Top 10 Heavyweights by decade

[BitPlayer]

Interesting idea.

[DrDuke]

Pretty fair evaluation in general. Not without agruable moments, but not bad. A one of the most interesting points is determination of the 80s king. Tyson is considered to achieve such title, but Larry Holmes was longer on top and had a tougher opposition, so he has been placed higher than Tyson with help of that point system not surprisingly.

[Ambling Alp II]

Crease did a topic on this a few years ago with a slightly different scoring system. I did it about 12 years ago. I gave 12 points to the champion, 10 to the #1 contender, 9 for #2, and so on.

The biggest surprise is Tami Mauriello.

Obviously it can be deceiving if you try to compare eras. Some were better than others so I guy finished 3rd in one decade might not have been as good as someone who was 6th in another and so on.
And some guys best years were the end of one decade and the begging of another and won't score well.

Still it is interesting. Makes you think about someone who gets overlooked for one thing.

[Kalan]

Rummy is the least knowledgeable or informative individual who posts to YouTube with any kind of following...

You can tweak mechanical rating systems til they produce the outcome you want... You could raise the importance of KO ratios or not consider them... You could raise or lower the importance of Title Fights.... You can use somebody's else's ratings for the basis of your system like Rummy... You can tweak your system forever til your fav comes out on top.

But if you're picking the top fighter of the decade -- it's who in that decade at his best, could beat the most other fighters, at that weight, in that decade. For the sake of Justice, it's not who won the most Title Fights in a decade, but who at his peak was the best... Politics can deny a fighter a shot at the Title like Sonny Liston was denied for so long in the 50's.

Louis was the top Heavyweight of the 1930's and 40's.... Liston 50's... Ali 60's... Holmes 70s... Tyson 80's. He peaked vs Holmes and Spinks.... Lewis 90's... Vitali Klitschko 00's https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtdOteT5G0Q cuz he was beating Lewis on all cards and should have gotten a Unanimous Technical Decision .... and Joshua will be for this decade...

Wladimir probably peaked in 2010 against Eddie Chambers... Chambers was at or near his peak, but Wladimir was brilliant. He barely got hit and dominated each round. He finished with one of the smoothest left hooks you'll ever see. Joshua will probably reach his peak around 2023 so he'll be a 2-decade dominator... He'll be 40 in 2029 so Daniel Dubois will no doubt get the best of him sometime around that time frame or earlier.

[ElJefe]

Rummy is the least knowledgeable or informative individual who posts to YouTube with any kind of following...

You can tweak mechanical rating systems til they produce the outcome you want... You could raise the importance of KO ratios or not consider them... You could raise or lower the importance of Title Fights.... You can use somebody's else's ratings for the basis of your system like Rummy... You can tweak your system forever til your fav comes out on top.

But if you're picking the top fighter of the decade -- it's who in that decade at his best, could beat the most other fighters, at that weight, in that decade. For the sake of Justice, it's not who won the most Title Fights in a decade, but who at his peak was the best... Politics can deny a fighter a shot at the Title like Sonny Liston was denied for so long in the 50's.

Louis was the top Heavyweight of the 1930's and 40's.... Liston 50's... Ali 60's... Holmes 70s... Tyson 80's. He peaked vs Holmes and Spinks.... Lewis 90's... Vitali Klitschko 00's https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtdOteT5G0Q cuz he was beating Lewis on all cards and should have gotten a Unanimous Technical Decision .... and Joshua will be for this decade...

Wladimir probably peaked in 2010 against Eddie Chambers... Chambers was at or near his peak, but Wladimir was brilliant. He barely got hit and dominated each round. He finished with one of the smoothest left hooks you'll ever see. Joshua will probably reach his peak around 2023 so he'll be a 2-decade dominator... He'll be 40 in 2029 so Daniel Dubois will no doubt get the best of him sometime around that time frame or earlier.

As far as I can see Rummy's work here has no personal bias. I can't see what conditions he's manipulating so that his favourite (whoever that may be, because from the video you wouldn't be able to tell) comes out on top. He uses the only set of rankings that stretch back that far. What other rankings do you suggest he uses?

