Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

For discussions on the great and not so great fighters of the past.

What you think of this list?

Great list
0
No votes
Good list, but some fighters are out-of-place
8
30%
Average list. Could do better myself.
6
22%
Bad list. Too many inaccuracies.
7
26%
Terrible. Just terrible.
6
22%
 
Total votes: 27
Crease
Posts: 11512
Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 10:19
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Crease » 13 Jun 2011, 17:46

From the 1999 Holiday edition:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Evander Holyfield
4. George Foreman
5. Larry Holmes
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Sonny Liston
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Johnson
10. Jack Dempsey
11. Ezzard Charles
12. James J. Jeffries
13. Jersey Joe Walcott
14. Mike Tyson
15. Gene Tunney
16. Harry Wills
17. Sam Langford
18. John L. Sullivan
19. Max Schmeling
20. Max Baer
21. Floyd Patterson
22. Ken Norton
23. Riddick Bowe
24. Bob Fitzsimmons
25. Joe Jeannette
26. Jimmy Bivins
27. Jerry Quarry
28. Jack Sharkey
29. Archie Moore
30. Sam McVey
31. Cleveland Williams
32. Lennox Lewis
33. Earnie Shavers
34. Jim Corbett
35. Ernie Terrell
36. Michael Spinks
37. Jimmy Young
38. Zora Folley
39. Ingemar Johansson
40. Ron Lyle
41. Tim Witherspoon
42. Jimmy Ellis
43. Mike Weaver
44. Michael Moorer
45. James J. Braddock
46. Tommy Farr
47. Tommy Burns
48. Tommy Gibbons
49. Pinklon Thomas
50. Michael Dokes

How do you rate this list form boxing's number one text.
Who is too high?
Who is too low?
keithmoonhangover
Posts: 7971
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42
Location: Living On Planet Happy

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby keithmoonhangover » 13 Jun 2011, 18:41

Lewis is too low, Bowe, Holyfield and Foreman are too high.

There is no way in the world that Liston should be rated higher than Jack Johnson.

Next thing they'll be saying that Jerry Quarry ranks higher than Lennox Lewis - oh wait, they are. :lol:
SaadOffTheDeck
Posts: 18786
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby SaadOffTheDeck » 13 Jun 2011, 18:56

I imagine the list was made before Lewis fought Holyfield.
crusader
Posts: 11097
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 20:14

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby crusader » 13 Jun 2011, 19:51

I think Cleveland Williams is too high.
IRLangmaid25
Posts: 3185
Joined: 01 Feb 2010, 19:08
Location: Langmaid Towers, Woodbridge, Suffolk, England, UK, Europe, The World, Earth.
Contact:

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby IRLangmaid25 » 13 Jun 2011, 20:04

It would be interesting to see the list now in 2011 and see how would stack up when you throw in the Brothers K.
dempseyfire
Posts: 5905
Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby dempseyfire » 13 Jun 2011, 20:29

Holyfield is WAY too high. Moorer shouldn't be on there. Johnson and Dempsey are too low.

My top 50 (Tunney and Langford I rank as light heavyweights):

1) Louis

2) Ali

3) Johnson

4) Dempsey

5) Foreman

6) Holmes

7) Frazier

8 ) Marciano

9) Liston

10) Jefferies

11) Holyfield

12) Lewis

13) Tyson

14) Walcott

15) Charles

16) Schmeling

17) Baer

18) Norton

19) Wills

20) Sharkey

21) Patterson

21) Jeannette

22) McVey

23) Corbett

24) Bivins

25) Quarry

26) Fulton (highly under-rated fighter)

27) Miske

28) Godfrey

29) Bowe

30) Moore

31) Willard

32) Terrell

33) Machen

34) Gunboat Smith

35) Renault

36) Pastor

37) Nova

38) Folley

39) Ellis

40) Young

41) Ed Martin

42) Lyle

43) Shavers

44) Johansson

45) Carnera

46) Ray

47) V. Klitschko (he at least showed he could compete with a great fighter, unlike his brother who has beaten a bunch of scrubs and lost by stoppage to 3 average heavyweights)

48) Witherspoon

49) Maher

50) W. Klitschko
Crease
Posts: 11512
Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 10:19
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Crease » 13 Jun 2011, 20:44

I don't know, but here's my views:

Too highs:
Evander Holyfield,
Sonny Liston (slightly to high, should be on the cusp of the top 10)
Cleveland Taylor (top 30?)
Pinklon Thomas (surprised he made the list)

