Nat Fleisher's Top Ten Heavyweights -1971

[dempseyfire]

quote="TheOneIsHere2008"]

Take Lenox Lewis...You would admit for a big man he was extremely skilled?

He was 6'5 and 240 pounds in his prime...How would a 5'8 175 pound boxer fare against him?

Just who is that 5'8 175-pounder you're referring to?[/quote]

How about Sam Langford?[/quote]

Some say Langford was 5'7

Lenox weighed 249 for the Tyson fight and 256 1/2 for Klitshko...

Can a 175 pound man give away 80 pounds and ten inches to a skilled fighter and be competitive?

When Ali discussed fighting Wilt Chamberlain, Angelo Dundee stood on a chair to illustrate the problem of fighting a man that much taller than you...Ali was 6'3, Wilt was 7'1...That's the same difference betwen Langford and Lewis...I'm not making any inference but a ten inch height difference is huge...[/quote]

Langford beat Harry Willis, Bill Tate, George Godfrey . . .all skilled big men who weighed 210-240 in their primes. Lennox at his peak weighed about 243.

In a real boxing match Ali could have destroyed Chamberlain in two rounds. Actually I'd favor 6 ft 165 lber Bob Fitz to destroy Chamberlain in two rounds.

[Cap]

Oh, look. Fitzsimmons has grown another 1/2 inch since his death.

Just for the public record, Fitz was 5' 11 1/2" tall, a shade taller than Joe Frazier. Jim Jeffries is often listed as 6' 2" but might not have even been six foot, as photos of him standing beside Fitz make the latter seem a wee bit taller.

[granberry]

Oh, look. Fitzsimmons has grown another 1/2 inch since his death.

Just for the public record, Fitz was 5' 11 1/2" tall, a shade taller than Joe Frazier. Jim Jeffries is often listed as 6' 2" but might not have even been six foot, as photos of him standing beside Fitz make the latter seem a wee bit taller.

Just for the record, huh?

LOL

I have stood next to Joe Frazier many times.

He was 5' 9" at the tallest.

When drunken Bert Sugar got his hands on what was left of the RING magazine after Nat Fleischer died, Sugar set lose the pathetic Herbert Goldman to trash the RING Record Book.

Goldman, a "I Hate Jack Dempsey" and "I Grovel for Ali and Gerry Cooney" type,

shrunk the size of many of the earlier champions.

In Goldman's bastardization of the RING record book, long dead Jack Dempsey lost a full inch in height, dropping from 6' 1 1/2 ro 6' 1/2 " YEARS after he died.

Goldman also wrote articles saying that Dempsey's "size would be against him" if he fought Ali or Holmes.

Sugar's "boxing historian" Herbert Goldman didn't know that Jess Willard was 6' 6 1/2".

This is a standard and easily observable media technique of "making nothing" of the object of the media's attack.

Cap here gives a tired attempt at imitating this very recognizable media "technique."

The only remaining question is:

HOW TALL are Ali and Larry Holmes?

Are they EIGHT feet tall? Or are they TEN feet tall?

LOL

[TheOneIsHere2008]

Oh, look. Fitzsimmons has grown another 1/2 inch since his death.

Just for the public record, Fitz was 5' 11 1/2" tall, a shade taller than Joe Frazier. Jim Jeffries is often listed as 6' 2" but might not have even been six foot, as photos of him standing beside Fitz make the latter seem a wee bit taller.

Yes, the IBHOF confirms what you said...

http://www.ibhof.com/ibhftape.htm

[Cap]

If you go back to the original sources, newspapers of the day, you'll find the real dimensions of the heavyweights back then. Those were the days when the average Joe on the street was well under six feet tall and 200 pounds. Six feet was tall and Willard's 6' 6" made him a giant of biblical proportions. (Angus MacAskill, the legendary Cape Breton Giant of the 1850s was 7' 9" and weighed 425 pounds. Now that's a giant!)

In boxing, size often means very little if the smaller man is more skilled than the taller, or if the latter fails to use his greater height to his advantage. While I often find myself embroiled in arguments over the relative merits of Dempsey, Marciano and Lewis, I find that, more and more, I'm of the opinion that it's probably best to, at the very least, separate fighters in two periods: 1890 to 1945 and 1946 to the present.

