, but I remember Young as having the edge but Ali getting the decision.

Next month one of you fellows might convince me to go on the basis of superior opposition beaten and thus put Ali back at #1.

[Bokaj]

1. Ali 1966-67. Just too fast and skillful. Unreal in some regards.
2. Lewis late 90's. It feels like a toss-up between Louis and Lewis, but I'll go with Lewis just to stand out a bit. No one with that size, strength and power has ever been as skillful as Lewis. Could lose focus, but I'm working from the assumption that everyone brings their A-game here.
3. Louis 1939-1942. Perfect punching machine. Deadly finisher. Like Lewis he was a killer in rematches as well.


Liston or Tyson could perhaps occupy a slot if they hadn't shown such failings when faced with adversity (especially when it comes to Tyson). Since more or less every match-up against other ATG:s would include a serious risk for adversity this is a bad defect to have in these kind of scenarious.

Louis should probably be in second place, actually. Sure I want to stick out, but...

[Loewe]

I didn't knock Foreman for beating Chuvalo, I said it was an OK win, which it was. An old Holmes was a better win than an old Chuvalo.

The only reason Patterson won the "linear" title earlier was because there were less belts and Spinks was fighting guys like a coked up Cooney and dropping belts rather than fight Tyson.

Even if your going to be harsh on him, he was still the youngest ever beltholder in history which is a great accomplishment...

Well, doesn´t matter. Fact is, Mike won it later than Patterson and that´s not beeing harsh on Tyson that is just a fact. Like it or not.

[round15]

Strange list. What's your reasoning for there being no Ali?

Ali stayed in the game way too long on the account of some gift decisions he received. Doug Jones beat him, Norton beat him all three times, Shavers beat him, Jimmy Young beat him and his win over Frazier in the FOTC 1974 rematch is debatable as well. If Joe had three more rounds in that fight, he probably wins the fight because Ali was slowing down over the last few rounds. Either way, too much money was invested into Ali, so there's no way he was going to lose to Frazier and Norton twice. Boxing wouldn't have allowed that.

I could have put him # 3 ahead of Marciano which is the obvious spot after Johnson and Louis, but Marciano gets little respect around here and nobody can argue with perfection.

Ali and Dempsey would round out the top five of my list.

[cjgloves]

1.Tyson
2.Ali
3.louis

order of them three but if my all time list louis might not be there.

[Muchmoore]

Well, doesn´t matter. Fact is, Mike won it later than Patterson and that´s not beeing harsh on Tyson that is just a fact. Like it or not.

Alright, Tyson was still the youngest beltholder ever and 2nd youngest "Linear" Champion of all time. Keep in mind when Patterson won it, he only had to win one fight and that was against a well past his best Archie Moore who had slid. Tyson had to beat WBC champ Berbick, IBF champ Tucker, and WBA champ Smith, just to finally get Spinks in the ring for the linear title.

[Muchmoore]

Ali stayed in the game way too long on the account of some gift decisions he received. Doug Jones beat him, Norton beat him all three times, Shavers beat him, Jimmy Young beat him and his win over Frazier in the FOTC 1974 rematch is debatable as well. If Joe had three more rounds in that fight, he probably wins the fight because Ali was slowing down over the last few rounds. Either way, too much money was invested into Ali, so there's no way he was going to lose to Frazier and Norton twice. Boxing wouldn't have allowed that.

I could have put him # 3 ahead of Marciano which is the obvious spot after Johnson and Louis, but Marciano gets little respect around here and nobody can argue with perfection.

Ali and Dempsey would round out the top five of my list.

Ali staying in the game too long doesn't affect his prime standings. Jones-Ali was an even fight but that Ali was still a little green and it was before his best fights.
Saying Shavers, Young, Frazier in the rematch of FOTC, Norton all three times beat him is stretching it wayyyy past the limit and using that as basis to keep a prime Ali out of the top 3 ever is as well. If Frazier had 3 more rounds he might have won, but guess what he didn't, and Ali fought accordingly to the 15 rounds.

[Minto]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Holyfield
4. Tyson
5. Lewis

[Bokaj]

Ali stayed in the game way too long on the account of some gift decisions he received. Doug Jones beat him, Norton beat him all three times, Shavers beat him, Jimmy Young beat him and his win over Frazier in the FOTC 1974 rematch is debatable as well. If Joe had three more rounds in that fight, he probably wins the fight because Ali was slowing down over the last few rounds. Either way, too much money was invested into Ali, so there's no way he was going to lose to Frazier and Norton twice. Boxing wouldn't have allowed that.

