Which decade of heavyweight boxing was the best?

[Duch]

Where do you find the golden era of heavyweight division? And why?

First option is 20 years because I can only put 10 options in a poll and I wanted to put in it the last decade of XXI century too.

[sweetsci]

70's - Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Quarry, Holmes, Young, Shavers, Lyle, etc. Combine those guys with the mainstream coverage of boxing and the popularity of the sport… Good times.

I wish there was an option for 1965-1975.

[HomicideHenry]

In terms of quality fighters, the 1970's.

In terms of social significance, and the thought process that the heavyweight championship was the greatest prize in sports period.... the 1900-1920 era.... why? After Tunney it seems to me the division went through a long period where the sport was essentially carried by the middleweights and welterweights (much like today and the early 1980s).... At the turn of the 20th century until the Depression the heavyweight division WAS boxing in the minds of the general public.

[evrenb]

Where do you find the golden era of heavyweight division? And why?

First option is 20 years because I can only put 10 options in a poll and I wanted to put in it the last decade of XXI century too.

I been thinking about this a fair bit recently....was going to look at putting together a top 15 for each decade as it may make things clearer. My initial response would be 1970's but the 1990's was awesome too...the 1980's had Holmes and Tyson...
The 1960's you had Patterson, Ali and Liston...so many great eras..but probably 1970's...

Evrenb

[gilgamesh]

1970's

[ben geoghegan]

McVea, Langford, Jeffries, Jeff Clark, Frank Childs, Griffin, Klondike, Jeannette, Jack Johnson, Denver Ed Martin, Dempsey, Wills, Tom Sharkey. Kid McCoy to Kid Norfolk--plus Corbett, Slavin Goddard and Fitzsimmons still around to make it interesting. That era has the advantage of being 20 years on the poll, but even still it's supreme. The amount of times these guys fought, where and who in the mix, doesn't compare.

[Ambling Alp II]

Not sure why we aren't counting the first year of the decade, but are counting the first year of the next. For example, we should count 1980-1989, not 1981-1990. Still, always an interesting subject.

Anyway, if you count both decades it really was outstanding. On their own, I would rate the 1910-1919 period as a little better than the 1900-1909 period. You also had Willard, Fulton, and Smith in that decade. There was a lot of depth.

[gilgamesh]

Not sure why we aren't counting the first year of the decade, but are counting the first year of the next. For example, we should count 1980-1989, not 1981-1990. Still, always an interesting subject.

Anyway, if you count both decades it really was outstanding. On their own, I would rate the 1910-1919 period as a little better than the 1900-1909 period. You also had Willard, Fulton, and Smith in that decade. There was a lot of depth.

The years of the Ambling Alps

[Duch]

Not sure why we aren't counting the first year of the decade, but are counting the first year of the next. For example, we should count 1980-1989, not 1981-1990. Still, always an interesting subject.

That was my mistake. I was confused because I knew that XX century started in 1901 so I thought that the same should be with decades. Now I know that decades and centuries are counted independently but still it sounds strange that we say e.g. "90's of XX century" which means '90-'99 and "00's of XXI century" which means 2000-2010 when we know that 2000 is still the end of XX century.

But nevermind. I should just put options like that: "90's" and that would be ok.

Anyway, if you count both decades it really was outstanding. On their own, I would rate the 1910-1919 period as a little better than the 1900-1909 period. You also had Willard, Fulton, and Smith in that decade. There was a lot of depth.

Yes but I have limitations. Only 10 options in a poll - maybe boxrec should allow you to put more options.

Anyway, only 1 person voted for the first option. I don't think that's a big deal which can influence on results of the poll. We can see a domination of 70's.

[Ambling Alp II]

No big deal about when the decades started.
No, it wouldn't have made much difference if 1900-1920 was split up as far as the voting goes.
Always an interesting topic. Maybe we could do it with other weight classes sometime.

[yancey]

1966-1975 for me.

With 1971 being the peak.