My Top 15 Heavyweights

Seasoned Veteran · Post by **Seasoned Veteran** » 05 Sep 2005, 06:38

1. Muhammad Ali

2. Jack Johnson

3. Jack Dempsey

4. Joe Louis

5. George Foreman

6. Joe Frazier

7. Larry Holmes

8. Evander Holyfield

9. Mike Tyson

10. Sonny Liston

11. Gene Tunney

12. Lennox Lewis

13. Ken Norton

14. Rocky Marciano

15. Jersey Joe Walcott

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 05 Sep 2005, 07:04

Hi SV

A good list... And everyone will have their own take. I'd say Dempsey is too high. I have the same top 2 as you with Louis in 3rd. I think you have Tyson too high and Norton isn't top 15 for me. He always gave Ali problems and always would but I think that was style. Ken was honest and a very good Heavy but not quite in theis class for me.

Sherlock · Post by **Sherlock** » 05 Sep 2005, 07:59

1. Jack Johnson
2. Joe Louis
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Sonny Liston
5. Larry Holmes
6. Jack Dempsey
7. George Foreman
8. Joe Frazier
9. Rocky Marciano
10. Gene Tunney
11. Mike Tyson
12. Max Baer
13. Jersey Joe Walcott
14. Max Schmeling
15. Lennox Lewis

And you got to have the Rock in at least the top ten. Even if you feel he's overrated, he at least deserves a top ten rating. I'm tough on him but still rate him 9th.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 05 Sep 2005, 08:00

My list would be....

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Larry Holmes
3. Jack Johnson
4. Joe Louis
5. Sonny Liston
6. George Foreman
7. Joe Frazier
8. Ezzard Charles
9. Jim Jeffries
10. Rocky Marcinao
11. Gene Tunney
12. Jack DEMPSEY
13. Joe Walcott
14. Evander Holifield
15. Jim Corbett

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 05 Sep 2005, 08:33

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

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 05 Sep 2005, 10:09

Marciano at 14? cmon seasoned vet... everyone says that lewis should be top 10 because he dominated his division..well WTF did marciano do his whole career..i find that to be a major injustice to marciano and it really bothers me and doesnt make sense.

My List

1) Muhammed Ali
2)Joe Louis
3) Jack Johnson
4)Jack Dempsey
5)Rocky Marciano
6)Sonny Liston
7) Larry Holmes
8)George Foreman
9)Joe Frazier
10)Mike Tyson
11)Max Baer
12)Gene Tunney
13)Ezzard Charles (might be a little low)
14)Jim Jeffries
15)Jersey Joe
16)James Figg.. how could u disagree its not like uve seen footage...

haha.. do u think guys like- John L Sullivan and Corbett and Jeffries and Fitzsimmons and all those pioneers have a place on this list? or have they been outmatched completley by there predisestors.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 05 Sep 2005, 14:42

first of id like to say i respect all ur opinion and i must sya season veteran, i think its unfair to rate marciano 14th overate him or not.

silkov and sherlock dont think much of ihm but at leats hteir accurate enoug hand smart enough to keep him in the top ten which is what he clearly should be in.

and its funny how u have dempsey (whos alot like the rock) at third and frazier at 6th, then u have marciano at 14th. perhaps u should read "biograpgy of a first son" the rocky marciano story by E. skehnan.
and watch some more of his fights, i think u will change ur opinion.

my top 15

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad ALi

3. Rocky Marciano season verteran is thee competetion the reason u base ur grounds??? cuase marciano beat tough contendrs, roland lastarza, don cockell, rex layne, lee savold, harry kid mathews, prime walcott and archie moore, still tough HOF ezzard charles, and past his prime but still top contende joe louis. IMO marcianos competetion was tougher than dempseys. and not to mention he retired undefeated 49-0. i need not say much more.

4. Jack Johnson
5. Larry Holmes
6. Joe Frazier
7. George Foreman
8. Jack Dempsey
9. Mike Tyson- his prime didnt last long enough. but at his best, their werent menay men who could have beat him.
10. Sonny Liston
11. Lennox Lewis
12. Jersey Joe Walcott
13. Ezzard Charles
14. Gene tunney
15. James jeffries

Lenny albert i think me and u both got all the same top 15 fighters except holyfield. but great list to u man and to everyone esle.