[ron4972]

The 1970s were the decade in which I followed boxing most closely. I saw most of the top heavyweights regularly on TV. I respectfully disagree with Rumsfeld's ratings for that decade. I'd rate the top ten as follows:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Larry Holmes
3. George Foreman
4. Joe Frazier
5. Ken Norton
6. Jimmy Young
7. Jerry Quarry
8. Ron Lyle
9. Earnie Shavers
10. (tie) John Tate & Joe Bugner
Honorable mention: Oscar Bonavena, George Chuvalo, Jeff Merritt, Floyd Patterson, Mike Weaver, Jimmy Ellis, Gerrie Coetzee

[gilgamesh]

The 1970s were the decade in which I followed boxing most closely. I saw most of the top heavyweights regularly on TV. I respectfully disagree with Rumsfeld's ratings for that decade. I'd rate the top ten as follows:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Larry Holmes
3. George Foreman
4. Joe Frazier
5. Ken Norton
6. Jimmy Young
7. Jerry Quarry
8. Ron Lyle
9. Earnie Shavers
10. (tie) John Tate & Joe Bugner
Honorable mention: Oscar Bonavena, George Chuvalo, Jeff Merritt, Floyd Patterson, Mike Weaver, Jimmy Ellis, Gerrie Coetzee

That Jeff doesn't make the list on Merritt...sorry...stupid joke, but I couldn't resist

[ron4972]

That Jeff doesn't make the list on Merritt...sorry...stupid joke, but I couldn't resist

Ha ha...funny. But in all seriousness, Merritt was a tall, rangy, hard-hitting monster. I suspect that, for a short period of time at least, Merritt might have had the potential to be a legitimate top heavyweight. Check out his knockout over Ron Stander, which is on youtube.

BTW, did you know that Merritt broke Earnie Shavers' jaw in sparring? That happened in 1973, when Shavers was training to fight Quarry. The bout had to be postponed as a result.

[gilgamesh]

That Jeff doesn't make the list on Merritt...sorry...stupid joke, but I couldn't resist

Ha ha...funny. But in all seriousness, Merritt was a tall, rangy, hard-hitting monster. I suspect that, for a short period of time at least, Merritt might have had the potential to be a legitimate top heavyweight. Check out his knockout over Ron Stander, which is on youtube.

BTW, did you know that Merritt broke Earnie Shavers' jaw in sparring? That happened in 1973, when Shavers was training to fight Quarry. The bout had to be postponed as a result.

Pretty nasty. He's hammering Stander with that left uppercut. I don't know why more guys don't throw that shot, it's often highly effective from the fighters I've seen use it. It would leave you vulnerable to counters at times, but sometimes it's an easy shot to slip through the guard, and does quite a bit of damage.

[ron4972]

Pretty nasty. He's hammering Stander with that left uppercut. I don't know why more guys don't throw that shot, it's often highly effective from the fighters I've seen use it. It would leave you vulnerable to counters at times, but sometimes it's an easy shot to slip through the guard, and does quite a bit of damage.

Regarding the left uppercut as a finishing blow, recently I was watching Cooney's defeats to Spinks and Foreman. Both times Cooney was hurt and finished by the left-uppercut. He couldn't see where it was coming from. I found that interesting.

It's also interesting that Cooney severely cut Jimmy Young with a left uppercut in 1980. Either that punch caused the cut, or that punch ripped open a lump on Young's face that might have started with a clash of heads. But either way, Young wasn't bleeding until he took that left uppercut. That's what led directly to the end of the fight.

Another case in point is Ron Lyle vs Joe Bugner in 1977. That bout was very closely fought, and would have been a draw except that Lyle managed to steal a few rounds by sneaking a light left uppercut through Bugner's guard. The punch never hurt Bugner, but it almost always caught him by surprise. I believe that sneaky little left uppercut of Lyle's made the difference in that bout. Lyle used it very intelligently...with a focus on scoring points.

[Kalan]

Pretty nasty. He's hammering Stander with that left uppercut. I don't know why more guys don't throw that shot, it's often highly effective from the fighters I've seen use it. It would leave you vulnerable to counters at times, but sometimes it's an easy shot to slip through the guard, and does quite a bit of damage.

A guy with good boxing skills isn’t going to give you the uppercut unless you have far better skills than Jeff Merritt.... You start with the jab and maybe some lead hooks or straight power shots against a good boxer.... He’s not going to let you rip his head off like Stander did.... Hitting Stander was like teeing off on a heavy bag. He was going through a bad streak where he had one win in 8 fights over a guy making his pro debut..

Merritt was a cooked goose when he fought Stander.. Merritt got knocked out in his next 2 fights by the well hammered Henry Clark and by newbie Stan Ward who had all of 5 wins.. Merritt didn’t get any big left uppercuts on those 2 guys. They weren’t the world’s worst punching bags.

[oogiebe]

Rummy is the least knowledgeable or informative individual who posts to YouTube with any kind of following...

You can tweak mechanical rating systems til they produce the outcome you want... You could raise the importance of KO ratios or not consider them... You could raise or lower the importance of Title Fights.... You can use somebody's else's ratings for the basis of your system like Rummy... You can tweak your system forever til your fav comes out on top.

But if you're picking the top fighter of the decade -- it's who in that decade at his best, could beat the most other fighters, at that weight, in that decade. For the sake of Justice, it's not who won the most Title Fights in a decade, but who at his peak was the best... Politics can deny a fighter a shot at the Title like Sonny Liston was denied for so long in the 50's.

