Top 30 Heavyweights: Name Your 22

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I don't know why these kinds of discussions always need to become hostile on this board but c'est la vie. To respond.

This is boxing, not track and field.

Brilliant. Good thing you pointed that out.

We're talking experience and accomplishments, which is what matters in boxing.

Nonsense. We were discussing a hypothetical boxing tournament, in which what matters is who would have beaten whom. Many things "matter in boxing," depending on the context of the discussion.

Watch a prime Quarry, like the Spencer fight and tell me that Ike was as fast as Quarry.

As between Quarry and Ike, I wouldn't want to live on the difference, that's for sure. Quarry was no speed-demon, your evident wide-eyed fan worship notwithstanding. And I do think Ike was probably faster than Lyle and Shavers were.

TI couldn't agree more. Tua and Byrd were both very good HWs, probably two of the better HWs of the late 90's, behind Lewis. Maybe if Ike had continued beating good HWs he could be mentioned as a guy that would have stood a chance against the names you throw around so cavalierly.

I don't know what to say to this except that I don't believe for one minute you would bet a month's mortgage on any of these guys to beat Ike Ibeabuchi if this were more than mere fantasy and somebody gave you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is.

"Especially" Shavers? I guess KOing Ellis, Young, Bugner, Norton, Smith and Williams, among others, doesn't compare well to Tua and Byrd?

That's an inane comment. He also lost to Ron Stander, Bob Stallings, didn't make it a single round against Quarry, collapsed against Tex Cobb and Bernardo Mercado, etc. Point is, Shavers was a thunderous puncher, with some skill, limited speed and limited durability. And, yes, I'd put a lot of money on Ibeabuchi to hand him his head. Less so with Lyle, who was better than Shavers, but I'd still make Ike the favorite.

Nobody is saying that Ike may not have developed into a top HW, but a close win over Tua and a stoppage of Byrd doesn't compare favorably to fighting top HWs for a decade, during what was arguably the best HW era, which is exactly what Quarry, Lyle and Shavers did. Some of us just like to see accomplishments, rather than possibilities.

The question is not where they rate in terms of historical significance or whatever sort of romantic notion you may have of overall 'worth.' The question is do you really think Earnie Shavers or Ron Lyle could have beaten Ike Ibeabuchi in a fight? For cryin' out loud, he was 235-240 (I forget exactly) in shape and he had some real skills. You would seriously take 210 pound Earnie Shavers, who got knocked out a dozen times in his career, to "stomp" him, as in the fight would be no contest??????

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

[The Great John L]

My favourite part was when John L. pointed out experience & accomplishments matter in Boxing, & Mr. E calls that, "Nonsense."

Yes I guess all he has to do is find a big strong guy on the street and that guy could beat prime Quarry, Lyle and Shavers as well. I wonder why boxers even bother fighting more than once or twice in their lives?

[Goodnight, Irene]

Both Mr. E and John L. have solid points, however; I have to side with Mr. E on the fact that this is a hypothetical who-beats-who peak-for-peak tournament. A lot of boxers from the '30's-60's tallied up more accomplishments/experience than Ike, but; peak-for-peak Ike would have a lot of them unconscious.

As he did all the best fighters of his era, &...oh, wait. Sh!t.

[The Great John L]

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

C'mon. I think he explained it quite well. Ike was bigger and stronger, and Shavers lost some fights. I guess Shavers should have had a lot less fights, and then he wouldn't have lost so many of those 89 pro fights that don't really matter.

Why would a fighter bother to have so many fights? We all now know that experience and beating a lot of guys doesn't matter.

[Mr E]

My favourite part was when John L. pointed out experience & accomplishments matter in Boxing, & Mr. E calls that, "Nonsense."

Glad you had a favorite part Irene. I repeat, many things matter in boxing depending on the context. Feel free to refute.

[The Great John L]

Both Mr. E and John L. have solid points, however; I have to side with Mr. E on the fact that this is a hypothetical who-beats-who peak-for-peak tournament. A lot of boxers from the '30's-60's tallied up more accomplishments/experience than Ike, but; peak-for-peak Ike would have a lot of them unconscious.

And we know this because Ike won how many fights?

Many of us are humble enough to acknowledge that we can't always tell by just watching a fighter exactly great he is, so we also rely on the fact that beating a bunch of the best fighters of your era not only helps to show how good you are but also gives you the experience that you need to become a better fighter. Boxing history is filled with fighters who won 18 fights in a row, and even beat a few ranked guys. However, once they fought a wider variety of styles and caliber of opponents, many of them were exposed as pretty ordinary. Although we'll never know, the odds are that Ike would have ended up being exposed.