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 05 Sep 2005, 14:51

why do some people knock marciano for the competition, then when people ask them why lewis is rated so high they say well the competition wasnt great but he beat everyone that he could, even when he lost he avenged it.... okay well rocky fought MUCH better competition then lewis and he NEVER lost. it bothers me that people overrate lewis in this matter and completley dog marciano.

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 05 Sep 2005, 14:53

how about top 25 heavyweights.. i have yet to see a thread listing the top 25 heavyweights of all time.. anyone have one? it would be more difficult to sort through the fighters...

do you guys think that floyd patterson was gype when we ranked our top 15 fighters? or how about fighters like jimmy bivins or ingmar johansenn.. geez i forgot those 2 even boxed there NEVER mentioned in boxing history.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 05 Sep 2005, 15:12

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

4. Evander Holyfield - most people say this is too high I know.
5. George Foreman
6. Jack Johnson.
7. Rocky Marciano

8. Jack Dempsey

9. Lennox Lewis
10. Sonny Lison
11. Joe Frazier
12. Gene Tunney
13. Jim Jeffries
14. Mike Tyson

15. Floyd Patterson

Where I have placed gaps is where I think there is a big difference between the fighter and the one ranked above. For example, I wouldn't argue if #14 Tyson was pushed to #9 - but I don't think he has done enough to oust Dempsey at #8.

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 05 Sep 2005, 15:16

i respect your opinion but IMO.... i think your 3/4 are too high but u already said u were expecting that...i think lewis at 9 is too high too but i think its a good list, ur one of the first ppl to mention floyd which is good.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 05 Sep 2005, 15:39

top 25 heavyweights

1. Joe louis
2. Muhammad ali
3. Rocky Marciano
4. Larry Holmes
5. Jack Johnson
6. Joe Frazier
7. George Foreman
8. Jack Dempsey
9. Mike Tyson
10. Sonny Liston
11. Lennox Lewis
12. Jersey joe walcott
13. Ezzard charles
14. Gene tunnney
15. James Jeffries
16. floyd Patterson
17. Max Schmelling
18. Evander Holyield
19. Max Baer
20. Sam Langford- i rate him at middleweight and welterweight though, but he beat great heayweights and beat harry wills when langford was past his prime.

21. Bob Fitzimmons
22. Ken Norton
23. Jack Sharkey
24. Riddick Bowe
25. Harry Wills

Marciano Frazier · Post by **Marciano Frazier** » 05 Sep 2005, 17:56

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. George Foreman(higher than most rate him, but really, Foreman's wins over Frazier, Norton, and Moorer are all as high-quality as it gets, he was a two-time champion who won the title 20 years apart, the oldest champion ever, etc. I think he's very underrated- Foreman is absolutely one of the top five of all time)
4. Rocky Marciano(unbelieveable how underrated Marciano is by many around here)
5. Joe Frazier(at least Smokin' Joe generally gets his respect on this site)
6. Larry Holmes
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Jim Jeffries
9. Jack Johnson
10. Evander Holyfield
11. Sonny Liston
12. Mike Tyson
13. Lennox Lewis
14. Jersey Joe Walcott
15. Ezzard Charles
16. Riddick Bowe
17. Floyd Patterson
18. Gene Tunney
19. Ingemar Johansson
20. Max Schmeling
21. Max Baer
22. Ken Norton
23. Sam Langford
24. Jack Sharkey
25. Archie Moore

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 05 Sep 2005, 19:14

marcianofrasier, is that u on boxingnews24.com forum defending marciano everyday against unintelligent users like revolver?????

cuase if it is, u and this other guy mannesamauler have to constantly defend him when users say guys like chrisy bryd and david tua would have beaten marciano. and u guys make great points so if it is u keep it up!!! and uve made some intelligent posts here as well.

overall i really like ur list and we have a lot of similarites. jw, what are ur basis when u put foreman at # 3 and holyfield in the top ten and not liston.

i mean foremans prime was to short but he did amazingly KO a prime norton and prime Frazer( though i think frazier was the never the same after ali 1, use the weight gain as an example) but foreman got knocked out by a past his prime ali, nearly got Koed by tough ron lyle (though great fight and he showed heart), and foreman in his prime lost to jimmy young. so sometimes inconsistency. and of course foreman gets nod for rgenaing the title 20 years later.

as for holyfield, his best days were at cruiserweight. in his prime at heavyweight, he had trouble with old past their primes holmes and foreman, and lost to riddick bowe two out of three and was knocked out in ther last fight. holyfield also lost to micheal moorer though he regained the title. holyfield beat a past his prime mike tyson though tyson was still tough. then holyifeld basically lost twice to lennox lewis (one was a draw) . but he lost an afwul lot at heavyweight too les impressive guys to be a top 10.

