Il Duce- Please give me your top ten heavyweights in order

[ThatOne]

Thank you in advance.

[gilgamesh]

Thank you in advance.

'Top 10', based upon their performance in the years that they competed.

Or 'Top 10' in 'head-to-head' analysis.

Why not both?

[ThatOne]

Thank you in advance.

'Top 10', based upon their performance in the years that they competed.

Or 'Top 10' in 'head-to-head' analysis.

of all time

[BoxBuzz]

This does not appear on first blush to be the list of a hobo.

[BoxBuzz]

Oh, your going to get some feedback there, however you knew the correct etymology, as you spelled it correctly. So I understand you know that this is no derivative of the very divisive word that it is often mistakenly linked to.

If you think you are being sagacious, I would think again.

[klompton]

Top 10, based upon their performance during their era.

Pre-1985

#1.........Jack Dempsey
#2.........Joe Louis
#3.........Larry Holmes
#4.........Rocky Marciano
#5.........Muhammad Ali
#6.........Jim Jeffries
#7.........Jack Johnson
#8.........George Foreman
#9.........Joe Frazier
#10.......Gene Tunney

What a surprise. The top spot is held by a white guy who ducked his top (black) contender for the entire duration of his reign and avoided his next top contender as well while fighting lesser fighters and staying largely inactive. Somehow Ali is five despite ducking no one and fighting arguably the stiffest set of competition during his two reigns. And why excise the last 30 years? You just left of a full quarter of the time between the beginning of your earliest champion (Jeffries 1899) and the present. Was it because fighters like Gene Tunney, Marciano, etc might get bumped by one of the more than 20 african american fighters who became champion between then and now... or god forbid a European fighter?

[evrenb]

HOW CAN ALI BE NUMBER 5 BASED ON PERFORMANCE WITHIN ERA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ?????????

[ThatOne]

Top 10, based upon their performance during their era.

Pre-1985

#1.........Jack Dempsey
#2.........Joe Louis
#3.........Larry Holmes
#4.........Rocky Marciano
#5.........Muhammad Ali
#6.........Jim Jeffries
#7.........Jack Johnson
#8.........George Foreman
#9.........Joe Frazier
#10.......Gene Tunney

The boxer you have at one on your top ten list was 0-2 against the boxer you have at ten and the boxer you have at five is the only boxer on your list to beat two other boxers in your top ten at or near their peak .

"Heck of a job, Brownie."

[ThatOne]

Go to any street corner and ask any 'Man on the Street' who Jack Depmsey was.

Then ask that man, who beat Jack Dempsey.

90 out 100 will have no clue..........

Now go back to your Lawn Moving Job at the Ali Ranch.......'Your Lunch Break is Over.

I knew you would insult me first.

You like apples, Il Douchebag.

How do you like them apples?

I live in Woodland Hills, California. You live in a trailer park.

lol@me

[keithmoonhangover]

The top spot is held by a white guy who ducked his top (black) contender for the entire duration of his reign

In fairness to Jack, fighting a black dude was pretty much a no-no from a promotional point of view. Boxing audiences in Jack's day were predominately white and a lot of those people may not have paid to watch a n****r (their word, not mine).

[ThatOne]

That One,

Just because you mow lawns in Woodland Hills, doesn't mean you live there.

My relatives live in Topanga Canyon, and they found you in the Yellow Pages
in the Landcaspers section.

Under...........'Don't Use That One'

I don't think Topanga Canyon is spelled Boyle Heights but I digress... Why don't you share with me their address so I can drive by there and make a small donation. They can use it at Vallarta in lieu of a EBT card.

[gilgamesh]

Top 10, based upon their performance during their era.

Pre-1985

#1.........Jack Dempsey
#2.........Joe Louis
#3.........Larry Holmes
#4.........Rocky Marciano
#5.........Muhammad Ali
#6.........Jim Jeffries
#7.........Jack Johnson
#8.........George Foreman
#9.........Joe Frazier
#10.......Gene Tunney

Ali and Louis are the only reasonable answers to the Top 2 at Heavyweight in my view.

Joe Louis mostly for his 25 consecutive title defenses, and his victories over Max Baer, Max Schmeling, Billy Conn 2x, Jersey Joe Walcott 2x (one was controversial), and a slew of other noteworthy contenders as well as a fair share of bums.

Muhammad Ali, the first ever 3x Heavyweight Champion of the World, with victories over Joe Frazier 2x, George Foreman, Floyd Patterson, Ken Norton 2x (both victories for Ali were questionable as I understand it, but still, good wins on the record nonetheless), Sonny Liston 2x (I already know about the controversial nature of the rematch), Jerry Quarry 2x

Plus contenders such as Bonavena, Earnie Shavers, Ron Lyle.