Too Lows:
Mike Tyson (should DEFINITELY be in the top 10.)
Rocky Marciano (only marginally)
Crease
Posts: 11512
Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 10:19
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Crease » 13 Jun 2011, 20:44

IRLangmaid25 wrote:It would be interesting to see the list now in 2011 and see how would stack up when you throw in the Brothers K.

x2.
:TU:
Crease
Posts: 11512
Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 10:19
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Crease » 13 Jun 2011, 20:46

dempseyfire wrote:V. Klitschko (he at least showed he could compete with a great fighter, unlike his brother who has beaten a bunch of scrubs and lost by stoppage to 3 average heavyweights)

I'm not a Klitchsko fan,. but I don't think that you are giving Wlad enough credit, for the past half-decade he has been the best around and beaten practically all the top contenders...
He's had a period ofdominance that few Heavyweight Champions have had, gave him credit for it.
:TU:
dempseyfire
Posts: 5905
Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby dempseyfire » 13 Jun 2011, 21:33

Crease wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:V. Klitschko (he at least showed he could compete with a great fighter, unlike his brother who has beaten a bunch of scrubs and lost by stoppage to 3 average heavyweights)

I'm not a Klitchsko fan,. but I don't think that you are giving Wlad enough credit, for the past half-decade he has been the best around and beaten practically all the top contenders...
He's had a period ofdominance that few Heavyweight Champions have had, gave him credit for it.
:TU:


He's beating the same level of comp Darius M beat in Germany . . so why does Wlad get credit for dominance over mediocrity and Darius doesn't . . just b/c there isn't a Jones Jr lurking around (and there is, who happens to be his brother)?

Burns had the same level of dominance and he's not in my top 50, and at least he beat a HOFer in O'Brian . . .all but two (Lyle and Witherspoon) of the fighters I ranked ahead of Wlad beat at least ONE Hall of Fame fighter and I'll take not only the resumes of those two over Wlads, but favor both of them to KTFO Wlad out the ring. Wlad hasn't beaten anyone who would come within sniffing distance of getting on a ballot to any HOF . . .maybe Chris Byrd will get in the Flint Michigan Hall of Fame.
The End
Posts: 1253
Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 17:53

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby The End » 14 Jun 2011, 00:44

Not identical to my list but I would definitely rearrange a few names.

It was in 99 so Lewis and Holyfields rankings are off.
jaclem2
Posts: 551
Joined: 09 Dec 2008, 17:42

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby jaclem2 » 14 Jun 2011, 02:04

...posssible, i suppose, to list the best 50, but no way to list them in order of quality. tough enough to do that with the top 5...
SaadOffTheDeck
Posts: 18786
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby SaadOffTheDeck » 14 Jun 2011, 04:22

dempseyfire wrote:
Crease wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:V. Klitschko (he at least showed he could compete with a great fighter, unlike his brother who has beaten a bunch of scrubs and lost by stoppage to 3 average heavyweights)

I'm not a Klitchsko fan,. but I don't think that you are giving Wlad enough credit, for the past half-decade he has been the best around and beaten practically all the top contenders...
He's had a period ofdominance that few Heavyweight Champions have had, gave him credit for it.
:TU:


He's beating the same level of comp Darius M beat in Germany . . so why does Wlad get credit for dominance over mediocrity and Darius doesn't . . just b/c there isn't a Jones Jr lurking around (and there is, who happens to be his brother)?

Burns had the same level of dominance and he's not in my top 50, and at least he beat a HOFer in O'Brian . . .all but two (Lyle and Witherspoon) of the fighters I ranked ahead of Wlad beat at least ONE Hall of Fame fighter and I'll take not only the resumes of those two over Wlads, but favor both of them to KTFO Wlad out the ring. Wlad hasn't beaten anyone who would come within sniffing distance of getting on a ballot to any HOF . . .maybe Chris Byrd will get in the Flint Michigan Hall of Fame.



The Klitschko's have no wins of note between them. That being said, either of them would beat the holy hell out of Primo Carnera.
keithmoonhangover
Posts: 7971
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42
Location: Living On Planet Happy

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby keithmoonhangover » 14 Jun 2011, 05:14

dempseyfire wrote:Holyfield is WAY too high. Moorer shouldn't be on there. Johnson and Dempsey are too low.