id rate liston and tyson over holyfield.

of course the rest of ur picks IMO are fabulous.

love the archie moore, pick. great choice.

on a side note, ur right about frazier. on this site he gets his respect and fair placement. but i noticed there seems to be a lot of marciano critics. now most of the users all give marciano respect and always praise hi mas a warrior, but i tend to see lot of users give him a not so fair rating and im one of the few ones that put him in the top 5. ive noticed hes mostly at around 9 or 10, and i feel he should be higher. u could make a case either way. but the main thing is, i noticed users tend to think he doesnt compare against other heavyweight champs and worse against modern fighters and average heavywewights. they think he is too small, or doesnt have the reach, etc. i just wish he would get his dues liek frazier and other guys. the most loved heavyweight on this forum are probably jack johnson and holmes. they get reated really high and are usually favored in the matchups.

marcianofraszier, i think the reaosn is some people just wont believe rocky beat a prime moore and walcott and a still toigh ezzard, and they wont believe the other great contenders he beat were good. its mainly the fact he never beat a great heavyweight over 220 lbs. i gaurantee u if rocky had kaoyed nino valdez or bob baker, no one would be saying he never beat a full fledged heavyweight. its too bad bob baker and nino valdez were worse than any of the contenders rock faced.

iceman21287 · Post by **iceman21287** » 05 Sep 2005, 20:30

This is my top 25...this isn't particularly a solid list in the sense that i think for sure that #23 is better than #25 or #6 is better than #8. I pretty much grouped them in small clusters of fighters who I think are very good, but I wasn't quite sure who I thought was better. For example, I Ali and Louis could be switched IMO, but if I had to choose, I would go with Ali. The top 10 I have on this list would be the same top 10 I would have on any other list, but I might have them switched around a bit. I will also say that at any one time I would have probably 20-23 of these fighters in a top 25 list, but I happen to believe that some of the honorable mentions (not all), could be switched with the latter half of my list and I wouldn't make too much of a fuss about it.

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Rocky Marciano
5. Gene Tunney
6. Jack Johnson
7. George Foreman
8. Joe Frazier
9. Mike Tyson
10. Sonny Liston
11. Larry Holmes
12. Evander Holyfield
13. Harry Wills
14. Peter Jackson (My wild card...The Black Prince was one of the greatest fighters of the late 1800's and in his prime would have beaten Jeffries, Corbett, and Sullivan IMO.)
15. Sam Langford
16. George Godfrey (One of the many great black fighters of the 1910s and 20s that never got a chance at the title because of his skin color. He was destroying Primo Carnera in a match in 1930 before he was DQ'd on a BS call in the 5th round)
17. Jersey Joe Walcott
18. Ezzard Charles
19. Max Schmeling
20. Lennox Lewis
21. Jim Jeffries
22. Young Stribling
23. Riddick Bowe
24. James Corbett
25. Sam McVea

Honorable Mentions:

Floyd Patterson, Max Baer, John L. Sullivan, Jack Sharkey, Billy Miske, Ken Norton, Bob Fitzsimmons, Ernie Terrell, Cleveland Williams, Joe Jeannette, George Chuvalo, Jimmy Young (the one that fought against Ali and beat Foreman), Archie Moore, Zora Folley, Roland LaStarza, Tommy Burns, Jimmy Ellis, Roscoe Toles, Johnny Summerlin, Gregorio Peralta, Earnie Shavers, Gunboat Smith, Paolino Uzcudun, Tommy Farr, Bob Cleroux (a great, yet fairly unknown, canadian boxer), Oscar Bonavena, Eddie Machen

I'm sure many of you will have a problem with some of the guys on my list, especially since I left many great fighters (Patterson, Baer, Sharkey, Jeannette, etc.) off of it, but when you take into account 125 years or so of professional boxing, it's quite hard to make a list that takes everything into account (time period, skills, blacks not really having a chance at the title until the Joe Louis era, new techniques, new supplements than can make a fighter stronger, faster, etc.). If anyone has a major problem with my list, come at me and I will defend it as best I can

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 05 Sep 2005, 21:32

iceman21287 wrote:17. Jersey Joe Walcott
18. Ezzard Charles
19. Max Schmeling
20. Lennox Lewis

how in gods name do u have these guys behind, peter jackson, harry willis. george godfrey, and then not have guys like norton baer sharkey and jeffries on the list..this just baffles me.. tunney is also ranked too high.

