Alltime HW champs if you take out their actual title fights

[funso banjo baby]

rate Marciano without his title fights.

rate Liston's before and after Clay/Patterson

etc

[Adamj1987]

marciano fought la starza and an old joe louis before he was champ he would of gone down as a footnote

liston would of gone down as 1 of the most avoided heavies in history

[Goodnight, Irene]

rate Marciano without his title fights.

rate Liston's before and after Clay/Patterson

etc

Like Adam said, Liston would've been ranked a lot higher. He went a long way toward cleaning out a very good division prior to snapping up the belt. Dempsey did, too, actually.

Best overall, completely removed from all title bouts (won & lost, I guess) would be a little more difficult to determine. Ali would rank highly, in relative terms. Worst-affected by this would be Louis, because of his long championship reign. More than half his entire career was fought with the belt around his waist!

[Crease]

rate Marciano without his title fights.
rate Liston's before and after Clay/Patterson

Without his title defences (and fight)... Marciano would struggle to be remembered.

His boxing record (42-0-0) would have been good for pub quizzes, but he would not be remembered as a "Great"

He would have ended up being remembered as another strong slugger, but that's it... Others would have said he was a lucky bum...
And called his fight against Ted Lowry into question.

Liston would be recalled as a fearsome heavyweight, a similar reputation to what George Foreman would gain in the bext few decades. DD

[Goodnight, Irene]

^^^I'm thinking a different route, at least possibly, for Marciano. Had he reached 42-0-0, & the fashion he did, then not made champ --- let's say, he died suddenly, or an injury in or out of the ring forced a premature retirement, he could be joining one of those popularity lists of, "Best Guys Never To Become Champion." Not saying that would happen, but chances would be decent --- especially with a win over Louis, which would lend him lasting exposure through the decades, on account of Louis' name value.

What of Louis himself, though? He bested ex-titleists Carnera, Sharkey & Baer, though fell to Schmeling, & would only have fought between the ages of twenty & twenty-two, & then again after his 36th birthday. That's an under-rated period, for mine --- he beat Jimmy Bivins, for crying out loud! Still, it's not the stuff of legend, his post-championship, pre-Marciano stretch. Would've shown great promise already, but, without the chance to re-bound permanently from the loss to a slightly post-prime Schmeling (or the chance to avenge the loss, outright), he's in deep.

Intriguing topic, when you think about it. Holmes is another interesting discussion point. Guy had a good (not great) pre-title run, & performed pretty damn well at an advanced age (post-championship), but, like Louis, so much of his career was spent as champ, it'd hurt tremendously to remove that from his legacy.

[funso banjo baby]

i see rocky as a kind of joe mesi.

also if mike tyson only had (linear) title fight from spinks onward then he would rank way up there

[Brute]

Louis had 64 wins in 67 fights, 26 of those wins were title fights. It is a bit hard to subtract that big a part of his career, especially when 2 of his losses were in a comeback when he was past his best.

[funso banjo baby]

thats the fun tho

a non title loss is a loss

liston was supposed to be well past his best even before patterson (always confusion as to his real age) yet after Clay he stormed through many decent fighters.

Louis is a half decent record

Holmes maybe not so good

[Jaywheel]

i see rocky as a kind of joe mesi.

Joe Mesi won't be happy...