His resume blows away all other Heavyweight resumes from all eras in my view, and his performances were pretty damn solid too. Some of them may have been tough fights, but that happens when you're regularly fighting great fighters.

[gilgamesh]

Go to any street corner and ask any 'Man on the Street' who Jack Depmsey was.

Then ask that man, who beat Jack Dempsey.

90 out 100 will have no clue..........

Now go back to your Lawn Moving Job at the Ali Ranch.......'Your Lunch Break is Over.

I would say the average man on the street these days won't even know who the hell Jack Dempsey was, much less who beat him.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Top 10, based upon their performance during their era.

Pre-1985

#1.........Jack Dempsey
#2.........Joe Louis
#3.........Larry Holmes
#4.........Rocky Marciano
#5.........Muhammad Ali
#6.........Jim Jeffries
#7.........Jack Johnson
#8.........George Foreman
#9.........Joe Frazier
#10.......Gene Tunney

The boxer you have at one on your top ten list was 0-2 against the boxer you have at ten and the boxer you have at five is the only boxer on your list to beat two other boxers in your top ten at or near their peak .

"Heck of a job, Brownie."

Dempsey should rate above Tunney. Neither are in my top 10. Ali & Louis are simply 1-2 in whatever order you want to have them. Nobody else has a legitimate claim.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Go to any street corner and ask any 'Man on the Street' who Jack Depmsey was.

Then ask that man, who beat Jack Dempsey.

90 out 100 will have no clue..........

Now go back to your Lawn Moving Job at the Ali Ranch.......'Your Lunch Break is Over.

I would say the average man on the street these days won't even know who the hell Jack Dempsey was, much less who beat him.

LOL, I do think dempsey was arguably the most popular fighter ever. Even then Ali would have to rate no worse than third.

[ThatOne]

I don't think this thread is going the way Il Manichino intended...

[ThatOne]

Can you imagine a Jack Dempsey bout with only 2000 or so showing up (ie; Lewiston, Maine}

Whenever Jack tied his shoes, there were 2000 people around.....

Can you imagine Jack winning the Medal Of Freedom , the highest civilian award in the United States, and being the guest at the White House of five U S presidents as well as meeting world leaders as diverse as Ferdinand Marcos, Nelson Mandela, Leonid Brezhnev, Anwar Sadat, Fidel Castro, and Indira Gandhi ?

[ThatOne]

Top 10, based upon their performance during their era.

Pre-1985

#1.........Jack Dempsey
#2.........Joe Louis
#3.........Larry Holmes
#4.........Rocky Marciano
#5.........Muhammad Ali
#6.........Jim Jeffries
#7.........Jack Johnson
#8.........George Foreman
#9.........Joe Frazier
#10.......Gene Tunney

The boxer you have at one on your top ten list was 0-2 against the boxer you have at ten and the boxer you have at five is the only boxer on your list to beat two other boxers in your top ten at or near their peak .

"Heck of a job, Brownie."

Dempsey should rate above Tunney. Neither are in my top 10. Ali & Louis are simply 1-2 in whatever order you want to have them. Nobody else has a legitimate claim.

I don't rate Dempsey over Tunney either. I just find Duce's order odd

[keithmoonhangover]

Can you imagine a Jack Dempsey bout with only 2000 or so showing up (ie; Lewiston, Maine}

Whenever Jack tied his shoes, there were 2000 people around.....

For a while Jack was the most recognisable face on the planet (until Charlie Chaplin came along), but that was also said of Mike Tyson and Ali at certain points in their career.

Dempsey was before television, so the amount of people watching him tie his shoe laces was obviously greater than it would be now, presumably he'd tie his laces on pay-per-view these days.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

The boxer you have at one on your top ten list was 0-2 against the boxer you have at ten and the boxer you have at five is the only boxer on your list to beat two other boxers in your top ten at or near their peak .

"Heck of a job, Brownie."

Dempsey should rate above Tunney. Neither are in my top 10. Ali & Louis are simply 1-2 in whatever order you want to have them. Nobody else has a legitimate claim.

I don't rate Dempsey over Tunney either. I just find Duce's order odd

It is, Dempsey over Tunney just isn't part of that. It's like saying Spinks needs to be rated above Holmes.

[ThatOne]

You know,

Mother Theresa never met any of those leaders either.

I guess she was a 'Bad Witch'.

Hand shaking with World Leaders doesn't make you anything special, unless they need something from you....
like a little 'publicity'.

Or maybe they wanted to bask in his presence.

[ThatOne]

You know,

Mother Theresa never met any of those leaders either.

I guess she was a 'Bad Witch'.

Hand shaking with World Leaders doesn't make you anything special, unless they need something from you....
like a little 'publicity'.

Or maybe they wanted to bask in his presence.

Or maybe they were trying to help collect the back alimony he still owed Sonji Roi...