i respect that u put some african americans up there from a time were they couldnt fight for titles or major fights, and its a damn shame, but that doesnt mean there so much better then the guys that had the titles at the time, or anyone for that matter, you move them up on the list just cause they never got there shot.. its a shame but it doesnt make them better...

were are fighters like jimmy bivins? ingmar johannson? jamesjbraddock?
micheal spinks?..im not saying they have to be on the list but not even in mention of possibly being on the list i mean christ you names bob cleroux but not those guys?.. i apologize and i guess i have to respect your opinion but i just am bafffffled.

as for sam mcvea.. the man only fought 4 fighters worth noting.

1) Joe Jeanette-record against him- 1-2-1
2)Jack Johnson- 0-3
3)Sam Langford- 2-5-8.. have any other 2 fighters fought against each other more times then that?..
4) Harry Wills- 2-2-1

well anyway that leaves him with a 5-12-10 record against the good fighters... granted they were good fighters, but if hes gonna make the top 25 list of all time, then shouldnt he be a good fighter as well>? considering jeanette didnt even make the list.

as for harry wills, he beat up on the blacks of his time pretty good,which was basically what he was limited too, but i dont think hes ranked that high, i think he goes in the HM area, he also got DESTROYED by both sharkey and uzcudun..which is odd because they didnt make the list....

could that posiblly say somethign about langford jeanette wills and mcvae..the blacks of the early 1900's.. maybe they werent that good, wills beat up on langford jeanette and mcvea, winning the saeries by a pretty substantial margin.... but then he went on to face the "whites" and got butchered... maybe the "whites" were better?

hmm where do u guys think luis firpo fits in in the heavyweight rankings? i would at least put him in honorable mention, he gave dempsey oen helluva fight.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 05 Sep 2005, 23:21

Rory,

You really think Baer was the 11th best heavyweight EVER?

I was watching him last night against Schmeling. I was shocked how crude he looked.

Seasoned Veteran · Post by **Seasoned Veteran** » 06 Sep 2005, 03:21

Rory McCloskey wrote:Marciano at 14? cmon seasoned vet... everyone says that lewis should be top 10 because he dominated his division..well WTF did marciano do his whole career..i find that to be a major injustice to marciano and it really bothers me and doesnt make sense. .[/list]

I think Rocky is a true great and at number 14 he is pretty high on the list. I just can't see him beating the people above him.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 06 Sep 2005, 03:23

seasoned veteran how can u say putting him at 14th is high. no one agees with u man, even the biggest marciano critics on here rate him at least at 10th.

and i disagree with u, i rate marciano at 3rd.

why do u have dempsey at 3rd and marciano at 14th?????

Seasoned Veteran · Post by **Seasoned Veteran** » 06 Sep 2005, 03:26

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:first of id like to say i respect all ur opinion and i must sya season veteran, i think its unfair to rate marciano 14th overate him or not.

silkov and sherlock dont think much of ihm but at leats hteir accurate enoug hand smart enough to keep him in the top ten which is what he clearly should be in.

and its funny how u have dempsey (whos alot like the rock) at third and frazier at 6th, then u have marciano at 14th. perhaps u should read "biograpgy of a first son" the rocky marciano story by E. skehnan.
and watch some more of his fights, i think u will change ur opinion.

my top 15

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad ALi

3. Rocky Marciano season verteran is thee competetion the reason u base ur grounds??? cuase marciano beat tough contendrs, roland lastarza, don cockell, rex layne, lee savold, harry kid mathews, prime walcott and archie moore, still tough HOF ezzard charles, and past his prime but still top contende joe louis. IMO marcianos competetion was tougher than dempseys. and not to mention he retired undefeated 49-0. i need not say much more.

4. Jack Johnson
5. Larry Holmes
6. Joe Frazier
7. George Foreman
8. Jack Dempsey
9. Mike Tyson- his prime didnt last long enough. but at his best, their werent menay men who could have beat him.
10. Sonny Liston
11. Lennox Lewis
12. Jersey Joe Walcott
13. Ezzard Charles
14. Gene tunney
15. James jeffries

Lenny albert i think me and u both got all the same top 15 fighters except holyfield. but great list to u man and to everyone esle.

