Page 3 of 3

Re: top 10 WORST World Heavyweight Champions:

Posted: 12 Feb 2011, 12:49
by Goodnight, Irene
Crease wrote:I brought this conversation p in the pub last night and a lot of lads brought up Pinklon Thomas and Mike Weaver.
Neither of whom were ever legit HW Champs.

Re: top 10 WORST World Heavyweight Champions:

Posted: 12 Feb 2011, 15:06
by dempseyfire
Scottrf wrote:
Old bones Ian wrote:
Scottrf wrote:Carnera was better than Marvin Hart. I think he gets put down too harsly because of his mob ties, but he won the title on merit.
Marvin Hart did beat Jack Johnson though, so he couldn't of been that bad
Carnera had notable wins himself. The referee for Johnson vs Hart clearly disapproved of Johnson's tactics as a boxer, and from the sounds of it Hart would have had to be knocked out for Jack to get the win. The reports I've read have Johnson administering a boxing lesson for the majority of the fight, with Marvin coming into his own later in the fight. A lot of the papers called it a robbery, and he seems to have got the decision almost wholly on aggression. But yes, to even hold his own would suggest at least a determination and moderate level of skill.
Good post, it's clear from the newspaper write-ups if the fight had been judged by a subjective ref or panel of judges Johnson would've won a comfortable decision. Hart clearly was a tough game fighter but I would rank him toward the very bottom of the pile in terms of legit lineal heavyweight champions, with only Rahman and Spinks being lower.

Re: top 10 WORST World Heavyweight Champions:

Posted: 15 Feb 2011, 11:41
by Ezzard
dempseyfire wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
Old bones Ian wrote: Marvin Hart did beat Jack Johnson though, so he couldn't of been that bad
Carnera had notable wins himself. The referee for Johnson vs Hart clearly disapproved of Johnson's tactics as a boxer, and from the sounds of it Hart would have had to be knocked out for Jack to get the win. The reports I've read have Johnson administering a boxing lesson for the majority of the fight, with Marvin coming into his own later in the fight. A lot of the papers called it a robbery, and he seems to have got the decision almost wholly on aggression. But yes, to even hold his own would suggest at least a determination and moderate level of skill.
Good post, it's clear from the newspaper write-ups if the fight had been judged by a subjective ref or panel of judges Johnson would've won a comfortable decision. Hart clearly was a tough game fighter but I would rank him toward the very bottom of the pile in terms of legit lineal heavyweight champions, with only Rahman and Spinks being lower.
I'm sure I read that Johnson accepted the decision as the right one? Can't remember where i read it though.

Re: top 10 WORST World Heavyweight Champions:

Posted: 16 Feb 2011, 02:58
by jaclem2
..carnera did NOT win the title legitimately and it was his huge weight and size advanatage and big feet that made it impossible for loughran...a light puncher...to do anything effective. carnera was strong and he could push loughran around without an effort.

Re: top 10 WORST World Heavyweight Champions:

Posted: 16 Feb 2011, 03:38
by Goodnight, Irene
jaclem2 wrote:..carnera did NOT win the title legitimately and it was his huge weight and size advanatage and big feet that made it impossible for loughran...a light puncher...to do anything effective. carnera was strong and he could push loughran around without an effort.
Loughran, I will grant you unconditionally, but what is your authority to state the first sentence really, Jaclem?

Re: top 10 WORST World Heavyweight Champions:

Posted: 19 Apr 2011, 21:49
by Crease
Corrie Sanders hasn't been mentioned at all?