Funny, how things like this gets bandied about and people still talk about how "sacred" Ali is. So he lost every fight he was in that was even remotely close? If that was true he wouldn't be in my top 3 either, probably.

And, yeah, you forget a couple. Foreman was drugged, Lyle would have beaten Ali if he wasn't prematurely stopped, Patterson if his back hadn't given out, Liston if he hadn't been forced to throw those fights, Terrel if Ali hadn't poked his eye out, and so forth and so forth. Methinks Ali had Keyser Soeze as manager. Or maybe it's really him who is Soeze... Mindblowing, isn't it?

[Russell]

I rate Lewis verry highly.

He beat a large volume of ranked contenders and a superb title reign.

What knocks him out of the 3 bracket is the durability issue. I think that if he had a slightly better chin (even Joe Louis grade) he would have been almost unbeatable.

And how was his chin any worse than Joe's?

[LennoxGOAT]

H2H....Lennox and Ali in no order with Foreman as the 3rd.

Everyone below the 3 are muddled together.

[Calroid]

Since the question of this thread is about prime and not resumes, I would say:

1.Ali + Tyson
3.Louis

Tyson before he joined King, was the Angel Of Death (in boxing terms). Imagine Floyd Patterson (the best boxer that Ali had seen and he admitted it) with immense power and a chin.

His prime was extremely short.

In terms of resumes it would be:

1.Ali
2.Louis
10+ Tyson

[Guido]

Tyson never beat a great HoF fighter, I don't think he would do too well against other great fighters who can stand up to him. You think Tyson would beat bigger, meaner guys like Liston or Foreman ?

1. Muhammad Ali (1966-67)

Too fast for anyone, pretty underrated power as his punches had sting and often came in rapid succession. His legendary jab and ring awarensss gave in an edge. Could also dance for more than 12 rounds if needed. His movement, lightning fast hands, his Robinson'esque footspeed, amazingly quick reflexes and something we can call his "spider sense" would confuse the opponents most of the time. Add to that, great determination, guile and toughness. He must be the greatest. :yep


2. George Foreman (1973-74)

Surprise surprise ! I know that my choice won't be liked by many people, but I feel that Foreman in his absolute prime, was able to knock out every fighter ever, except Muhammad Ali and maybe Sonny Liston. The irresistible force he showed vs Frazier, Norton and even Ali is jaw dropping. I believe that only Ali could've withstand that amount of punishment he took in The Jungle against the strong, hulking, belting beast that Foreman was. His defense and stamina are an obvious concern but most of the time, it's not a factor as he could finish the job early. A prime, focused and confident pre-Ali Foreman was effective at what he did.. chasing the opponent, towering him and laying the smackdown on him before the fatigue kicked in.


3. Joe Louis (1938-39), the best overall puncher ever at this weight, and perhaps at any weight. His punches were hard and fast and came with uncanny precision and perfect balance on the delivery. He moved in quickly and with concern. He never wasted his energy, each and every move was coldly calculated.You cannot escape his lethal charges... once there's blood in the water, there's no way out. The Schmeling rematch is the single most flawless fight we can look for. A complete shutout and utter destruction. I'm not the biggest Louis fan but he belongs here. Even his tendency to get floored and his "vulnerability" against pure finesse boxers can't make me overlook his incredible punching talent.


Tyson just missed the cut, but prime for prime, considering him "on paper" or ability wise, he must be Top 5 ever.

Sold! I rate Holmes higher than Foreman in terms of accomplishments and all-time rankings, but H2H, these are the three I think would just dominate. Liston isn't far off. I just don't see it with Tyson - never did.

[pugilist_boyd]

# 1-louis -# 2 dempsey # 3 jeffries #4 ali #5 tyson these picks are in the fighters best primes not durring title reign nessicerely and this order could flip flop by the time i get done typing way to close to call ali would mainly have to use his bicycling feet to beat any of them

[sthomas]

#1-Ali
#2-Louis
#3-Marciano

[Seamus]

Louis
Ali
Lewis

next would be Dempsey, Tyson and Holmes.

[Ezzard]

Tyson has no right to be in a top 3...

Take a moment to look at what others could do and what they did do... Tyson was a dangerous fighter but the ratings here are nonsense...

[META5]

Tyson has no right to be in a top 3...

Take a moment to look at what others could do and what they did do...