Cap

[TheOneIsHere2008]

If you go back to the original sources, newspapers of the day, you'll find the real dimensions of the heavyweights back then. Those were the days when the average Joe on the street was well under six feet tall and 200 pounds. Six feet was tall and Willard's 6' 6" made him a giant of biblical proportions. (Angus MacAskill, the legendary Cape Breton Giant of the 1850s was 7' 9" and weighed 425 pounds. Now that's a giant!)

In boxing, size often means very little if the smaller man is more skilled than the taller, or if the latter fails to use his greater height to his advantage. While I often find myself embroiled in arguments over the relative merits of Dempsey, Marciano and Lewis, I find that, more and more, I'm of the opinion that it's probably best to, at the very least, separate fighters in two periods: 1890 to 1945 and 1946 to the present.

Cap

A 5'7 man fighting a 7'9 man better have a hell of a body punch...

[Ambling Alp]

Fleischer's list I dont think was too out of whack for that time. Johnson by all account up until then had achieved greater than Ali had done, as had Joe Louis. I dont agree with Tunney ever being on the list, I believe he is more suited for a p4p rating. Otherwise Louis is too low, Fitzsimmons is too high as, like Tunney, he should be more suited to a p4p rating, so maybe he shouldnt be on the list either, Nat Fleischer's time or not. Schmeling, in my opinion, if anything proved he was the best of the so-called "cheese champions" following Tunney's retirement, and the best European heavyweight in history thus far, but he wasnt an ATG heavyweight.

So the more appropriate list should be:

1. Johnson
2. Louis
3. Jeffries
4. Dempsey
5. Corbett
6. Langford- though he never was a champion; and should be regarded like Tunney/Fitzsimmons as a p4p ATG
7. Marciano

But then that leaves three more spots to be open; so lets get down to business:

Baer, Sharkey, Carnera, Burns, Hart, Willard are immediately dropped from the list because none of the men, no matter what potential they had, never quite lived up to the hype or made it over that extra slump to become qualified as an ATG heavyweight, though it is true that you can make a solid argument for any of them to be greater than what they are generally considered.

Ezzard Charles, Jersey Joe Walcott were not on Fleischer's list...while you can argue against Charles that he should be, like Tunney/Langford/Fitzsimmons, regarded as a p4p great, while that is true he had a greater record/pedigree as a heavyweight than those men had, and he defeated Walcott more times than not. So Charles and Walcott take the number 8 and 9 spots.

Whose the top 10 man then? Up until Clay's reign as champion, there was no greater destroyer in the ring, who could box as well, than Sonny Liston. Let's project here for just a moment: If Ali never existed, Liston would not have suffered a defeat until 1968 [against Leotis Martin] when he was in his 40's. Liston defeated a more talented pool of men on the way up than Ali did, and though his reign was brief, as stated before he would not face a defeat until 1968-1969, five or so years following his losses to Ali.

I believe Liston deserves the number 10 spot.

I do think that his list was "out of whack" even for his time. Your own list is quite a bit different. While I have some reservations with your list it's better than his.
You just can't have Louis #6. It wasn't unheard of to have someone have Dempsey or Johnson rated higher. However, Fitz and Corbett aren't even arguable. Even Jeffries is quite a stretch.

Marciano #10? You could atleast make an decent arguement of having Jeffries ahead of Marciano, maybe even Langford. But Fitz, Corbett, and Schmeling ahead of Marciano is indefensible.

Fleischer had an obvious bias for fighters towards fighters who fought long ago. (Of course other people have a bias toward more recent fighters.)


I strongly disagree with ommitting dismissing Fitzsimmons and Tunney but counting Charles.
Fitz arguably should be rated higher than Corbett; certainly not far behind him. He beat at least the quality of heavyweight competition as Corbett did. (Sharkey,Ruhlin,Maher, Corbett himself.)
Tunney had almost as many fights against heavyweights as Jeffries and never lost at that weight.

There are a few statements that are factually incorrect:
-Sonny Liston wasn't in his 40's when he lost to Leotis Martin. He was "only" 37. Still he was old.
-The Martin fight was in 1969, not 1968. (Not a big deal.)
-Even if Ali never existed would have have had a loss before Martin. He lost to Marty Marshall ealry in his career.

