Best Heavyweights by Category

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 03 Jan 2008, 00:50

Ezzard wrote:Stamina = JEFFRIES/MARCIANO

Good call.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 04 Jan 2008, 17:36

Jab - Ali, then Holmes. (speed and accurracy is a lot more important with a jab)

Right hand -Shavers, then Foreman

Left hook - Frazier, then Dempsey

Stamina -Jeffries

Chin - McCall, Chuvalo, or Cobb

Body - Frazier, then Marciano

Combinations - Ali, Louis

Defense - Ali, Tunney

Uppercut - Johnson, Tyson, or Foreman

Hand speed -Ali, then Tyson or Patterson

Ring general - Ali, then Tunney

Intelligence - Corbett,Tunney,Louis, or Ali

Effective pressure- Dempsey or Frazier. Then Marciano or Tyson.

Best finisher - Louis,Marciano and Foreman

Accurracy (the most underrated category) Ali, then Holyfield and Louis.

theone · Post by **theone** » 05 Jan 2008, 12:19

why is Jefferies stamina being rated so high? Yeah he fought 5 fights that went 20 rounds or more, but i doubt they were fought at a Hagler/Hearns pace.
The few fight clips I've seen of Jefferies doesn't suggest he wasn't exactly Henry Armstrong in there. He fought flat footed, combinations were rare, and clinches were as prevalent as in a John Ruiz highlight film.

I just don't see the justification in ranking his stamina higher than a Marciano's or Frazier's whose greatness in that category is easily evident.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 05 Jan 2008, 20:37

Syntax Error wrote:
elmersalsa wrote:If we say "best all around" does that mean the fighter is a complete fighter?
I would say so, that's why I nominated Evander Holyfield.

Excellent stamina & workrate; can punch a bit, can box very well & he had a great chin in his prime. He could also slug it out & bend the rules if necessary. :P

Well, in my opinion, I believe like you that Holyfield was the most complete fighter of the heavyweight class ever.

Can we rate Ezzard Charles as one of the most complete heavyweights too, even though, he is more considered as a ligh-heavyweight?

I do not think that Ali was a complete fighter, but some people here tated him as the best all around...That is why I asked if that means "complete fighter"

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 06 Jan 2008, 03:30

Punching power isn't the be all and end all (and Ali was hardly Pernel Whitaker in that department) and outside of that area Ali was better than Holyfield in any facet of boxing you want to name. And I highly doubt that Holyfield hit all that much harder than Ali.

Ezzard Charles is one of the greatest Heavyweight champions of all time.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 07 Jan 2008, 17:23

theone wrote:why is Jefferies stamina being rated so high? Yeah he fought 5 fights that went 20 rounds or more, but i doubt they were fought at a Hagler/Hearns pace.
The few fight clips I've seen of Jefferies doesn't suggest he wasn't exactly Henry Armstrong in there. He fought flat footed, combinations were rare, and clinches were as prevalent as in a John Ruiz highlight film.

I just don't see the justification in ranking his stamina higher than a Marciano's or Frazier's whose greatness in that category is easily evident.

I think going that long several times does prove you have good stamina. I understand your point about it being easier to last longer when you don't fight at a fast pace. However, even if you fight at a slower pace, it's still difficult to last 20 or more rounds. Just trying holding your hands up and moving around for that long. Even clinches take their toll after awhile. It's also difficult to judge Jeffries by the very limited footage of him.

Marciano only went more than 12 or more rounds twice in his whole career. Frazier did it 5 times, but only lasted 15 twice.

It's hard to say, I suppose if you had someone who fought at a fast pace and went 15 rounds several times and never seemed tired then you would have a clear cut winner here. Unfortunately no one seems to fit the bill.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 07 Jan 2008, 17:51

I Feel Fine wrote:Punching power isn't the be all and end all (and Ali was hardly Pernel Whitaker in that department) and outside of that area Ali was better than Holyfield in any facet of boxing you want to name. And I highly doubt that Holyfield hit all that much harder than Ali.

Ezzard Charles is one of the greatest Heavyweight champions of all time.

Yeah, Ali could do some pretty stuff in the ring, no doubt about it, but I think Holyfield was more complete of a fighter than Ali.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 08 Jan 2008, 02:25

Ali did more than "pretty stuff" in the ring. Holyfield did not get hit less than Ali, Holyfield was not a better boxer than Ali, and Ali had the greater physical attributes; speed, chin, stamina, agility, etc. except for perhaps punching power, as mentioned. And Ali is one of the few Heavyweights who surpasses Holyfield in the heart and resiliency departments.

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 08 Jan 2008, 02:40

In terms of who is the superior all-rounder, I would give the nod to Ali between the two.