Of course you could be correct that Ike would have beaten Lyle, Quarry and Shavers, and maybe even Frazier, Lewis and Holyfield. But given his extremely thin resume, that is very little evidence to support that opinion.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Barry --- I wasn't being menacing. Honestly, I just cannot stand the hype around this guy...there are simply a million fighters like him through history, who were (rightly) forgotten pretty quickly, because they showed some promise without proving anything of true, lasting note (exactly what Ibeabuchi did).

Ibeabuchi, to me, is kind of the fighter equivalent of the excuses for Tyson in the fight with Douglas. "He was under-trained, unfocused, had money problems, woman problems, etc." Yeah...& a thousand men before him, for whom no pardon is given, didn't when they lost certain fights?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

C'mon. I think he explained it quite well. Ike was bigger and stronger, and Shavers lost some fights. I guess Shavers should have had a lot less fights, and then he wouldn't have lost so many of those 89 pro fights that don't really matter.

Why would a fighter bother to have so many fights? We all now know that experience and beating a lot of guys doesn't matter.

Here is an interesting statistic, Shavers had two more first round knock outs than Ibeabuchi had fights. With those including Norton, Ellis & carter it is quite fair to say that Earnie had a better resume of first rd victories than Ike did overall.

[Mr E]

I don't know why these kinds of discussions always need to become hostile on this board but c'est la vie. To respond.

This is boxing, not track and field.

Brilliant. Good thing you pointed that out.

We're talking experience and accomplishments, which is what matters in boxing.

Nonsense. We were discussing a hypothetical boxing tournament, in which what matters is who would have beaten whom. Many things "matter in boxing," depending on the context of the discussion.

Watch a prime Quarry, like the Spencer fight and tell me that Ike was as fast as Quarry.

As between Quarry and Ike, I wouldn't want to live on the difference, that's for sure. Quarry was no speed-demon, your evident wide-eyed fan worship notwithstanding. And I do think Ike was probably faster than Lyle and Shavers were.

TI couldn't agree more. Tua and Byrd were both very good HWs, probably two of the better HWs of the late 90's, behind Lewis. Maybe if Ike had continued beating good HWs he could be mentioned as a guy that would have stood a chance against the names you throw around so cavalierly.

I don't know what to say to this except that I don't believe for one minute you would bet a month's mortgage on any of these guys to beat Ike Ibeabuchi if this were more than mere fantasy and somebody gave you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is.

"Especially" Shavers? I guess KOing Ellis, Young, Bugner, Norton, Smith and Williams, among others, doesn't compare well to Tua and Byrd?

That's an inane comment. He also lost to Ron Stander, Bob Stallings, didn't make it a single round against Quarry, collapsed against Tex Cobb and Bernardo Mercado, etc. Point is, Shavers was a thunderous puncher, with some skill, limited speed and limited durability. And, yes, I'd put a lot of money on Ibeabuchi to hand him his head. Less so with Lyle, who was better than Shavers, but I'd still make Ike the favorite.

Nobody is saying that Ike may not have developed into a top HW, but a close win over Tua and a stoppage of Byrd doesn't compare favorably to fighting top HWs for a decade, during what was arguably the best HW era, which is exactly what Quarry, Lyle and Shavers did. Some of us just like to see accomplishments, rather than possibilities.

The question is not where they rate in terms of historical significance or whatever sort of romantic notion you may have of overall 'worth.' The question is do you really think Earnie Shavers or Ron Lyle could have beaten Ike Ibeabuchi in a fight? For cryin' out loud, he was 235-240 (I forget exactly) in shape and he had some real skills. You would seriously take 210 pound Earnie Shavers, who got knocked out a dozen times in his career, to "stomp" him, as in the fight would be no contest??????

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

That's a fair question. Ike was bigger, stronger, and far more durable than Shavers was, so I like his chances in a big way. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing. What surprised me was the dismissive, arrogant tone of 'Shavers would stomp him,' etc.

[Goodnight, Irene]

"Glad you had a favorite part Irene. I repeat, many things matter in boxing depending on the context. Feel free to refute." - Mr E.

How's that Ignore function working for you?

[The Great John L]

Here is an interesting statistic, Shavers had two more first round knock outs than Ibeabuchi had fights. With those including Norton, Ellis & carter it is quite fair to say that Earnie had a better resume of first rd victories than Ike did overall.