Louis was the top Heavyweight of the 1930's and 40's.... Liston 50's... Ali 60's... Holmes 70s... Tyson 80's. He peaked vs Holmes and Spinks.... Lewis 90's... Vitali Klitschko 00's https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtdOteT5G0Q cuz he was beating Lewis on all cards and should have gotten a Unanimous Technical Decision .... and Joshua will be for this decade...

Wladimir probably peaked in 2010 against Eddie Chambers... Chambers was at or near his peak, but Wladimir was brilliant. He barely got hit and dominated each round. He finished with one of the smoothest left hooks you'll ever see. Joshua will probably reach his peak around 2023 so he'll be a 2-decade dominator... He'll be 40 in 2029 so Daniel Dubois will no doubt get the best of him sometime around that time frame or earlier.

Don't you mean the one who you disagree with the most? I'm no fan, but it's more opinion.

[ron4972]

A guy with good boxing skills isn’t going to give you the uppercut unless you have far better skills than Jeff Merritt.... You start with the jab and maybe some lead hooks or straight power shots against a good boxer.... He’s not going to let you rip his head off like Stander did.... Hitting Stander was like teeing off on a heavy bag. He was going through a bad streak where he had one win in 8 fights over a guy making his pro debut..

Merritt was a cooked goose when he fought Stander.. Merritt got knocked out in his next 2 fights by the well hammered Henry Clark and by newbie Stan Ward who had all of 5 wins.. Merritt didn’t get any big left uppercuts on those 2 guys. They weren’t the world’s worst punching bags.

I am extremely impressed by Merritt's KO over Stander because Stander was such a strong and durable guy. Normally, when Stander got beat by a top contender, he could absorb anything thrown at him. Incredibly tough, as he proved against Frazier and Norton even though he was completely outclassed. But look at how Merritt dealt with Stander: hurt him badly and put him on the deck. In a mere two rounds. That says something about Merritt's power and unfulfilled potential.

As for Henry Clark, are you sure you aren't underrating him? Clark, at worst, was a borderline top-10 fighter. He had lots of losses because he didn't get a big build-up that the more marketable fighters get to have. I remember that World/International Boxing had Clark ranked between 4th and 9th in their ratings for the 1975-76 period. I don't think it's any big shame for Merritt to have gotten caught cold by Clark.

Concerning the Ward fight, that was Merritt's first bout after three years in slammer. Merritt was put in there against Ward without any tune-up fights. I'm sure that what we saw of Merritt on that day tells us nothing about his true ability level. Incidentally, Merritt was whipping Ward (closed one of his eyes completely) until that moment he walked into a punch that he couldn't recover from.

[APerno]

Rummy is the least knowledgeable or informative individual who posts to YouTube with any kind of following...

...You can use somebody's else's ratings for the basis of your system like Rummy...

Considering what he offered, a statistical analysis based on other 'expert' opinions, doesn't the second statement you made, make the first statement irrelevant?

I don't agree with all his results but the guy was straight-up about what he was doing; and didn't need any fight knowledge (just statistical knowledge) to complete the task.

I do agree his decision to use a calendar decade, e.g. 1930s, did distort the results. Some fighters had a great 'decade' but it was spread over two calendar decades and they didn't get proper recognition. But again he was straight-up about what he was trying to do. He let the numbers speak for themselves.

[BitPlayer]

He done it for the other divisions to and just uploaded this

[APerno]

Wow that was a terrible, useless results; I almost want to take back my defense for his effort; he should have just not bothered.

[Heretic]

Pretty nasty. He's hammering Stander with that left uppercut. I don't know why more guys don't throw that shot, it's often highly effective from the fighters I've seen use it. It would leave you vulnerable to counters at times, but sometimes it's an easy shot to slip through the guard, and does quite a bit of damage.

Regarding the left uppercut as a finishing blow, recently I was watching Cooney's defeats to Spinks and Foreman. Both times Cooney was hurt and finished by the left-uppercut. He couldn't see where it was coming from. I found that interesting.

It's also interesting that Cooney severely cut Jimmy Young with a left uppercut in 1980. Either that punch caused the cut, or that punch ripped open a lump on Young's face that might have started with a clash of heads. But either way, Young wasn't bleeding until he took that left uppercut. That's what led directly to the end of the fight.

Another case in point is Ron Lyle vs Joe Bugner in 1977. That bout was very closely fought, and would have been a draw except that Lyle managed to steal a few rounds by sneaking a light left uppercut through Bugner's guard. The punch never hurt Bugner, but it almost always caught him by surprise. I believe that sneaky little left uppercut of Lyle's made the difference in that bout. Lyle used it very intelligently...with a focus on scoring points.

Gassiev is throwing that punch very well. He nailed Dorticos with quite few