Nevertheless, as mentioned Liston had an impressive "pre title" career, and of course was pretty impressive against Patterson.
If you were to rate him in 1971, (and not count fighters that were still active) he could concievably be as high as #3 (behind Louis and Johnson) and no lower than #7 with Louis,Johnson,Dempsey,Jeffries,Tunney, and Marciano are the only heavyweights that you could have made a legitimate arguement that were better than Liston.

[Tony1244]

1. Jack Johnson
2. Jim Jeffries
3. Bob Fitzsimmons
4. Jack Dempsey
5. James J. Corbett
6. Joe Louis
7. Sam Langford
8. Gene Tunney
9. Max Schmeling
10. Rocky Marciano

My first exposure to boxing was in the 1970s so I grew up with this list.

Amazing now, isn't it? Fitzsimmons @ 3 !

[Kalan]

quote="TheOneIsHere2008"]

In a real boxing match Ali could have destroyed Chamberlain in two rounds. Actually I'd favor 6 ft 165 lber Bob Fitz to destroy Chamberlain in two rounds.

Ali would have been murdered if he fought Chamberlain... Saying 160 pound Fitzsimmons could flatten a trained Chamaberlain is like saying Fitz could score 100 point in an NBA Basketball game and haul down 55 rebounds at the same time with the other team focusing almost exclusively on him, because he was the biggest offensive and defensive threat... Ali did the TV Dog & Pony shows to build up a Chamberlain fight but refused to sign the contract -- because he knew Chamberlain was going to kill him if he ventured into a ring with him.

This video proves Ali refused to sign to fight Wilt...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF57P1uUG0s

Ali actually said, "I accept your challenge ... after I get done with a few more contenders ... IF I beat them." ... He was dogging all the way.

[Kalan]

As I have had it listed in The Ring Record Book for some years, my all-time rating of heavyweights is as follows: 1. Jack Johnson, 2. Jim Jeffries, 3. Bob Fitzsimmons, 4. Jack Dempsey, 5. James J. Corbett, 6. Joe Louis, 7. Sam Langford, 8. Gene Tunney, 9. Max Schmeling, 10. Rocky Marciano.

IMHO, I do not think Jeffries, Fitzsimmons, Corbett, Langford,Tunney and Schmeling could hang with a Muhammad Ali,a Larry Holmes, a George Foreman, a Joe Frazier, an Evander Holyfield or even a Lenox Lewis

I don't know what you mean by "even" cuz Lewis beat every man he ever fought (officially), including beating Holyfield twice and knocking Tyson out for the 10-count -- which Holyfield failed to do... Holmes of course was knocked bow legged by Tyson.. Holmes beat Ali so one-sidedly it was the most pathetic mismatch in Boxing History.. That came long after the 6-0-1 Leon Spinks beat Ali in a fight where he should have been facing Larry Holmes.. I don't see anyone listed above coming close to beating Joshua.. If AJ retires undefeated he'll definitely go down as the greatest Heavyweight of all time -- and as everybody knows Heavyweights are bigger, faster, and stronger than ever -- and coming from all over the world rather than just America.. A huge slice of the World is producing professional boxers where Professional Boxing never even existed before.

America only has 4% of the world's population -- and Americans tend to rank only Americans in their 10-Ten ATG Heavyweights.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

.. That came long after the 6-0-1 Leon Spinks beat Ali in a fight where he should have been facing Larry Holmes..

- As typical of your posting history, you use a rare combination of selective history out of context mixed in with your made up fantasy history.

The 1977 annual Ring rankings had Norton, who most thought whooped Ali in 1976, as #1, with Jimmy Young, who most thought whooped Ali prior as #2. Ali fought Shavers in 1977, ignoring the Norton rematch, and fought Leon in early February 1978 well before the annual Ring rankings were published. Norton was the mandatory at any rate, and the reason Ali was stripped of the WBA title.

How ironic your zero, Fat Larry, who was still skinny, never avenged his lopsided Bobick KO in the amateurs or dared to risk a Jimmy Young fight. When Fat Larry, who was still skinny, was forced to man up to Norton for a WBC title shot, again most thought Norton whooped him and finishing the stronger fight with Fat Larry, who was still skinny, looking to be hanging on. No rematch either for huge money that fight would have generated. Instead we got consecutive fights with Spanish cream puff, Evangelista, Baby Ocasio, and unranked 19-8 journeyman, Mike Weaver, who was whooping Fat Larry, who was still skinny, a new one before succumbing to a desperation uppercut by Larry.

