Great fighters without a single Great Win

[Onamastus]

Inspired by a comment I just read by onetimeonly, and a sort of reverse of Lady Thatcher's recent thread about lower ranking pugs with one great win.

When it comes to fighters with massive reputations but literally no meaningful wins, does anyone beat Vitali Klitschko? In fact, is there anyone other than Vitali who enjoys such a comfy spot in the all-time rankings without ever having proven his greatness in the ring?

[Onetimeonly]

No, nobody comes close. People give him credit for his brothers wins. I wouldn't call him great though. Palomino and cuevas never really had a signature 'great' win.

[Seamus]

Quite a few people consider Jack Johnson and Sonny Liston great, but nothing on their resumes suggests they were.

[Controversial]

You could argue Mike Tyson never beat anyone great

[Onamastus]

Quite a few people consider Jack Johnson and Sonny Liston great, but nothing on their resumes suggests they were.

Did you miss the part of Johnson's resume where he beat Langford, McVey and Jeannette a combined 12 times?

Listen similarly mopped up the division while Patterson defended against second raters.

[Onamastus]

You could argue Mike Tyson never beat anyone great

There's a great chasm between Spinks, Tucker, Thomas, Tubbs, Holmes and Ruddock et al and Herbie Hide, Sanders, Briggs and Chisora.

The used-up Tyson's trouncing of Golota trumps Vitali's biggest win.

[Controversial]

You could argue Mike Tyson never beat anyone great

There's a great chasm between Spinks, Tucker, Thomas, Tubbs, Holmes and Ruddock et al and Herbie Hide, Sanders, Briggs and Chisora.

The used-up Tyson's trouncing of Golota trumps Vitali's biggest win.

I wasn't comparing Tysons wins to anyone, just saying you can argue most he beat weren't classed as in their prime 'great' fighters.

[margaret thatcher]

Hard to beat Vit

Just other names in general though...Golovkin. Regarded by many as an absolute ATG but really just has an accumulation of wins over your run of the mill B level fighters you get all the time in every era. Above that level, he is only 1-1-1 and could easily have been 0-2-1 (or 2-1 tbf...point is they weren't clear wins)

[oogiebe]

Hard to beat Vit

Just other names in general though...Golovkin

Who are Jack Johnson's great wins, MT?

[margaret thatcher]

I could start on Jack but will save it for another time

[chrisjs1985]

Khaosai Galaxy?

[gilgamesh]

Hard to beat Vit

Just other names in general though...Golovkin

Who are Jack Johnson's great wins, MT?

Jim Jeffries, Sam McVea, Sam Langford, Bob Fitzsimmons

Jeffries and Fitz were older then, but it's still noteworthy wins.

[Tony1244]

Dempsey is considered great due to folklore, but I never heard anyone call Willard great.

[oogiebe]

Who are Jack Johnson's great wins, MT?

Jim Jeffries, Sam McVea, Sam Langford, Bob Fitzsimmons

Jeffries and Fitz were older then, but it's still noteworthy wins.

I was kidding with Margie. But thanks.

[Wee Tommy]

Ricardo Lopez

[gilgamesh]

Dempsey is considered great due to folklore, but I never heard anyone call Willard great.

Dempsey vs Willard is definitely the most savage title win in Boxing history. That's probably one of the reasons why it stands out.

[Ambling Alp II]

Are we counting wins over fighters from a lower weight class?
Dempsey did beat Levinsky, Gibbons, and Carpentier.

He also beat Jack Sharkey.

[Tony1244]

Jack Sharkey and Gibbons may have been his best wins, especially the former. True, Dempsey-Willard was savage.

[Seamus]

You'd think it wouldn't have to be repeated, but Langford was a MW when he fought Johnson, McVea was only 19 the last time he fought Jack, and Jeanette got way better, like the other 2. Little Fitzsimmons was ancient, Jeffries hadn't fought in yrs and was badly out of shape. In short the great Jack Johnson beat up on the old the small and the green.

[gilgamesh]

Jack Sharkey and Gibbons may have been his best wins, especially the former. True, Dempsey-Willard was savage.

Not just savage. It was THE MOST SAVAGE.

Which in a sport known for it's savagery, says a lot.

[gilgamesh]

You'd think it wouldn't have to be repeated, but Langford was a MW when he fought Johnson, McVea was only 19 the last time he fought Jack, and Jeanette got way better, like the other 2. Little Fitzsimmons was ancient, Jeffries hadn't fought in yrs and was badly out of shape. In short the great Jack Johnson beat up on the old the small and the green.

There wasn't a criteria of "Did he have an age or size advantage over the great fighters he beat" just "Does he have great wins" and Johnson certainly does.

Langford had a great deal of success fighting Heavyweights.

[margaret thatcher]

Ya, a guy like Fitz may have been like a 155ish pound 44 year old, but that's still a great win that helps cement JJ as a legend. Not quite as impressive as beating a Jeff who hadn't boxed in 6 years though.

[Onamastus]

You'd think it wouldn't have to be repeated, but Langford was a MW when he fought Johnson, McVea was only 19 the last time he fought Jack, and Jeanette got way better, like the other 2. Little Fitzsimmons was ancient, Jeffries hadn't fought in yrs and was badly out of shape. In short the great Jack Johnson beat up on the old the small and the green.

You'd think it wouldn't have to be repeated why title fight rerererererematches with those green-blacks were unrealistic.

[Tony1244]

Jack Sharkey and Gibbons may have been his best wins, especially the former. True, Dempsey-Willard was savage.

Not just savage. It was THE MOST SAVAGE.

Which in a sport known for it's savagery, says a lot.

Man if that was color HD.

[Seamus]

The thread is titled "Great fighters without a single Great Win" and for whatever reason I don't see Jack Johnson with any.