Top 81 Heavyweights of All Time/Horrible List/Please Ignore

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 17 Jan 2007, 08:00

Decagon wrote:
The Great John L wrote:Yeah, just like Jack Sharkey when he was KO’d by Dempsey. He was counted out and clearly beaten.
Well, there's a little controversy there. He was knocked out by an illegal combo. Bad decisions aren't clean wins. Poor stoppages aren't clean wins. They don't mean the same as clean wins, but they don't mean the same as clean losses. One guy quitting or being rightly disqualified? That's different. I mean, only an idiot would argue that Sharkey wasn't jobbed in that fight.

Also, Sharkey had a spectacular career outside of the Depsey fight, beating Godfrey, Wills, Schmeling (most overrated robbery of the 1930s), Delaney, Stribling, Lougrhan and Risko, to name a few. That's what I rank him based on. I went through a Sharkey nuthugging phase a few years ago when I ranked him #14 or something, but I'm happy with him at #20.

8)

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 17 Jan 2007, 09:33

Decagon wrote:No. If a fighter clearly loses a fight, I don't give him credit for it. Conn against Lous, Golota against Bowe, Ruddock against Tyson, Quitali against Byrd... We've gone over this 20 times. Are you really this dense, or are you just pretending to be stupid?

Well youre certainly stupid enough to rate Moore higher than Patterson as a heavyweight, even though Floyd koed him!!.... nice one!... 8)

...you're always good for a laugh Dec...

8)

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 17 Jan 2007, 19:01

Decagon wrote:
silkov wrote:
Decagon wrote:No. If a fighter clearly loses a fight, I don't give him credit for it. Conn against Lous, Golota against Bowe, Ruddock against Tyson, Quitali against Byrd... We've gone over this 20 times. Are you really this dense, or are you just pretending to be stupid?
Well youre certainly stupid enough to rate Moore higher than Patterson as a heavyweight, even though Floyd koed him!!.... nice one!... 8) ...you're always good for a laugh Dec... 8)
I also rank Schmeling above Louis. Would you rank Ross Puritty over Wladimir Klitschko?

Well, you probably would if left unattended...

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 18 Jan 2007, 10:26

Decagon wrote:Do you actually think your stupid views influence others?!?!? Talk about delusions of grandeur. Most people simply laugh at your ravings about sucky, Eastern European heavyweights.

The only delusional person here is you mate, whatever your taking its turning your brain to mush and making you a laughing stock on here, as for the 'sucky' Eastern Europeon heavies that seem to worry you so much they have taken over the division unless you hadnt noticed and this is just the begining!... the American heavyweight is finished... learn to live with it!... 8)

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 18 Jan 2007, 10:53

silkov wrote:
Decagon wrote:Do you actually think your stupid views influence others?!?!? Talk about delusions of grandeur. Most people simply laugh at your ravings about sucky, Eastern European heavyweights.
The only delusional person here is you mate, whatever your taking its turning your brain to mush and making you a laughing stock on here, as for the 'sucky' Eastern Europeon heavies that seem to worry you so much they have taken over the division unless you hadnt noticed and this is just the begining!... the American heavyweight is finished... learn to live with it!... 8)

Leave Decagon alone; he is a hopeless, compulsive case. This is the only way he can communicate. I've long stopped bothering with him -- after all, the drunkard at the entrance to my Metro station has his brain about as blown out as him, but he is significantly more entertaining.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 01 Feb 2007, 10:56

Lets be more understanding!... Dec can't help it!... 8)