I have seen a few of Rocky's fights and he is extremely tough, no question. I just think that the boxers above him on my list would (depending on the fighter) keep him at bay with their jab and outbox him or overpower him. His competition while not the level of the 1970's competition was still fairly stern. I simply can't see him beating a Foreman, Frazier etc.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 06 Sep 2005, 04:23

Rory McCloskey wrote:
as for harry wills, he beat up on the blacks of his time pretty good,which was basically what he was limited too, but i dont think hes ranked that high, i think he goes in the HM area, he also got DESTROYED by both sharkey and uzcudun..which is odd because they didnt make the list....

could that posiblly say somethign about langford jeanette wills and mcvae..the blacks of the early 1900's.. maybe they werent that good, wills beat up on langford jeanette and mcvea, winning the saeries by a pretty substantial margin.... but then he went on to face the "whites" and got butchered... maybe the "whites" were better?

Rory

Race has always been a huge factor in boxing becasue of the way the sport is run. In other sports a schedule is drawn up and everybody adheres to it. In boxing matches are made, cancelled, fighters avoided etc... Often fights that should have happened don't. these guys never had a chance to fight for titles because promoters and managers didn't want them beating up their white counterparts. I'm not saying that this would have definitely happened but it was a risk that few took.

I think (but am prepared top be corrected) Wills was a little past his prime when he fought Sharkey and Uzcudan (both fine Heavyweights in their own right). I also read how these guys often did not fight all out because it would seriously ruin their chances to bag a big pay fight against a marquee white contender.

It's very difficult to rate these guys fairly but wehat are we to do? To ignore them seems to further promote the injustice. I think we have to make the best of the evidence... I'm not sure where they come in the pantheon of greats but Wills, Langofrd etc... certainly were greats.

Seasoned Veteran · Post by **Seasoned Veteran** » 06 Sep 2005, 04:45

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:seasoned veteran how can u say putting him at 14th is high. no one agees with u man, even the biggest marciano critics on here rate him at least at 10th.

and i disagree with u, i rate marciano at 3rd.

why do u have dempsey at 3rd and marciano at 14th?????

I meant high as looking at so many top heavys over the years, to be ranked at 14th is a good level. Marciano is one of the all-time greats just not as good as the people above him.

I am a Dempsey fan and think that he would have been a tough match for anyone on the list in his prime.

iceman21287 · Post by **iceman21287** » 06 Sep 2005, 05:27

Rory McCloskey wrote:
iceman21287 wrote:17. Jersey Joe Walcott
18. Ezzard Charles
19. Max Schmeling
20. Lennox Lewis
how in gods name do u have these guys behind, peter jackson, harry willis. george godfrey, and then not have guys like norton baer sharkey and jeffries on the list..this just baffles me.. tunney is also ranked too high.

i respect that u put some african americans up there from a time were they couldnt fight for titles or major fights, and its a damn shame, but that doesnt mean there so much better then the guys that had the titles at the time, or anyone for that matter, you move them up on the list just cause they never got there shot.. its a shame but it doesnt make them better...

were are fighters like jimmy bivins? ingmar johannson? jamesjbraddock?
micheal spinks?..im not saying they have to be on the list but not even in mention of possibly being on the list i mean christ you names bob cleroux but not those guys?.. i apologize and i guess i have to respect your opinion but i just am bafffffled.

as for sam mcvea.. the man only fought 4 fighters worth noting.

1) Joe Jeanette-record against him- 1-2-1
2)Jack Johnson- 0-3
3)Sam Langford- 2-5-8.. have any other 2 fighters fought against each other more times then that?..
4) Harry Wills- 2-2-1

well anyway that leaves him with a 5-12-10 record against the good fighters... granted they were good fighters, but if hes gonna make the top 25 list of all time, then shouldnt he be a good fighter as well>? considering jeanette didnt even make the list.

as for harry wills, he beat up on the blacks of his time pretty good,which was basically what he was limited too, but i dont think hes ranked that high, i think he goes in the HM area, he also got DESTROYED by both sharkey and uzcudun..which is odd because they didnt make the list....

could that posiblly say somethign about langford jeanette wills and mcvae..the blacks of the early 1900's.. maybe they werent that good, wills beat up on langford jeanette and mcvea, winning the saeries by a pretty substantial margin.... but then he went on to face the "whites" and got butchered... maybe the "whites" were better?

hmm where do u guys think luis firpo fits in in the heavyweight rankings? i would at least put him in honorable mention, he gave dempsey oen helluva fight.