A great desperation shot from hell deserving credit, but hardly the hallmark of a HOF fighter, but he's all yours, every lovable fat Larry who used to be skinny pound of him, and quite deservedly so.

[Kalan]

.. That came long after the 6-0-1 Leon Spinks beat Ali in a fight where he should have been facing Larry Holmes..

- As typical of your posting history, you use a rare combination of selective history out of context mixed in with your made up fantasy history.

The 1977 annual Ring rankings had Norton, who most thought whooped Ali in 1976, as #1, with Jimmy Young, who most thought whooped Ali prior as #2. Ali fought Shavers in 1977, ignoring the Norton rematch, and fought Leon in early February 1978 well before the annual Ring rankings were published. Norton was the mandatory at any rate, and the reason Ali was stripped of the WBA title.

How ironic your zero, Fat Larry, who was still skinny, never avenged his lopsided Bobick KO in the amateurs or dared to risk a Jimmy Young fight. When Fat Larry, who was still skinny, was forced to man up to Norton for a WBC title shot, again most thought Norton whooped him and finishing the stronger fight with Fat Larry, who was still skinny, looking to be hanging on. No rematch either for huge money that fight would have generated. Instead we got consecutive fights with Spanish cream puff, Evangelista, Baby Ocasio, and unranked 19-8 journeyman, Mike Weaver, who was whooping Fat Larry, who was still skinny, a new one before succumbing to a desperation uppercut by Larry.

A great desperation shot from hell deserving credit, but hardly the hallmark of a HOF fighter, but he's all yours, every lovable fat Larry who used to be skinny pound of him, and quite deservedly so.

You're not a selector of Historical fights... You're a flat out HATER!!! ... The general consensus of the Holmes-Norton fight was that Holmes won by a much wider margin than the score... Even Ali's buddy Howard Cosell thought that Holmes beat Norton a lot more convincingly than the scores... The truth is -- Holmes would have easily knocked Norton out if he had 2 good arms for that fight.. He had a torn left biceps.

Mike Weaver was a tremendous puncher who scored smashing KO victories over John Tate and Gerry Coetzee, effectively ending their careers... Holmes took the Dream Weaver out... In fact Weaver was so powerful looking that Ken Norton gave him the nickname "Hercules."

It's not necessary to avenge every defeat you had as a rank amateur to a more experienced boxer... Duane Bobick was irrelevant as a professional Heavyweight Boxer. Unlike Larry Holmes and Mike Weaver he never got any better and was too stupid to learn anything... Holmes mastered so much of the game that he was still fighting World Title fights with Ray Mercer, Evander Holyfield, and Oliver McCall in his mid 40's -- an age Ali had long since retired because of brain damage... Holmes mastered the art of defense so he could still hang with the best at 45.

Lewis fled into retirement because Vitali Klitschko would have smashed the shitt out of him if LL took the rematch as promised.

[Kalan]

.. That came long after the 6-0-1 Leon Spinks beat Ali in a fight where he should have been facing Larry Holmes..

- As typical of your posting history, you use a rare combination of selective history out of context mixed in with your made up fantasy history.

The 1977 annual Ring rankings had Norton, who most thought whooped Ali in 1976, as #1, with Jimmy Young, who most thought whooped Ali prior as #2. Ali fought Shavers in 1977, ignoring the Norton rematch, and fought Leon in early February 1978 well before the annual Ring rankings were published. Norton was the mandatory at any rate, and the reason Ali was stripped of the WBA title.

How ironic your zero, Fat Larry, who was still skinny, never avenged his lopsided Bobick KO in the amateurs or dared to risk a Jimmy Young fight. When Fat Larry, who was still skinny, was forced to man up to Norton for a WBC title shot, again most thought Norton whooped him and finishing the stronger fight with Fat Larry, who was still skinny, looking to be hanging on. No rematch either for huge money that fight would have generated. Instead we got consecutive fights with Spanish cream puff, Evangelista, Baby Ocasio, and unranked 19-8 journeyman, Mike Weaver, who was whooping Fat Larry, who was still skinny, a new one before succumbing to a desperation uppercut by Larry.