Out of interest, which HWs in their absolute prime impress you more than prime Tyson ... Ability wise, technically, skillset ... whatever your criteria are. Can you name them and explain why you make your conclusions?

[Muchmoore]

Out of interest, which HWs in their absolute prime impress you more than prime Tyson ... Ability wise, technically, skillset ... whatever your criteria are. Can you name them and explain why you make your conclusions?

Precisely. And before people say he never beat a great fighter in his prime well neither did Holmes, Dempsey, Lennox Lewis, etc. etc. there are many "greats" that have a weaker resume than Tyson that are rated higher. The only men who defeated a "great" fighter in his prime in the past 60 years is Ali defeating Foreman, and Bowe beating Evander.

[Muchmoore]

1. Rocky Marciano at age 29 - great power, iron chin, endless stamina... nobody could keep up with him for 15 rounds.

2. Jack Dempsey at age 24 - Fast and powerful, hard to hit and had an iron chin even if you did hit him. Less stamina than Marciano.

3. Joe Louis at age 27 - Great punching speed, power and accuracy, at this age he also had great defense.

Gene Tunney and Muhammad Ali don't make the list because their defensive strategy is a disadvantage in itself. The top three fighters would have the power and punching speed to hit their target and hurt.

Foreman, Liston, Frazier all had the power and speed to hurt Ali, but they never could finish him. and two of these three fought him past his prime. Tunney is not not an ATG HW.

[Bill Butcher]

#27 or 28th Mike Tyson.

:verysad

I hate to be the one to break the news to you but there`s a strong chance you could be mentally ill (assuming your post wasnt a joke of course)

[Bill Butcher]

Well, doesn´t matter. Fact is, Mike won it later than Patterson and that´s not beeing harsh on Tyson that is just a fact. Like it or not.

The record books state that Mike Tyson is the youngest ever heavyweight champion at age 20 with Patterson 2nd at 21 & Ali 3rd at 22.

THATS FACT.... not opinion, but fact, check it out if you dont believe me.

:thumbsup

[Bill Butcher]

Ali stayed in the game way too long on the account of some gift decisions he received. Doug Jones beat him, Norton beat him all three times, Shavers beat him, Jimmy Young beat him and his win over Frazier in the FOTC 1974 rematch is debatable as well. If Joe had three more rounds in that fight, he probably wins the fight because Ali was slowing down over the last few rounds. Either way, too much money was invested into Ali, so there's no way he was going to lose to Frazier and Norton twice. Boxing wouldn't have allowed that.

1. Clay beat Doug Jones by at least 2 rds, watch the fight instead of reading biased peoples opinions.

2. Norton (3rd fight) & young might have deserved the decisions but Ali was never much good after the 3rd Frazier fight.

3. Ali beat Shavers, Frazier (2nd fight) & Norton (2nd fight)

4. Im guessing your name is rd 15 because of rd 15 in the FOTC & Ali is not your favourite boxer, in fact far from it ?

[Bummy Davis]

Joe Louis fought the most defenses, great # of still prime ex Champs, greatest power/combo puncher, 25 title defenses 68-3...Joe was the ultimate fighting machine, economical but effieciant

Rocky Marciano 49-0 43 KO's 6 title defenses vs 5 # 1 and 1 # 2 rated contender, Hard 2 fisted puncher,great workrate and stamina, late power, great recup, mental strength,solid chin,Rythym breaker,punched collar bones, arms

Ali...beat Foreman,Liston,Frazier, Norton,Spinks...fastest hands good feet,solid chin...mental strength....Prime in Frazier 1...Foreman 1...Liston 1...good ability to adapt, confuse and conceal, showman..who conviced the crowd, his opponents and the ref

[Seamus]

showman..who conviced the crowd, his opponents and the ref


Which is why I not only find many of his fights boring and shams but also his legacy is extremely flawed as he inspired generations of whiners and actors and piss-ant showmen. Ali did a lot to destroy the sport of boxing.

[Big Yank Bal]

#1-Ali
#2-Louis
#3-Marciano


:yep

[ripcity]

1.Tyson
2. Louis
3. Ali

[Bill Butcher]

Ali did a lot to destroy the sport of boxing.

:lol:

You should do stand up.

Ali saved boxing you nutter. :nut

[Seamus]

:lol:

You should do stand up.

Ali saved boxing you nutter. :nut

No. His influence fucked it up. Maybe the yanks are all gung-ho over the guy- and he was truly great for a while- but that clinching, clowning, holding the ropes, holding behind the head, pandering to the audience and judges, the sense of entitlement that he dragged into the ring that he was BETTER than the sport RUINED the boxing for decades. Hundreds of less talented fighters tried to emulate that shit and ended up turning the sport into an arena for candy-assed whiners.