As I said my list isn't a list that i set in stone. You could, in my opinion, put every one of the fighters you mentioned in the list or higher on the list. There are tons of extremely good fighters, and only 10 or so that IMO stick out as set in stone all-time greats. I even mention that i threw peter jackson in there as a wild card basically because i think he was a dominant fighter in his era that not many people know about.

I also should have explained my honorable mention list a little more, something in which I fail to do. The list were fighters that in my mind I considered very good off the top of my head. I obviously left some fighters out and I even mention that I probably forgot some in my first post. Obviously leaving Jimmy Bivins out is a huge blunder, as he is one of, if not the greatest, heavyweight to have never won the title.

Harry Wills is one of the greatest heavyweight of all time and I see no problem with me ranking him as high as I did. It's important to remember that when Wills fought Sharkey and Uzcudun he was 38 and at the end of his career.

Not mentioning Luis Firpo is also a mistake on my part now that I think about it. The man was literally 1 second away from defeating Jack Sharkey to become the heavyweight champ. Norton, Baer, Sharkey, and Jeffries could all be on the list in my opinion. I put many of the names on my list as I did basically to get some recognition to those (godfrey, peter jackson, etc.) fighters because I believe they had top 25 talent and no one was mentioning them. Unfortunately, there are around 50 fighters in the history of the division, maybe more, that IMO are talented enough to be considered top 25.

And yeah, the Bob Cleroux thing is biased, because I'm of Canadian heritage and always thought he had good talent. The names you mention that I did not all have to be considered great heavies though. I simply was brainstorming in my head great heavies that I hadn't mentioned for honorable mention and after a while decided to stop before the list got too big.

Michael Spinks I didn't add because, even though he defeated Holmes twice, I have always thought of him as a light heavy. That's the same reason Billy Conn isn't mentioned.

I was debating on whether or not to put McVea on the list at #25 because I literally had about 10 fighters that I was thinking about putting at #25. However, the reason I chose McVea is that I have read many newspaper clipping from that era and whether McVea wins or loses, they always say he was tough as nails and the fight to the end. I know that Jeannette in particular beat him on many occasions, but I have also read that Jeannette was beaten easily in many fights, but I have yet to read a newspaper clipping that shows that McVea was ever beaten easily. So I guess I just rated heart and durability over talent in that case.

Either way those two (and many others) I consider to be some of the greats of all-time.

I guess one more thing. Ingemar Johannsson, IMO, though he may be a hall of famer, isn't any greater of a heavyweight champ than buster douglas, jess willard, or primo carnera. This was a man who beat up on European fighters, got lucky against Floyd once, and then got beaten down the next two times. In my personal opinion, if Johansson is a Hall of Famer, then put Buster Douglas in there too...he beat a top 10 all-time fighter whereas Johansson only beat a top 25-50 all-time heavy. That's my opinion on Johansson.

On Braddock, I know that must have set you off that I left him off the HM list because you're a big fan of his, and basically I just forgot to tell you the truth. Anyone who beats Max Baer in his prime, even if it was only one fight, deserves to be mentioned. His heart far exceeded his ability and he basically won the heavyweight title on heart, and that alone deserves an HM.

Sorry that my list irritated you because that certainly wasn't my intent. Just lively debate

Hope this clears some things up for all who disagree with my list!

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 06 Sep 2005, 06:35

Rory McCloskey wrote:haha.. do u think guys like- John L Sullivan and Corbett and Jeffries and Fitzsimmons and all those pioneers have a place on this list? or have they been outmatched completley by there predisestors.[/list]

Yes, I think they should be on these lists, but it would be hrd to defend because there is so little film evidence to support an opinion about them. OTOH, Nat Fleischer, who saw every HW champ from Corbett to Frazier in action had Sullivan, Corbett and Fitz in his top 10, and one ranking of his from the early 50's had Sullivan #1. While he never saw Sullivan fight a championship fight, he did know John L, as well as many of his opponents, so his opinion was probably more highly educated than most of ours.

Years ago, I read a book about the great Tommy Loughran, who said that when he sparred with a 60+ yo Corbett in the 20's that he was still very quick and nearly impossible to hit with a solid punch. Perhaps this was simply a statement made with a bit of hero worship, but perhaps not. Obviously, know one really knows who would win these mythical matchups, but it is fun to discuss.

Grimm · Post by **Grimm** » 06 Sep 2005, 08:43

Ken Norton over Marciano?

No way.