Dead Beat Clay

Sadly, she is no longer with us. Herbert Muhammad should have left the matchmaking to kismet.

[HomicideHenry]

Top 10, based upon their performance during their era.

Pre-1985

#1.........Jack Dempsey
#2.........Joe Louis
#3.........Larry Holmes
#4.........Rocky Marciano
#5.........Muhammad Ali
#6.........Jim Jeffries
#7.........Jack Johnson
#8.........George Foreman
#9.........Joe Frazier
#10.......Gene Tunney

Sorta reminds me of Nat Fleischer's list just before he died. Ali didn't make the top ten, as did some others. Yet, interesting enough Jack Johnson was #1, Jeffries #2, Fitzsimmons #3. Dempsey made the top 5 and Louis barely made the top ten. Marciano was at number ten.

My list (changes year by year), but here is how it goes (pre 1985):

#1- Larry Holmes
#2- Muhammad Ali
#3- Joe Louis
#4- Rocky Marciano
#5- Jack Dempsey
#6- Jack Johnson
#7- James J. Jeffries
#8- Joe Frazier
#9- George Foreman
#10- Bob Fitzsimmons

Why Fitzsimmons at all on the list? Overall accomplishments at various weights, longetivity and success at different stages in his career. Why not Tunney? Because imho Gene didn't do enough at heavyweight. He was certainly one of the greatest 175 pounders to never hold a title at the weight, but he had only a handful of fights before Dempsey and fought once more after the two matches with the Manassa Mauler. A longer stint at heavyweight would have proved more better analysis of his actual abilities at the weight.

Why is Frazier and Foreman rated so low? Quite frankly (imho) outside of Ali, Frazier's career victories and short reign didn't really impress me as being a top five caliber fighter in the all time great sense. Same, in a sense to Foreman. Before Frazier he fought essentially 40 or so hand picked dead men or over the hill types. Sure he knocked the crap out of Norton too, but at the end of the day he couldnt handle Ali or Young and his weaknesses were clear after Zaire. His comeback in the late 80's and 90's showed a superior Foreman than his younger self.

Why is Jeffries on the list? He retired undefeated. He only had 20 or so fights and is considered an all-time great puncher and fighter despite a deep career like everyone else. He defeated HOF fighters Fitzsimmons (2x's), Corbett (2x's), Sharkey (2x's), and Choynski. In his day he was invincible and for many years the worldwide public refused to accept Hart and Burns as the true champions, and one may argue Jack Johnson himself wasnt considered the true champion either until he defeated Jeffries. That is the kind of staying power and public sentiment that Jeffries had. What's amazing to me is that he was retired six years, had to lose 110 pounds, get in shape for a 45 round fight and still went fifteen rounds with the best fighter on the planet---- and it was in that shape, that he finally ever touched canvas in his entire career. How good was he at his best? The legendary Sam Langford used to promote himself as "Willing to take on all comers, except Mr. Jeffries."

Why is Marciano rated over Dempsey? Unlike Dempsey Marciano didn't sit on the title. Unlike Dempsey Marciano fought his mandatories---- Don Cockell being the lone exception, all others were rated #1 (Cockell was rated #2). Marciano retired undefeated. One can argue maybe Marciano was the better conditioned, harder punching, more durable fighter than Dempsey---- Dempsey was faster and could box a little bit, but outside of that the men were virtually the same.

Why is Louis #3? Simple. Louis had problems with great movers and great tacticians. Imagine Billy Conn being taller, heavier, with more speed and more power---- that is Ali. As great as Louis's record stands there is no way he could ever catch Ali. But almost everyone else on the list is fair game to Louis. And that is why he is #3 and not #2.

Why is Holmes rated #1 and Ali #2? This is a bit harder to defend, as it is more a personal preference or belief than one that can be justified by stats or evidence. However, if one goes by the evidence it is clear Holmes was just too good in 1974 as Ali's sparring partner, etc. and one can pretty much put two and two together that Holmes at his best could have beaten Ali even then---- the question as to whether Holmes could have beaten the best version of Ali ever is another question, but I believe he could have. Holmes laser precision jab, incredibly accurate shots, great conditioning and focus could have been enough to keep Ali in constant motion, having to reset himself rather than fire shots. This is a bit of a long shot, but I think of any man in boxing history it would have been Holmes that would of done it.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Top 10, based upon their performance during their era.

Pre-1985

#1.........Jack Dempsey
#2.........Joe Louis
#3.........Larry Holmes
#4.........Rocky Marciano
#5.........Muhammad Ali
#6.........Jim Jeffries
#7.........Jack Johnson
#8.........George Foreman
#9.........Joe Frazier
#10.......Gene Tunney

Why Fitzsimmons at all on the list? Overall accomplishments at various weights, longetivity and success at different stages in his career. Why not Tunney? Because imho Gene didn't do enough at heavyweight. He was certainly one of the greatest 175 pounders to never hold a title at the weight, but he had only a handful of fights before Dempsey and fought once more after the two matches with the Manassa Mauler. A longer stint at heavyweight would have proved more better analysis of his actual abilities at the weight.