My top 50 (Tunney and Langford I rank as light heavyweights):

1) Louis

2) Ali

3) Johnson

4) Dempsey

5) Foreman

6) Holmes

7) Frazier

8 ) Marciano

9) Liston

10) Jefferies

11) Holyfield

12) Lewis

13) Tyson

14) Walcott

15) Charles

16) Schmeling

17) Baer

18) Norton

19) Wills

20) Sharkey

21) Patterson

21) Jeannette

22) McVey

23) Corbett

24) Bivins

25) Quarry

26) Fulton (highly under-rated fighter)

27) Miske

28) Godfrey

29) Bowe

30) Moore

31) Willard

32) Terrell

33) Machen

34) Gunboat Smith

35) Renault

36) Pastor

37) Nova

38) Folley

39) Ellis

40) Young

41) Ed Martin

42) Lyle

43) Shavers

44) Johansson

45) Carnera

46) Ray

47) V. Klitschko (he at least showed he could compete with a great fighter, unlike his brother who has beaten a bunch of scrubs and lost by stoppage to 3 average heavyweights)

48) Witherspoon

49) Maher

50) W. Klitschko


Wladimir and Vitali have beaten pretty much everyone put in front of them. Let me ask you this. Who did half the fighters on your list beat? Nobodies that's who. Putting Vitali Klitschko at 47 is absolutely ludicrous. Tim Witherspoon above Wladimir Klitschko - come on man, give your head a shake.
SaadOffTheDeck
Posts: 18786
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby SaadOffTheDeck » 14 Jun 2011, 12:19

I don't think Wlad could beat a half in shape Witherspoon.
keithmoonhangover
Posts: 7971
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42
Location: Living On Planet Happy

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby keithmoonhangover » 14 Jun 2011, 12:34

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't think Wlad could beat a half in shape Witherspoon.


That's highly questionable. The Wlad of the last few years has been a superb champion, winning with ease. If you're compaing the Wlad that got beat by Sanders and Brewster, then I'll mention the Witherspoon that got crushed by Bonecrusher Smith.

Prime for prime, it's an interesting fight, but Wlad has had many many more good days than Tim.
SaadOffTheDeck
Posts: 18786
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby SaadOffTheDeck » 14 Jun 2011, 12:54

keithmoonhangover wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't think Wlad could beat a half in shape Witherspoon.


That's highly questionable. The Wlad of the last few years has been a superb champion, winning with ease. If you're compaing the Wlad that got beat by Sanders and Brewster, then I'll mention the Witherspoon that got crushed by Bonecrusher Smith.

Prime for prime, it's an interesting fight, but Wlad has had many many more good days than Tim.


Spoon wasn't in any kind of shape and even admitted that he gave no effort to win. So yeah, I'd take Wlad over him on the worst day of Witherspoon's career.

Wlad has had many many more bums in the other corner. On their best days, I don't think Wlad lasts a round.
dempseyfire
Posts: 5905
Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby dempseyfire » 14 Jun 2011, 21:22

keithmoonhangover wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:Holyfield is WAY too high. Moorer shouldn't be on there. Johnson and Dempsey are too low.

My top 50 (Tunney and Langford I rank as light heavyweights):

1) Louis

2) Ali

3) Johnson

4) Dempsey

5) Foreman

6) Holmes

7) Frazier

8 ) Marciano

9) Liston

10) Jefferies

11) Holyfield

12) Lewis

13) Tyson

14) Walcott

15) Charles

16) Schmeling

17) Baer

18) Norton

19) Wills

20) Sharkey

21) Patterson

21) Jeannette

22) McVey

23) Corbett

24) Bivins

25) Quarry

26) Fulton (highly under-rated fighter)

27) Miske

28) Godfrey

29) Bowe

30) Moore

31) Willard

32) Terrell

33) Machen

34) Gunboat Smith

35) Renault

36) Pastor

37) Nova

38) Folley

39) Ellis

40) Young

41) Ed Martin

42) Lyle

43) Shavers

44) Johansson

45) Carnera

46) Ray

47) V. Klitschko (he at least showed he could compete with a great fighter, unlike his brother who has beaten a bunch of scrubs and lost by stoppage to 3 average heavyweights)

48) Witherspoon

49) Maher

50) W. Klitschko


Wladimir and Vitali have beaten pretty much everyone put in front of them. Let me ask you this. Who did half the fighters on your list beat? Nobodies that's who. Putting Vitali Klitschko at 47 is absolutely ludicrous. Tim Witherspoon above Wladimir Klitschko - come on man, give your head a shake.