Yes, but Ike was bigger and stronger, and as anyone can see much faster and more durable. All those wins are irrelevant.

[Goodnight, Irene]

I actually would be very interested to see Shavers & Ibeabuchi. I have long campaigned both are quite over-rated. Shavers at least has a stronger resume in his corner, though. Ibeabuchi was more athletic, & showed better conditioning. Would have been interesting.

[Mr E]

My favourite part was when John L. pointed out experience & accomplishments matter in Boxing, & Mr. E calls that, "Nonsense."

Yes I guess all he has to do is find a big strong guy on the street and that guy could beat prime Quarry, Lyle and Shavers as well. I wonder why boxers even bother fighting more than once or twice in their lives?

Yeah, okay, smart guy. Why don't you tell me how you see these fights actually playing out, or is 'Shavers would stomp him' the best you can do?

[Goodnight, Irene]

Ibeabuchi was, "bigger" than Shavers? If so, it surely could not have been by any measure actually impacting the fight.

Pretty sure we wouldn't be talking about Foreman on Marciano, here.

[Mr E]

"Glad you had a favorite part Irene. I repeat, many things matter in boxing depending on the context. Feel free to refute." - Mr E.

How's that Ignore function working for you?

I have no idea what this means.

[Mr E]

Ibeabuchi was, "bigger" than Shavers? If so, it surely could not have been by any measure actually impacting the fight.

Pretty sure we wouldn't be talking about Foreman on Marciano, here.

What are you talking about? Ibeabuchi had 25-30 pounds on Shavers.

[Goodnight, Irene]

E...

How much bigger than Shavers was Ibeabuchi, out of interest?

[Mr E]

Both Mr. E and John L. have solid points, however; I have to side with Mr. E on the fact that this is a hypothetical who-beats-who peak-for-peak tournament. A lot of boxers from the '30's-60's tallied up more accomplishments/experience than Ike, but; peak-for-peak Ike would have a lot of them unconscious.

Right. I share this opinion. I am puzzled why those who do not share it fly straight into name-calling and borderline histrionics but, again, c'est la vie.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Ibeabuchi was, "bigger" than Shavers? If so, it surely could not have been by any measure actually impacting the fight.

Pretty sure we wouldn't be talking about Foreman on Marciano, here.

What are you talking about? Ibeabuchi had 25-30 pounds on Shavers.

You think Ibeabuchi would have that in the 70's? Think Shavers wouldn't in the 90's? What is the realistic, actual genetic difference between them? It can't be much.

[Mr E]

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

C'mon. I think he explained it quite well. Ike was bigger and stronger, and Shavers lost some fights. I guess Shavers should have had a lot less fights, and then he wouldn't have lost so many of those 89 pro fights that don't really matter.

Why would a fighter bother to have so many fights? We all now know that experience and beating a lot of guys doesn't matter.

Here is an interesting statistic, Shavers had two more first round knock outs than Ibeabuchi had fights. With those including Norton, Ellis & carter it is quite fair to say that Earnie had a better resume of first rd victories than Ike did overall.

Okay but you could probably say the same thing about Roberto Duran as compared to Ike, right? That statistic is only peripherally relevant to the discussion of who would have beaten whom in this match-up.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I don't know why these kinds of discussions always need to become hostile on this board but c'est la vie. To respond.
Brilliant. Good thing you pointed that out.
Nonsense. We were discussing a hypothetical boxing tournament, in which what matters is who would have beaten whom. Many things "matter in boxing," depending on the context of the discussion.
As between Quarry and Ike, I wouldn't want to live on the difference, that's for sure. Quarry was no speed-demon, your evident wide-eyed fan worship notwithstanding. And I do think Ike was probably faster than Lyle and Shavers were.

I don't know what to say to this except that I don't believe for one minute you would bet a month's mortgage on any of these guys to beat Ike Ibeabuchi if this were more than mere fantasy and somebody gave you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is.
That's an inane comment. He also lost to Ron Stander, Bob Stallings, didn't make it a single round against Quarry, collapsed against Tex Cobb and Bernardo Mercado, etc. Point is, Shavers was a thunderous puncher, with some skill, limited speed and limited durability. And, yes, I'd put a lot of money on Ibeabuchi to hand him his head. Less so with Lyle, who was better than Shavers, but I'd still make Ike the favorite.
The question is not where they rate in terms of historical significance or whatever sort of romantic notion you may have of overall 'worth.' The question is do you really think Earnie Shavers or Ron Lyle could have beaten Ike Ibeabuchi in a fight? For cryin' out loud, he was 235-240 (I forget exactly) in shape and he had some real skills. You would seriously take 210 pound Earnie Shavers, who got knocked out a dozen times in his career, to "stomp" him, as in the fight would be no contest??????