A great desperation shot from hell deserving credit, but hardly the hallmark of a HOF fighter, but he's all yours, every lovable fat Larry who used to be skinny pound of him, and quite deservedly so.

You're not a selector of Historical fights... You're a flat out HATER!!! ... The general consensus of the Holmes-Norton fight was that Holmes won by a much wider margin than the score... Even Ali's buddy Howard Cosell thought that Holmes beat Norton a lot more convincingly than the scores... The truth is -- Holmes would have easily knocked Norton out if he had 2 good arms for that fight.. He had a torn left biceps.

Mike Weaver was a tremendous puncher who scored smashing KO victories over John Tate and Gerry Coetzee, effectively ending their careers... Holmes took the Dream Weaver out... In fact Weaver was so powerful looking that Ken Norton gave him the nickname "Hercules."

It's not necessary to avenge every defeat you had as a rank amateur to a more experienced boxer... Duane Bobick was irrelevant as a professional Heavyweight Boxer. Unlike Larry Holmes and Mike Weaver he never got any better and was too stupid to learn anything... Holmes mastered so much of the game that he was still fighting World Title fights with Ray Mercer, Evander Holyfield, and Oliver McCall in his mid 40's -- an age Ali had long since retired because of brain damage... Holmes mastered the art of defense so he could still hang with the best at 45.

Lewis quit the game because Vitali Klitschko would have smashed the shitt out of him if LL took the rematch as promised. Vitali was never knocked down and was never behind on points after any fight in his entire career. No other retired Heavyweight Champion can say that.

[Cap]

Coulda woulda shoulda, pure speculation and therefore of no value. What is of value is the fact that Vitali:

- quit like a dog against Chris Byrd
- got bloodied and stopped when he finally fought a great fighter in Lennox Lewis

Watch the first round of Vitali Klitschko's fight with Corrie Sanders. If that had been any of the top heavyweights from the 60's and 70's Klitschko would never have seen the second round. Sanders had relatively fast hands but was not a HUGE banger as Klitschko fans claim. (See his fights with Garing Lane and Ross Purity, et al)

Oh, and as far as Holmes goes, he was nothing special and Norton was robbed big time in that fight. It was obvious promoters figured Holmes had more of a future cash-wise than Norton so fixed it for Mr Thumb to win.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

[Tony1244]

Coulda woulda shoulda, pure speculation and therefore of no value. What is of value is the fact that Vitali:

- quit like a dog against Chris Byrd
- got bloodied and stopped when he finally fought a great fighter in Lennox Lewis

Watch the first round of Vitali Klitschko's fight with Corrie Sanders. If that had been any of the top heavyweights from the 60's and 70's Klitschko would never have seen the second round. Sanders had relatively fast hands but was not a HUGE banger as Klitschko fans claim. (See his fights with Garing Lane and Ross Purity, et al)

Oh, and as far as Holmes goes, he was nothing special and Norton was robbed big time in that fight. It was obvious promoters figured Holmes had more of a future cash-wise than Norton so fixed it for Mr Thumb to win.

Agree w/ first paragraph on Vit. Second paragraph is simply wrong; Holmes was special and deserved Norton decision as he dominated first half and second half was close.

[Cap]

Agree to disagree.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Just have to agree you're wrong. It was a great fight, I had it 9-6 Holmes, no way in hell was Norton "robbed".

[Controversial]

Sanders had relatively fast hands but was not a HUGE banger as Klitschko fans claim. (See his fights with Garing Lane and Ross Purity, et al)

Sanders was a very dangerous puncher early, many 1st round wins and all but one of his 31 KOs coming in 4 rounds or less.

[Kalan]

You're not a selector of Historical fights... You're a flat out HATER!!! ... The general consensus of the Holmes-Norton fight was that Holmes won by a much wider margin than the score... Even Ali's buddy Howard Cosell thought that Holmes beat Norton a lot more convincingly than the scores... The truth is -- Holmes would have easily knocked Norton out if he had 2 good arms for that fight.. He had a torn left biceps.

Mike Weaver was a tremendous puncher who scored smashing KO victories over John Tate and Gerry Coetzee, effectively ending their careers... Holmes took the Dream Weaver out... In fact Weaver was so powerful looking that Ken Norton gave him the nickname "Hercules."