No, sir, you are wrong.

[jamie1988]

1-Balboa
2-Butterbean
3-Audley Harrison

[D-MAC]

1 - Ali
2 - Louis
3 - Lewis

[Bill Butcher]

No. His influence fucked it up. Maybe the yanks are all gung-ho over the guy- and he was truly great for a while- but that clinching, clowning, holding the ropes, holding behind the head, pandering to the audience and judges, the sense of entitlement that he dragged into the ring that he was BETTER than the sport RUINED the boxing for decades. Hundreds of less talented fighters tried to emulate that shit and ended up turning the sport into an arena for candy-assed whiners.

No, sir, you are wrong.

Most great fighters that were influenced by Ali brought entertainment to boxing, guys like Jones jr, Leonard & Naseem Hamed (love him or hate him) turned many people into boxing fans who otherwise wouldnt have been fans because of their charisma & they directly credit Ali as the benchmark for their careers.

Nothing is 100% perfect & just because a few idiots try & copy Ali & make themselves look bad doesnt mean the sport is `ruined.`

Before Ali came, boxers never earned the money they deserved, with that comes some negativity with whiners as you say using this in a bad way but all in all, Ali helped boxing way more than he hurt boxing.

;)

[Chinxkid]

Most great fighters that were influenced by Ali brought entertainment to boxing, guys like Jones jr, Leonard & Naseem Hamed (love him or hate him) turned many people into boxing fans who otherwise wouldnt have been fans because of their charisma & they directly credit Ali as the benchmark for their careers.

Nothing is 100% perfect & just because a few idiots try & copy Ali & make themselves look bad doesnt mean the sport is `ruined.`

Before Ali came, boxers never earned the money they deserved, with that comes some negativity with whiners as you say using this in a bad way but all in all, Ali helped boxing way more than he hurt boxing.

;)

Here, here!

[D-MAC]

Most great fighters that were influenced by Ali brought entertainment to boxing, guys like Jones jr, Leonard & Naseem Hamed (love him or hate him) turned many people into boxing fans who otherwise wouldnt have been fans because of their charisma & they directly credit Ali as the benchmark for their careers.

Nothing is 100% perfect & just because a few idiots try & copy Ali & make themselves look bad doesnt mean the sport is `ruined.`

Before Ali came, boxers never earned the money they deserved, with that comes some negativity with whiners as you say using this in a bad way but all in all, Ali helped boxing way more than he hurt boxing.

;)

Well said.

Ali may not be the best boxer of all time, but he is by far the most well known.

He was a damn good influence, and was idolised by many of the fighters that came after him (if it wasn't for Ali we could have lost some of our best pugilists of the last few years to other sports/occupations).

[Bill Butcher]

Well said.

Ali may not be the best boxer of all time, but he is by far the most well known.

He was a damn good influence, and was idolised by many of the fighters that came after him (if it wasn't for Ali we could have lost some of our best pugilists of the last few years to other sports/occupations).

Definetely.

Ps. Best overall p4p fighter must go to Robinson but Ali is right up there behind him & IMO is the best ever HWT & possibly no2 p4p. Not bad at all.

:good

[Bill1234]

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Larry Holmes

[COULDHAVEBEEN]

For me the best 3 by a fair margin are Rocky Marciano, Mohammed Ali and Joe Louis. The only tricky part is getting them in the correct order.

JOE LOUIS: By mid 1948, Joe Louis was 60-1-0. It’s hard to argue that by then he wasn’t the best there’d ever been (until that time). His only blemish had been a loss to Max Shmelling in 1936, and 52 of his 60 wins had been by KOs. The only doubts that can be raised on Louis are the extra bouts he had after this time (in order to pay the taxman) and the quality of some of his earlier opponents. But his record, especially for longetivity as World Champion, is unique.

ROCKY MARCIANO: When Marciano retired undefeated in 1955 his record read 49 wins, 43 of them by KO. He beat amongst others Jersey Joe Walcott, Joe Loius, Ezzard Charles & Archie Moore. In my mind he’d probably surpassed Joe Louis. Louis was certainly a better boxer, in the purest sense. But Marciano was a wrecking ball! The fact that Marciano retired undefeated was the cream on the cake of a brilliant record.