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

That's a fair question. Ike was bigger, stronger, and far more durable than Shavers was, so I like his chances in a big way. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing. What surprised me was the dismissive, arrogant tone of 'Shavers would stomp him,' etc.

I would disagree that Ike was stronger and while he appeared to be durable that is difficult to gauge after only 20 fights. Remember how everyone raved about Sam Peter's chin? After some fights against better fighters in a terribly weak division that was proven to be words that were spoken too soon.

I wouldn't rule out Ike beating Earnie, but you seem to be equally as dismissive of Shavers chances as others are of Ike's. Earnie would go all out for the kill and burn himself out but he was always dangerous and had a heart as big as his punch. He stopped Roy Williams running on gas fumes and on the verge of being stopped himself. He really didn't gas hard against Ali until the latter stages of a 15 round fight. How would Ike handle being hurt?

I think this is a tough fight to call but Shavers was better than you're giving him credit for. I'll tell you one thing, I would go past a mortgage payment, I would bet my house on Shavers against Wlad.

[Mr E]

Ibeabuchi was, "bigger" than Shavers? If so, it surely could not have been by any measure actually impacting the fight.

Pretty sure we wouldn't be talking about Foreman on Marciano, here.

What are you talking about? Ibeabuchi had 25-30 pounds on Shavers.

You think Ibeabuchi would have that in the 70's? Think Shavers wouldn't in the 90's? What is the realistic, actual genetic difference between them? It can't be much.

WHAT? When did that become the question?

You put those 70s fighters on steroids like Ike was and, shoot, whole new ballgame. But I was lifting them all straight out of history and dropping them into a hypothetical ring. I assumed you were doing likewise.

[Mr E]

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

C'mon. I think he explained it quite well. Ike was bigger and stronger, and Shavers lost some fights. I guess Shavers should have had a lot less fights, and then he wouldn't have lost so many of those 89 pro fights that don't really matter.

Why would a fighter bother to have so many fights? We all now know that experience and beating a lot of guys doesn't matter.

So, what you're saying is that whoever had the most fights against the 'most impressive opposition,' however you subjectively define that term, would automatically win a head-to-head match-up? I can only assume that you make your living doing something other than betting on boxing.

[Mr E]

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

That's a fair question. Ike was bigger, stronger, and far more durable than Shavers was, so I like his chances in a big way. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing. What surprised me was the dismissive, arrogant tone of 'Shavers would stomp him,' etc.

I would disagree that Ike was stronger and while he appeared to be durable that is difficult to gauge after only 20 fights. Remember how everyone raved about Sam Peter's chin? After some fights against better fighters in a terribly weak division that was proven to be words that were spoken too soon.

I wouldn't rule out Ike beating Earnie, but you seem to be equally as dismissive of Shavers chances as others are of Ike's. Earnie would go all out for the kill and burn himself out but he was always dangerous and had a heart as big as his punch. He stopped Roy Williams running on gas fumes and on the verge of being stopped himself. He really didn't gas hard against Ali until the latter stages of a 15 round fight. How would Ike handle being hurt?

I think this is a tough fight to call but Shavers was better than you're giving him credit for. I'll tell you one thing, I would go past a mortgage payment, I would bet my house on Shavers against Wlad.

All of these are good points. Personally, I always thought Shavers was over-rated even during the 70s and I think his legend has grown a little too much since that time. Hell of a puncher but remember how he wore himself out using Tex Cobb's head as a tetherball? Ike took some tremendous shots from Tua's left hook... I could be wrong but I don't think Shavers could bounce him on outta there with just a couple shots. Consequently, I think in this fight he'd be required to take a couple of Ike's best and, based on this track record, I don't think he could.

[Goodnight, Irene]

OK, but I don't see twenty-five pounds being the difference between these two. They are simply not that far apart in size in any meaningful way.

If Ibeabuchi wins, it's because Shavers either couldn't take his punch, or burned out, IMO. If Shavers wins, it's because Ibeabuchi either couldn't take his punch, or lacked the big-game experience to hang with someone who'd been in there with fighters of such superior quality to Ibeabuchi's competition --- the Quarry's, Ellis', Ali's, Lyle's & co. Stands a man in very good stead, it does.