Heavyweight ratings 2010-19.

[mattdonnellon]

I think this belongs in History Forum now.
Purely performance based in 2010-19 inclusive.
1-Wlad, pretty clear to me.
2-Povetkin-Close with Joshua, give it to him on longevity.
3-Joshua-underrated body of work, Whyte, Pov, Wlad, Parker, Ruiz.
4-Vitali-short span but beat Solis, Chisora, Adamek, Charr
5-Fury- Thin resume but Wlad, Chisora and Wilder is impressive.
6-Wilder- very thin but Ortiz and the "draw" with Fury coupled with spectacular ko's get him this slot.
7-Pulev-longevity and consistency, Thompson, Chisora and Peter, solid wins.
8-Whyte-Chisora, Parker and Helenius and the losing effort against Joshua earns him the nod.
9-Parker-Flattered a bit but Takam and Ruiz were good victims.
10-Ruiz- based on his Parker loss and the win over AJ.

Chisora was really the gatekeeper for this bunch, no big name wins but competitive with lots of the above. Haye might have warranted a spot but only Chisora as a worthwhile name on his win ledger. Helenius, Adamek, Ortiz-especially-, Takam, and others might be entitled to consideration. Overall, I think history will be kind to this decade.

[DrDuke]

If to make it more oriented on performances + quality of opposition formula, not just looking on papers and records on them, I'd make such list:

1. Wladimir Klitschko - he was beating the best opposition possible for the half of the decade. He was inarguably regarded as the best guy out there for bigger amount of time, than anybody else. An obvious number #1.
2. Tyson Fury - defeated Klitschko in a one-sided fashion, became a one of the three kings of the division and drawn against the other one of them, where he was robbed by the majority of the opinions.
3. Anthony Joshua - overall he had the best resume in the 2nd half of the decade, but he wasn't that convincing as Fury. He had defeated already conquered Klitschko in a more competetive bout. He didn't fight any of the other two leaders of the division. He was KOed, yet he avenged the loss
4. Deontay Wilder - the last of the three kings of the late 2010s. His defences overall aren't very impressive, as there was a lot of cherry-picking, especially at the early stages, but eventually he collected pretty good scalps with such wins, like Ortiz X2, Stiverne (only the first win is valuable), Breazeale.
5. Alexander Povetkin - was around the very top all the time, lost only twice, both times in the title fights. Won the number of top competitors.
6. Dillian Whyte - was around the top for the 2nd half of the decade. Also won the number of top competitors.
7. Andy Ruiz Jr - Joshua win and an arguable loss to Parker for the vacant belt puts him in the list for sure.
8. Vitali Klitschko - held the remaining major belt, had some solid defences like Chisora, Adamek and then unbeaten Charr.
9. Kubrat Pulev - was considered as the top fighter for the majority of the decade, had a decent resume, lost only to Klitschko in a championship bout.
10. Dereck Chisora - was around the top for all the decade, faced a helluva opposition, defeated some top competitors, although was majorly losing to the best, yet was often giving a fight to them.

[mattdonnellon]

Pretty similar, Chisora in for Parker, fair enough and I'd probably not argue with anybody that put Ortiz in at ten either. I would have Vitali higher than Dr Duke but each to their own!

[DrDuke]

I would have Vitali higher than Dr Duke but each to their own!

I just thought, that Ruiz' victory over Joshua is much bigger, than any Vitali's win in 2010s (if not any his win in all his career). Vitali's biggest victory in the 2010 is Chisora. And Whyte beat Chisora twice, once arguable, but second time by KO. While Whyte is longer active in 2010 and collected more good scalps. The same can be said about Povetkin. Vitali's value in 2010 was more in possessing the belt.

[Onetimeonly]

Vitali is way too high. Though that's par for the course on any list he appears on.

[DrDuke]

Vitali is way too high. Though that's par for the course on any list he appears on.

How would you rate him?

[Onetimeonly]

Vitali is way too high. Though that's par for the course on any list he appears on.

How would you rate him?

The only ones I'd put him over for sure are pulev, Parker and chairs. Possibly povetkin. Same as you.

[funso banjo baby]

id struggle to put Ruiz in there.

[mattdonnellon]

There is no right or wrong in this, just opinions. To me Wilder has defeated only Stiverne, who had really beat nobody and Ortiz who's only real win was Jennings and IMO he was well beaten by Fury. Povetkin beat Chagaev, Huck, Charr, Takam, Perez, Wach, and drew with Hunter, more longevity, more decent wins. Vitali's case is less clear but for me Solis, Adamek and Charr were at least as good a series of wins as Wilder but he had only three years.
Ruiz's win over AJ was massive, perhaps the best win of the decade by anyone but not much substance in the rest of his resume. Fury's "win" over Wilder and the Wlad win plus Cunningham and Chisora gets him up there.
Wilder could easily prove to be very impressive going forward but right noe I see him in the bottom half of the decades top ten.

[Onetimeonly]

Huck clearly beat povetkin.