MUHAMMAD ALI: In 1977, when Ali defeated Ernie Shavers, his record read 55-2-0. His wins included Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Patterson & Liston, and the only blemishes earlier losses to Frazier & Norton, which he later avenged. At this point it could be argued Ali had surpassed Louis. Mainly because he fought and beat better opposition (there was no Frazier or Foreman around during Louis’ reign). It was mainly downhill for Ali from late 1977 on-ward. That’s partly why Marciano’s unbeaten record puts him ahead in my mind.

So for me, it’s 1/ MARCIANO 2/ ALI 3/ LOUIS and a fair gap to the rest.

[Loewe]

The record books state that Mike Tyson is the youngest ever heavyweight champion at age 20 with Patterson 2nd at 21 & Ali 3rd at 22.

THATS FACT.... not opinion, but fact, check it out if you dont believe me.

:thumbsup

If yxou call a meaningless belt hw title than you are right. I don´t.

[Holmes' Jab]

Louis '38
Ali '67
Liston '60
Holmes '81
Lewis '99
Tyson '88

[Ezzard]

Out of interest, which HWs in their absolute prime impress you more than prime Tyson ... Ability wise, technically, skillset ... whatever your criteria are. Can you name them and explain why you make your conclusions?

If I look at a roster of greats and put Tyson up against them and look at what he actually did....

I'm not one who believes in his mythical 'prime'. In fact the word 'prime' in a thread title is usually ruse to try and think up a new way of putting Mike at the top of the tree.

What I see is a very mobile big man, good hand speed, decent defence for an attacking minded fighter (though way overrated these days). I look at this evidence and see that Mike actually had the ability to beat anyone on his day. Though he was always too easily handled on the inside and often frustrated at close quarters. Then I look at the defeats (because this is where you see a man stripped bare). This is where you really see what is there, in their core...

If Tyson is in a competitive fight we see a similar pattern. He loses his composure from as far back as Mitch Green. Loses his focus. looks for an easy way out. This begins with the search for the KO blow to finish it. If that doesn't come the frustration grows... Against the greats he's going to be in a lot of competitive fights. He's going to win some by jumping all over his opponents but he's not going to win any fight that continues to be competitive.

Which Tyson fight is really that impressive? His best wins were Berbick and Thomas, both of whom were inconsistent and faded by the time he faced them. A far more worn out Holyfield split him in two and pulled his heart out of his chest. Douglas beat him up with a straight up guard and a limited repertoire made up of jab, one-two... Many will tell you oooh but that's not prime Tyson!!! he was mid 20s... He never won a fight that compares with guys like Louis, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Liston, Holyfield...

Tyson was a deeply flawed fighter who flattered to deceive... Ability always gives him a shot but realistically, based on what he actually did only some partisanship and myopia can justify him being in the top 3.

[Bummy Davis]

For me the best 3 by a fair margin are Rocky Marciano, Mohammed Ali and Joe Louis. The only tricky part is getting them in the correct order.

JOE LOUIS: By mid 1948, Joe Louis was 60-1-0. It’s hard to argue that by then he wasn’t the best there’d ever been (until that time). His only blemish had been a loss to Max Shmelling in 1936, and 52 of his 60 wins had been by KOs. The only doubts that can be raised on Louis are the extra bouts he had after this time (in order to pay the taxman) and the quality of some of his earlier opponents. But his record, especially for longetivity as World Champion, is unique.

ROCKY MARCIANO: When Marciano retired undefeated in 1955 his record read 49 wins, 43 of them by KO. He beat amongst others Jersey Joe Walcott, Joe Loius, Ezzard Charles & Archie Moore. In my mind he’d probably surpassed Joe Louis. Louis was certainly a better boxer, in the purest sense. But Marciano was a wrecking ball! The fact that Marciano retired undefeated was the cream on the cake of a brilliant record.

MUHAMMAD ALI: In 1977, when Ali defeated Ernie Shavers, his record read 55-2-0. His wins included Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Patterson & Liston, and the only blemishes earlier losses to Frazier & Norton, which he later avenged. At this point it could be argued Ali had surpassed Louis. Mainly because he fought and beat better opposition (there was no Frazier or Foreman around during Louis’ reign). It was mainly downhill for Ali from late 1977 on-ward. That’s partly why Marciano’s unbeaten record puts him ahead in my mind.

So for me, it’s 1/ MARCIANO 2/ ALI 3/ LOUIS and a fair gap to the rest.

good post

[Holmes' Jab]

Marciano, whilst he rates high overall would suffer more on a head to head basis. In my view anyway.