It's not necessary to avenge every defeat you had as a rank amateur to a more experienced boxer... Duane Bobick was irrelevant as a professional Heavyweight Boxer. Unlike Larry Holmes and Mike Weaver he never got any better and was too stupid to learn anything... Holmes mastered so much of the game that he was still fighting World Title fights with Ray Mercer, Evander Holyfield, and Oliver McCall in his mid 40's -- an age Ali had long since retired because of brain damage... Holmes mastered the art of defense so he could still hang with the best at 45.

Lewis quit the game because Vitali Klitschko would have smashed the shitt out of him if LL took the rematch as promised. Vitali was never knocked down and was never behind on points after any fight in his entire career. No other retired Heavyweight Champion can say that.

Coulda woulda shoulda, pure speculation and therefore of no value. What is of value is the fact that Vitali:

- quit like a dog against Chris Byrd
- got bloodied and stopped when he finally fought a great fighter in Lennox Lewis

What is true is Klitschko quit because he was way ahead of Byrd unanimously -- but was rendered defenseless because of a totally severed rotator cuff assembly... You're not a surgeon and don't know the extent of the injury -- which was extremely severe... Vitali was stopped on foul induced cuts and got robbed in the Lewis fight... Bryd was battered twice by Wladimir Klitschko.. That's the ONLY mutual opponent he has in common with with Vitali who he did a better job on than Vitali did.. VK battered and stopped Sanders, Purrity, and Peter who all put Wladimir down... None of them came close to putting Vitali down or doing a damned thing with him except being the recipients of massive punishment.

[Kalan]

Coulda woulda shoulda, pure speculation and therefore of no value. What is of value is the fact that Vitali:

- quit like a dog against Chris Byrd
- got bloodied and stopped when he finally fought a great fighter in Lennox Lewis

Watch the first round of Vitali Klitschko's fight with Corrie Sanders. If that had been any of the top heavyweights from the 60's and 70's Klitschko would never have seen the second round. Sanders had relatively fast hands but was not a HUGE banger as Klitschko fans claim. (See his fights with Garing Lane and Ross Purity, et al)

Oh, and as far as Holmes goes, he was nothing special and Norton was robbed big time in that fight. It was obvious promoters figured Holmes had more of a future cash-wise than Norton so fixed it for Mr Thumb to win.

Agree w/ first paragraph on Vit. Second paragraph is simply wrong; Holmes was special and deserved Norton decision as he dominated first half and second half was close.

Top Heavyweights of the 1960's included Karl Mildenberger, Thad Spencer, Henry Cooper, Ernie Terrell, Doug Jones, and George Chuvalo, all of whom would be 50/1 underdogs to Wladimir Klitschko in any of the 9 years from 2006 through 2014.. Wlad didn't get beaten until he was 39 -- but was far from a compete Heavyweight until he was 30.. I admit he wasn't technically solid in his 20's.. He lacked great coaching til he was 27.

Top Heavyweights of the 70's included Leon Stinks (won the Lineal Heavyweight Title by beating Ali) ... Chuck Wepner (went 15 with Ali) ... Joe Bugner (he couldn't box, got hit with everything, and he couldn't hit, but he went 15 with Ali) ... Mac Foster (couldn't box green bananas but went 15 rounds with Ali) ... Buster Mathis (weighed 280 for some fights and 220 for others, and got hit with everything, but went the distance with Ali) ... The Wladimir Klitschko of the 9 years from 2006 through 2014 would have been a 20/1 to 50/1 favorite to beat any of those dogs.

Ali had many technical problems just like Wladimir Klitschko had... Ali wasn't a technically sound boxer, but never corrected the problems. Larry Holmes fought until age 45 against Heavyweight Champions because he was a brilliant technician with great coaching.

Wladimir corrected his many problems.. Basically a wide stance, poor footwork, a stiff stance, and an immobile forward head.. Steward took the kinks out or Klitschko never would have enjoyed the success he had for as long as he remained on top.. Longer than Ali or anyone but Holmes.