I might give heart & chin to Holyfield though --- only on the basis that he proved his mettle during his peak years, whereas Ali never did (or had to). People IMO are too willing to combine the best of the 60's Ali with the best of the 70's. I agree the 70's Ali endured more in the Frazier wars than Holyfield ever had put upon him, & would rank that version of Ali tougher, but not the peak version of 65-67. George Foreman was a tough guy during the 90's who took boatloads of punishment at an advanced age but you can't transplant that onto the peak incarnation of the man.

Even so, handspeed, reflexes, combination punching, footwork, ring intelligence, adaptability, stamina --- all favour Ali over Holyfield.

p4p1 · Post by **p4p1** » 08 Jan 2008, 06:04

Goodnight, Irene wrote:In terms of who is the superior all-rounder, I would give the nod to Ali between the two.

I might give heart & chin to Holyfield though --- only on the basis that he proved his mettle during his peak years, whereas Ali never did (or had to). People IMO are too willing to combine the best of the 60's Ali with the best of the 70's. I agree the 70's Ali endured more in the Frazier wars than Holyfield ever had put upon him, & would rank that version of Ali tougher, but not the peak version of 65-67. George Foreman was a tough guy during the 90's who took boatloads of punishment at an advanced age but you can't transplant that onto the peak incarnation of the man.

Even so, handspeed, reflexes, combination punching, footwork, ring intelligence, adaptability, stamina --- all favour Ali over Holyfield.

how can ya say he was not tuff in his first rain we dont kno for sure he never laid on the ropes and took big shots i dont think a fighter just gets a great chin all of a sudden

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 08 Jan 2008, 06:11

I didn't say he wasn't tough --- I simply said there is some question to the peak Ali because he wasn't really tested in a gruelling, protracted fight. & chins do develope. If you watch him earlier in his career, he was a skinny kid who was felled & hurt by punches he would have laughed off ten years into the future. Granted, Ali was still maturing then, & while at his peak he was physically a strong, well-built young fighter.

But unlike Holyfield, during his peak years he never endured a war or, for the most part, got hit with the kind of shots Holyfield did. That's why I would give it to Holyfield peak-to-peak, not because he was tougher, but because the evidence really isn't there for Ali. Default, I guess you could say.

I agree that Ali at his toughest in the 70's had a better chin & more heart than Holyfield.

Crease · Post by **Crease** » 09 Jan 2008, 15:05

Okay here's my take on this:

BEST JAB: Sonny Liston
(although Holmes and Lewis had leaning jabs, you had to be tall to pull that one off, Liston had a firm jab, that's why I picked him).

BEST RIGHT HAND: Rocky Marciano
No other fighter in history has one a Heavyweight title, (at the biggest stage of them all) by one punch... A straight right hand.... BAM!

BEST LEFT HOOK: Joe Frazier
Frazier's left hook worked for him time and again, one of the most ferocious punches ever unleashed.

STAMINA: Rocky Marciano
A man who could have fought 25 rounds at a charging rate.

CHIN: Rocky Marciano
Knocked down twice, and both times you could say he was caught off-balace.

BODY PUNCHING: Joe Frazier
"Kill the body and the head will die!" said Frazier... And it worked for him.

COMBINATIONS: Joe Louis
Joe Louis: The complete 6 punch KOer...

DEFENCE: Mike Tyson
Even an old Tyson could hang on against the lies of Lennox Lewis for 8 rounds.

BEST ALL AROUND: Rocky Marciano
I still say he was the greatest and could have defeated anyone in the ring.

p4p1 · Post by **p4p1** » 10 Jan 2008, 08:11

Goodnight, Irene wrote:I didn't say he wasn't tough --- I simply said there is some question to the peak Ali because he wasn't really tested in a gruelling, protracted fight. & chins do develope. If you watch him earlier in his career, he was a skinny kid who was felled & hurt by punches he would have laughed off ten years into the future. Granted, Ali was still maturing then, & while at his peak he was physically a strong, well-built young fighter.

But unlike Holyfield, during his peak years he never endured a war or, for the most part, got hit with the kind of shots Holyfield did. That's why I would give it to Holyfield peak-to-peak, not because he was tougher, but because the evidence really isn't there for Ali. Default, I guess you could say.

I agree that Ali at his toughest in the 70's had a better chin & more heart than Holyfield.

fair point you explained very well

p4p1 · Post by **p4p1** » 10 Jan 2008, 08:14

i dont know if rocky could defeat anyone with his never say die attitude you cant count him out agree on the right hand but i do not think he was a very complete fighter he just played to his strengths very well

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 10 Jan 2008, 08:30

Thanks. Good of you to acknowledge.