[janitor]

Marciano, whilst he rates high overall would suffer more on a head to head basis. In my view anyway.

I tend to think that Marciano is the type of fighter who would create a smaller version of hell for any fighter regardless of their style, and that in order to beat him you would have to be prepared to pass through it.

[Miguelito]

1 - Muhammad Ali

-------------------

2 - Joe Louis

--------------------

3 - Sonny Liston
4 - Lennox Lewis



I'm offering 4 without apology, because I see next to nothing between these two.
1)Mike Tyson-cause in his prime he would handle anyone on this list and a crime to not even have him on your top 3 bro:patsch
__________________________________________________
2) Muhammad Ali
__________________________________________________
3)Joe Louis-once again how does Lennox and Sonny get passed the Brown Bomber?
4)I actually have a tie for this spot giving JL the close edge over Rocky Marciano:deal

[Mendoza]

MUHAMMAD ALI (1966)

JOE LOUIS (1938)

MIKE TYSON (1987)


Put those 3 guys vs each other in any order & you ARE gonna see something really special.

:thumbsup


I think you could make a case for about seven or so champions being #1 or #2.

[PlayerGold81]

1 Muhammed Ali
2 Sonny Liston
3 Frazier

In his Prime I think Listons reach and power could of been enough to just beat Frazier. Peak condition Frazier just edges out Foreman for third.

[Bill Butcher]

If yxou call a meaningless belt hw title than you are right. I don´t.

Fair enough but think of it this way....

Mike Tyson was without question due a shot at the world champion when he fought Berbick so more than likely if there was still only one belt (as I believe there should be) then Tyson would have still got that shot & at that particular time, Tyson was the best HWT on the planet & would have beaten whoever had that one belt if you get what I mean.....
So why should Tyson be stripped of being the youngest ever HWT champ just because there are more belts now than when Ali & Patterson won it, thats crazy. The fact is... those 3 won the HWT title because they were the best HWTs in the world at that time & of those 3, Mike was the youngest so IMO the record books are correct.

I mean... its not as if Joe Louis or one of the other ATGs held a title when Mike beat Berbick... then you could say that he didnt beat the real champ.... but Mike was THE BEST & Berbick only got what any other belt holder at that time would have got.

Cheers !

:thumbsup

[Loewe]

Fair enough but think of it this way....

Mike Tyson was without question due a shot at the world champion when he fought Berbick so more than likely if there was still only one belt (as I believe there should be) then Tyson would have still got that shot & at that particular time, Tyson was the best HWT on the planet & would have beaten whoever had that one belt if you get what I mean.....
So why should Tyson be stripped of being the youngest ever HWT champ just because there are more belts now than when Ali & Patterson won it, thats crazy. The fact is... those 3 won the HWT title because they were the best HWTs in the world at that time & of those 3, Mike was the youngest so IMO the record books are correct.

I mean... its not as if Joe Louis or one of the other ATGs held a title when Mike beat Berbick... then you could say that he didnt beat the real champ.... but Mike was THE BEST & Berbick only got what any other belt holder at that time would have got.

Cheers !

:thumbsup

Than you think Ruiz was as much hw champion of the world as Ali? Wow, i´m shocked.

[Bill Butcher]

Than you think Ruiz was as much hw champion of the world as Ali? Wow, i´m shocked.

Difference was.... Ali was the best HWT in the world when he won the title, Tyson was WITHOUT DOUBT the best HWT in the world when he won the title, John Ruiz was probably not the best HWT in the world when he won the title, he just happened to be better than one of the other belt holders, this was not the case for Ali or Tyson.

To put it another way.... Tyson at age 20 managed to become the best HWT on the planet (something no other HWT has ever done) he just had to bitch slap Berbick for it to be made official but everyone knew anyway as Im sure you did too.

:thumbsup

[Loewe]

Difference was.... Ali was the best HWT in the world when he won the title, Tyson was WITHOUT DOUBT the best HWT in the world when he won the title, John Ruiz was probably not the best HWT in the world when he won the title, he just happened to be better than one of the other belt holders, this was not the case for Ali or Tyson.

To put it another way.... Tyson at age 20 managed to become the best HWT on the planet (something no other HWT has ever done) he just had to bitch slap Berbick for it to be made official but everyone knew anyway as Im sure you did too.

:thumbsup

Maybe Tyson was the best hw at the time but to prove it he had to beat the man who beat the man - and that was Spinks and not Berbick.