[Tony1244]

Watch the first round of Vitali Klitschko's fight with Corrie Sanders. If that had been any of the top heavyweights from the 60's and 70's Klitschko would never have seen the second round. Sanders had relatively fast hands but was not a HUGE banger as Klitschko fans claim. (See his fights with Garing Lane and Ross Purity, et al)

Oh, and as far as Holmes goes, he was nothing special and Norton was robbed big time in that fight. It was obvious promoters figured Holmes had more of a future cash-wise than Norton so fixed it for Mr Thumb to win.

Agree w/ first paragraph on Vit. Second paragraph is simply wrong; Holmes was special and deserved Norton decision as he dominated first half and second half was close.

Top Heavyweights of the 1960's included Karl Mildenberger, Thad Spencer, Henry Cooper, Ernie Terrell, Doug Jones, and George Chuvalo, all of whom would be 50/1 underdogs to Wladimir Klitschko in any of the 9 years from 2006 through 2014.. Wlad didn't get beaten until he was 39 -- but was far from a compete Heavyweight until he was 30.. I admit he wasn't technically solid in his 20's.. He lacked great coaching til he was 27.

Top Heavyweights of the 70's included Leon Stinks (won the Lineal Heavyweight Title by beating Ali) ... Chuck Wepner (went 15 with Ali) ... Joe Bugner (he couldn't box, got hit with everything, and he couldn't hit, but he went 15 with Ali) ... Mac Foster (couldn't box green bananas but went 15 rounds with Ali) ... Buster Mathis (weighed 280 for some fights and 220 for others, and got hit with everything, but went the distance with Ali) ... The Wladimir Klitschko of the 9 years from 2006 through 2014 would have been a 20/1 to 50/1 favorite to beat any of those dogs.

Ali had many technical problems just like Wladimir Klitschko had... Ali wasn't a technically sound boxer, but never corrected the problems.

Wladimir did.

Your 1960s and 1970s lists miss Liston, Patterson, Quarry, Ellis, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Frazier, Lyle, Shavers, and Norton.

Your Bugner description isn't too flattering. LOL. He couldn't hit, but he could box and take a shot. Spinks shouldn't be on the list but should have been. Let me explain: if he wasn't a compulsive drug user and drinker he would have been on the list, but he was, so he was nothing near what he could have been. He probably could have gotten away with some recreational use, but his usage was chronic. If you ain't tough you don't win Olympic Gold in 1976.

I like Wepner a lot. Great character, but he was not a 1960s great.

[Kalan]

And was stopped by a fresh, but fat Buster Mathis in 3 rounds or so -- but didn't get stopped by top 70's Heavyweights like Ali in a round or 2.

[Kalan]

Your 1960s and 1970s lists miss Liston, Patterson, Quarry, Ellis, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Frazier, Lyle, Shavers, and Norton

All those boys would be huge underdogs to a 2011 circa Wladimir Klitschko... Patterson crushed by Liston.. Quarry thumped by wide open (for any big, tall, brutally powerful, and hard punching Heavyweight) Joe Frazier... Ellis getting run over by wide open Frazier... Chuvalo being an actual punching bag... Bonavena likewise... Lyle being a super slow, poor technician who got started very late... Shavers getting knocked out by everybody like Stander and Cobb, and beaten by pathetic Bob Stallings... and Norton getting punched out by 188-pound greenie Jose Garcia.

Liston was the most formidable Heavyweight of the lot -- but he didn't age well and would be easily out-boxed by the much faster David Haye. He was even smaller than David Haye BTW.. Today's Heavyweights are huge compared to that day -- lIke matching Marciano with Liston.

[Kalan]

Your Bugner description isn't too flattering. LOL. He couldn't hit, but he could box and take a shot

He couldn't box worth a damn... Marvis Frazier had 9 freakin' fights when he boxed the living piss out of Bugner... What a joke!! Bugner was the most immobile punching bag I've ever seen... It's like you insulted him if you missed a punch. His stance was so awkward he couldn't slip any. Wladimir Klitschko circa 2011 would cut the guy down in half a round... Wlad was much bigger, taller, and stronger...aside from the technical advantages and athletic advantages he would enjoy... Being much bigger and taller is the only advantage Bugner enjoyed over anybody..

Little Larry Middleton and Jack Bodell also beat Bugner he was so bad.. Even Bobick beat Middleton.. Quarry put Bodell out in seconds.