Marciano Frazier · Post by **Marciano Frazier** » 22 Apr 2007, 13:00

Decagon wrote:Okay, I got lazy and stopped at 81 instead of a multiple of five. This list needs a LOT of work, so I'd appreciate your comments. Stuff like, "Oh, my God! Tiger Jack at #79?!?! That's stupid!" aren't really helpful. I'd rather talk about the placement of individual fighters in relation to other individual fighters, and please remember, this list will probably change.
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Larry Holmes
4. Jack Johnson
5. Joe Frazier
6. Sonny Liston
7. George Foreman
8. Evander Holyfield
9. Rocky Marciano
10. Lennox Lewis
11. Jack Dempsey
12. Mike Tyson
13. Gene Tunney
14. Ezzard Charles
15. Jersey Joe Walcott
16. Sam Langford
17. Jim Jeffries
18. Riddick Bowe
19. Max Schmelling
20. Jack Sharkey
21. Archie Moore
22. Jimmy Young
23. Ken Norton
24. Michael Spinks
25. Floyd Patterson
26. Earnie Shavers
27. Joe Jeannette
28. Jerry Quarry
29. Harry Wills
30. Cleveland Williams
31. Chris Byrd
32. Max Baer
33. Elmer Ray
34. Ike Ibeabuchi
35. David Tua
36. Tim Witherspoon
37. John L. Sullivan
38. George Godfrey
39. Ron Lyle
40. Oscar Bonavena
41. Pinklon Thomas
42. Hasim Rahman
43. Ingemar Johanssen
44. Roland LaStarza
45. Sam McVey
46. John Ruiz
47. Joe Bugner
48. Gerry Cooney
49. Buster Douglas
50. Harry Greb
51. Harold Johnson
52. James Corbett
53. Michael Moorer
54. Vitali Klitschko
55. Zora Foley
56. Jimmy Ellis
57. Razor Ruddock
58. Tom Sharkey
59. Ernie Terrel
60. Wladimir Klitschko
61. Michael Dokes
62. Tommy Burns
63. Roy Jones
64. James Toney
65. Marvin Hart
66. John Tate
67. Tommy Loughran
68. Jimmy Bivins
69. James Braddock
70. Gerrie Coetzee
71. Tony Tucker
72. Mike Weaver
73. John Henry Lewis
74. Billy Conn
75. Greg Page
76. Rex Layne
77. Trevor Berbick
78. Bonecrusher Smith
79. Tiger Jack Fox
80. Buddy Baer
81. Bob Fitzsimmons

Mostly a good list, I think. Personally, I'd say Johnson is too high, Liston is too high, Marciano's too low, Tunney's a little too high, Jeffries is considerably too low, Floyd Patterson is too low, Cleveland Williams is much too high, Ingemar Johansson is much too low, Gerry Cooney is too high, Roy Jones doesn't belong on the list on the basis of one heavyweight fight, and you really sell all the turn-of-the-20th-century guys short. I'm not a big fan of Corbett, Fitzsimmons and Sharkey, but they at least belong in the top 50.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 22 Apr 2007, 14:39

Moore over Patterson? Patterson got KO'd a few times, but Moore never faced Liston and Patterson beat some good fighters, especially after he lost his title.

Definitely not terrible... I like Frazier over Marciano, and Holmes in the top 5. I'd probably rate Lewis a little higher. I would tend to rank Foreman over Liston, but I understand the argument behind Liston ahead.

funso banjo baby · Post by **funso banjo baby** » 22 Apr 2007, 15:54

longevity is a useful tool for measuring .... not just how long a career spanned.... but how long was each champion completely dominant ?

so i would be surprised to see both Frazier and Foreman or liston for that matter in the top ten (altho Sonny is a personal fave of mine)

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 22 Apr 2007, 16:24

I don't know that Liston and Frazier had any less longevity than a lot of people on the list... Foreman was a top Heavyweight in three different decades.

funso banjo baby · Post by **funso banjo baby** » 23 Apr 2007, 09:54

i was going down the line of dominance whilst champion.