This is quite contradictory. Fitzsimmons gets credit for his fights at all weights and Tunney is penalized for not fighting enough at heavyweight? I don't rate either of them near the top 10, but that reasoning is beyond bizarre.

[yancey]

Top 10, based upon their performance during their era.

Pre-1985

#1.........Jack Dempsey
#2.........Joe Louis
#3.........Larry Holmes
#4.........Rocky Marciano
#5.........Muhammad Ali
#6.........Jim Jeffries
#7.........Jack Johnson
#8.........George Foreman
#9.........Joe Frazier
#10.......Gene Tunney

Sorta reminds me of Nat Fleischer's list just before he died. Ali didn't make the top ten, as did some others. Yet, interesting enough Jack Johnson was #1, Jeffries #2, Fitzsimmons #3. Dempsey made the top 5 and Louis barely made the top ten. Marciano was at number ten.

My list (changes year by year), but here is how it goes (pre 1985):

#1- Larry Holmes
#2- Muhammad Ali
#3- Joe Louis
#4- Rocky Marciano
#5- Jack Dempsey
#6- Jack Johnson
#7- James J. Jeffries
#8- Joe Frazier
#9- George Foreman
#10- Bob Fitzsimmons

Why Fitzsimmons at all on the list? Overall accomplishments at various weights, longetivity and success at different stages in his career. Why not Tunney? Because imho Gene didn't do enough at heavyweight. He was certainly one of the greatest 175 pounders to never hold a title at the weight, but he had only a handful of fights before Dempsey and fought once more after the two matches with the Manassa Mauler. A longer stint at heavyweight would have proved more better analysis of his actual abilities at the weight.

Why is Frazier and Foreman rated so low? Quite frankly (imho) outside of Ali, Frazier's career victories and short reign didn't really impress me as being a top five caliber fighter in the all time great sense. Same, in a sense to Foreman. Before Frazier he fought essentially 40 or so hand picked dead men or over the hill types. Sure he knocked the crap out of Norton too, but at the end of the day he couldnt handle Ali or Young and his weaknesses were clear after Zaire. His comeback in the late 80's and 90's showed a superior Foreman than his younger self.

Why is Jeffries on the list? He retired undefeated. He only had 20 or so fights and is considered an all-time great puncher and fighter despite a deep career like everyone else. He defeated HOF fighters Fitzsimmons (2x's), Corbett (2x's), Sharkey (2x's), and Choynski. In his day he was invincible and for many years the worldwide public refused to accept Hart and Burns as the true champions, and one may argue Jack Johnson himself wasnt considered the true champion either until he defeated Jeffries. That is the kind of staying power and public sentiment that Jeffries had. What's amazing to me is that he was retired six years, had to lose 110 pounds, get in shape for a 45 round fight and still went fifteen rounds with the best fighter on the planet---- and it was in that shape, that he finally ever touched canvas in his entire career. How good was he at his best? The legendary Sam Langford used to promote himself as "Willing to take on all comers, except Mr. Jeffries."

Why is Marciano rated over Dempsey? Unlike Dempsey Marciano didn't sit on the title. Unlike Dempsey Marciano fought his mandatories---- Don Cockell being the lone exception, all others were rated #1 (Cockell was rated #2). Marciano retired undefeated. One can argue maybe Marciano was the better conditioned, harder punching, more durable fighter than Dempsey---- Dempsey was faster and could box a little bit, but outside of that the men were virtually the same.

Why is Louis #3? Simple. Louis had problems with great movers and great tacticians. Imagine Billy Conn being taller, heavier, with more speed and more power---- that is Ali. As great as Louis's record stands there is no way he could ever catch Ali. But almost everyone else on the list is fair game to Louis. And that is why he is #3 and not #2.

Why is Holmes rated #1 and Ali #2? This is a bit harder to defend, as it is more a personal preference or belief than one that can be justified by stats or evidence. However, if one goes by the evidence it is clear Holmes was just too good in 1974 as Ali's sparring partner, etc. and one can pretty much put two and two together that Holmes at his best could have beaten Ali even then---- the question as to whether Holmes could have beaten the best version of Ali ever is another question, but I believe he could have. Holmes laser precision jab, incredibly accurate shots, great conditioning and focus could have been enough to keep Ali in constant motion, having to reset himself rather than fire shots. This is a bit of a long shot, but I think of any man in boxing history it would have been Holmes that would of done it.

Would there have been any other era where Cockell was anywhere near to the #2 contender?

You've got Marciano too high and Frazier and Foreman too low.