I'll take the best wins of anyone on that list over the best Ws of the K brothers ANYDAY of the week and twice on Sunday. Witherspoon beat Page, Bruno, Tubbs, Bonecrusher Smith, Snipes, Truth Williams, Tillis . . I mean you can combine the Klitschkos best Ws together . . Byrd, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Brock, Chambers, Peter, Gomez, Kirk Johnson, and it still isn't as strong as that. Plus he fought Holmes VERY close, at least he lasted the distance rather than getting his eyeball torn out in his title shot.

The mid 80s were derided as a 'weak' era but I can't see the likes of Chagaev, Brock, Chambers, Johnson, and yes Haye ever getting past the top contenders. Byrd would be able to spring a few upsets and maybe Ibragimov could score a W over a few of the guys on their off-night, but that's it. A Mike Weaver would destroy most of those guys . .Sam Peter would've never made it past ESPN calibre opposition.
keithmoonhangover
Posts: 7971
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42
Location: Living On Planet Happy

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby keithmoonhangover » 15 Jun 2011, 17:27

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't think Wlad could beat a half in shape Witherspoon.


That's highly questionable. The Wlad of the last few years has been a superb champion, winning with ease. If you're compaing the Wlad that got beat by Sanders and Brewster, then I'll mention the Witherspoon that got crushed by Bonecrusher Smith.

Prime for prime, it's an interesting fight, but Wlad has had many many more good days than Tim.


Spoon wasn't in any kind of shape and even admitted that he gave no effort to win. So yeah, I'd take Wlad over him on the worst day of Witherspoon's career.

Wlad has had many many more bums in the other corner. On their best days, I don't think Wlad lasts a round.


Last time I heard something that funny I was watching Eddie Murphy's Delirious.
Ambling Alp
Posts: 3627
Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Ambling Alp » 15 Jun 2011, 17:43

The first ten aren't too bad; though I too would have Holyfield a little lower.
After that it is hit and miss.
How does Quarry get to be 15 spots ahead of Jimmy Ellis? Archie Moore should not be that high. Tommy Farr has no business being in the Top 50.
Of course Lewis only being #32 is unbelievable.
Heartbreak_Kid79
Posts: 412
Joined: 09 Nov 2006, 13:39
Location: UK

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Heartbreak_Kid79 » 23 Jun 2011, 07:34

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I imagine the list was made before Lewis fought Holyfield.


Yeah it was made leading up to Lewis-Holyfied 1.... very early in 1999.

I have a copy of the RING magazine (the issue after the list was printed) and someboy wrote in saying, Holyfield#3? are you going to reanalyze this when Lewis beats him??
Ambling Alp
Posts: 3627
Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Ambling Alp » 23 Jun 2011, 13:54

He was way past if when he fought Lewis, so the "draw" with Lewis should not hurt his ranking too much. However, # 3 does seem a bit high to begin with.
Adamj1987
Posts: 6808
Joined: 14 Oct 2008, 16:16
Location: I'm off the chain things are never gonna be the same
Contact:

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Adamj1987 » 23 Jun 2011, 16:00

Pinklon thomas and michael dokes top 50 ever? not a chance both were good fighters but not top 50 ever
SaadOffTheDeck
Posts: 18786
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby SaadOffTheDeck » 23 Jun 2011, 16:09

Heartbreak_Kid79 wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I imagine the list was made before Lewis fought Holyfield.


Yeah it was made leading up to Lewis-Holyfied 1.... very early in 1999.

I have a copy of the RING magazine (the issue after the list was printed) and someboy wrote in saying, Holyfield#3? are you going to reanalyze this when Lewis beats him??


My issue would be much more with Lewis at 32. I have Holyfield #4.
Ambling Alp
Posts: 3627
Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31

Re: Ring Magazine: Top 50 Heavyweights of all time:

Postby Ambling Alp » 23 Jun 2011, 19:15

Adamj1987 wrote:Pinklon thomas and michael dokes top 50 ever? not a chance both were good fighters but not top 50 ever


If you have done one of these lists, you will see that it gets harder the farther down the list you go. In another words, there is a bigger difference between whoever you rank #5 and say #25 than there is between say #30 and # 50.

Several of the "alphabet soup". champs of the 1980s (Thomas, Dokes, Witherspoon, Page, Tubbs etc are very close) You could almost put their names in a hat and draw them out. Really you could have these guys ranked between #40 and #60. They all had their ups and downs.

Return to “Boxers of the past”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 6 guests