there are many joe jeanettes and langfords out there

but a champion should be judged (among other things) whilst holding the crown

funso banjo baby · Post by **funso banjo baby** » 24 Apr 2007, 06:02

cant be said of ALI HOLMES LOUIS in terms of exploits whilst holding the undisputed crown these guys are intouchable (yes even Larry)

funso banjo baby · Post by **funso banjo baby** » 24 Apr 2007, 16:15

but look at all the unbeaten boxers that holmesfought .... all the past and future champions......... no one threatened Holmes at his peak (gerry cooney)

and like Louis he absorbed hammer blows that possibly no other fighters in history could have done

maybe joe grim

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 24 Apr 2007, 17:03

First Archie Moore- I like Archie but he simply wasn't a great heavyweight. He had two big fights at heavyweight and got knocked out by Marciano and Patterson. (Patterson is actually ranked behind Moore.)

archie moore dominated top ranked dangerous heavyweights like bob baker, nino valdez, clarence henry, jimmy bivins, ENOUGH SAID. thats very good win resume at heavyweight. not to mention many other heavyweight wins.

moores record at heavyweight was 86-4

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 24 Apr 2007, 17:05

moore beat bob baker and nino valdez 2x, both big powerful skilled heavyweights whom Cus D amato avoided like the plague

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 25 Apr 2007, 16:54

Yes anyone that beats Baker,Valdes, Henry, Bivins has to be a great heavyweight. #21 of all time seems about right. Obviously only 20 heavyweights of all time could have done this.

Don't forget the draws with Pastrano, the legendary Karel Sys and the great Howard King.

I also don't like it when fighters duck the top guys. When Archie was fighting all of those top heavyweights in the 1940's and 1950's, how did he do against Walcott, Charles,Machen,Folley,Williams,Johansson,and Liston?

Marciano Frazier · Post by **Marciano Frazier** » 28 Apr 2007, 19:23

Ambling Alp wrote:Yes anyone that beats Baker,Valdes, Henry, Bivins has to be a great heavyweight. #21 of all time seems about right. Obviously only 20 heavyweights of all time could have done this.

All of those guys are arguably top 100 all-time heavyweights, and Bivins is arguably top 50. Valdes was #1 contender on an impressive winning streak when Moore beat him, Henry was regarded by many as the best up-and-comer in the division, and Baker had a very strong resume. Moore soundly beat all of them, along with a host of other contenders and fringe contenders in the heavyweight division, while only losing to the absolute cream of the crop. I don't think only 20 fighters could have done that, but I'd say it definitely places him in the top 50 and makes a strong case for top 40 or top 35.

Don't forget the draws with Pastrano, the legendary Karel Sys and the great Howard King.

Moore was nearing 50 years old when he drew with Pastrano, who was a young future world champion. How many champions in boxing history have gone to draws with future champions while they themselves were in their late 40s? I believe the answer is precisely... one. Sys may not have been "legendary," but he was a solid contender, and this was in Argentina, where most fights which were close at all were called draws- look at Carlos Monzon's record if you don't believe me. He had one draw with Howard King, but as you conveniently fail to mention, he also beat King four times.

I also don't like it when fighters duck the top guys. When Archie was fighting all of those top heavyweights in the 1940's and 1950's, how did he do against Walcott, Charles,Machen,Folley,Williams,Johansson,and Liston?

Accusing Archie Moore of ducking anyone is ludicrous. It was the other way around. Moore was ducked over and over again throughout his career, over the course of decades. He was #1 contender at middleweight and denied a title shot, #1 at light heavyweight for years before he was finally granted a shot, took a huge campaign and all kinds of noteworthy wins to get a shot at the heavyweight championship, etc. Moore went up against more Hall-of-Famers over a longer timespan than just about anyone in the history of the sport and had no qualms about facing the best. Even when he was in his late 40s, he was quite willing to fight future champ Pastrano and undefeated gold medalist and future legend Ali. Moore would fight absolutely anyone, and you're being downright silly to pretend otherwise.

Top 81 Heavyweights of All Time/Horrible List/Please Ignore

Re: Top 81 Heavyweights of All Time/Horrible List/Please Ign