Page 3 of 5
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 11:53
by DrDuke
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:43
Ali didn't know that Liston was there to take a dive. He was there to defend the title against the #1 contender and a great fighter.
Either he gets a high score because he was willing to do this, or it gets thrown out.
He should not be penalized with a low score.
If he gets a low score, you are dropping any pretense of this being fair and are just scoring by who you like and don't like.
That's exactly why I also suggested the average mark without this bout. It can't be scored otherwise than 0.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 13:48
by gilgamesh
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:43
Ali didn't know that Liston was there to take a dive. He was there to defend the title against the #1 contender and a great fighter.
Either he gets a high score because he was willing to do this, or it gets thrown out.
He should not be penalized with a low score.
If he gets a low score, you are dropping any pretense of this being fair and are just scoring by who you like and don't like.
I don't dislike Ali at all.
I can't really think of too many other dives where anyone would be penalized because there's very rarely a Dive in a title fight that is that obvious.
Without or without Liston 2, Ali's still got the best resume of any Heavyweight ever. So it really don't matter.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 13:54
by HomicideHenry
gilgamesh wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 13:48
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:43
Ali didn't know that Liston was there to take a dive. He was there to defend the title against the #1 contender and a great fighter.
Either he gets a high score because he was willing to do this, or it gets thrown out.
He should not be penalized with a low score.
If he gets a low score, you are dropping any pretense of this being fair and are just scoring by who you like and don't like.
I don't dislike Ali at all.
I can't really think of too many other dives where anyone would be penalized because there's very rarely a Dive in a title fight that is that obvious.
Without or without Liston 2, Ali's still got the best resume of any Heavyweight ever. So it really don't matter.
I think after reviewing Larry Holmes and Vladimir Klitschko in comparison Muhammad Ali still rates 5.1 overall which is noticeably higher than their title runs with the exception of Muhammad Ali's first title run when he was still Cassius Clay.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 14:58
by Ezzard
Why is an average important? Surely five defences against 8s and 9s beats one defence against a 10?
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 14:59
by gilgamesh
Ezzard wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 14:58
Why is an average important? Surely five defences against 8s and 9s beats one defence against a 10?
I would think so.
The nerd in me loves how excruciatingly detailed we've gotten about all this
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 15:00
by Ezzard
DrDuke wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 14:32
How about Lennox Lewis?
1st reign
Tony Tucker 7
Frank Bruno 7
Phil Jackson 4
Oliver McCall 6
Average 6
2nd reign
Henry Akinwande 7
Andrew Golota 8
Shannon Briggs 6
Zeljko Mavrovic 7
Evander Holyfield I 9
Evander Holyfield II 9
Michael Grant 5
Francois Botha 5
David Tua 8
Hasim Rahman 7
Average 7,1
3rd reign
Mike Tyson 6
Vitali Klitschko 8
Average 7
Interesting to see it like this. he didn't get many Zanons, Coopmans or Dunns.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 15:01
by Ezzard
gilgamesh wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 14:59
Ezzard wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 14:58
Why is an average important? Surely five defences against 8s and 9s beats one defence against a 10?
I would think so.
The nerd in me loves how excruciatingly detailed we've gotten about all this
That's the fun.
Of course most will reverse engineer their scores to make sure their sweetheart wins!
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 15:04
by Ezzard
Lennox Lewis
1st reign
Tony Tucker 5
Frank Bruno 5
Phil Jackson 3
2nd reign
Henry Akinwande 5
Andrew Golota 6
Shannon Briggs 5
Zeljko Mavrovic 5
Evander Holyfield I 7
Evander Holyfield II 7
Michael Grant 3
Francois Botha 3
David Tua 6
3rd reign
Mike Tyson 3
Vitali Klitschko 7
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 15:05
by Ambling Alp II
It depends.
How about if a guy has only 1s-5s (like you know who for example) and another guy has one 8?
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 15:07
by Ambling Alp II
Ezzard wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 15:04
Lennox Lewis
1st reign
Tony Tucker 5
Frank Bruno 5
Phil Jackson 3
Oliver McCall 5
2nd reign
Henry Akinwande 5
Andrew Golota 6
Shannon Briggs 5
Zeljko Mavrovic 5
Evander Holyfield I 7
Evander Holyfield II 7
Michael Grant 3
Francois Botha 3
David Tua 6
Hasim Rahman 6
3rd reign
Mike Tyson 3
Vitali Klitschko 7
Almost in total agreement until I got the end.
Mavrovic is tough to rate because there isn't much to go on. He did fight a decent fight against Lewis.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 15:09
by gilgamesh
Lennox Lewis
1st reign
Tony Tucker 5
Frank Bruno 5
Phil Jackson 3
2nd reign
Henry Akinwande 5
Andrew Golota 6
Shannon Briggs 6
Zeljko Mavrovic 5
Evander Holyfield I 8
Evander Holyfield II 8
Michael Grant 5
Francois Botha 3
David Tua 7
3rd reign
Mike Tyson 5
Vitali Klitschko 10
This is how I'd rate Lennox's title defenses. I'm not gonna give him anything for McCall and Rahman because we didn't even start that sh*t until Lennox.
If we're counting guys they lost to, then Wladimir surely gets a 9 or 10 for Tyson Fury does he not? But it didn't even get a mention among Wlad's title defenses.
Nor should it mind you.
A title fight you lost is....a fight you lost. It's not exactly a feather in your cap is it? In some rare instances a guy's status is elevated in defeat if it's a truly great fight, but that damn sure wasn't the case with Fury-Wlad
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 15:57
by Ezzard
He did beat McCall at some point.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 15:59
by gilgamesh
Ezzard wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 15:57
He did beat McCall at some point.
Yeah he did. Rahman too. But those were title wins, not defenses.
And for the record I'd rate the Rahman win in the rematch pretty highly for him. He dominated the sh*t out of Rahman, and pretty much made it look like the 1st win was a complete fluke.
The 2nd McCall fight is just f*cking bizarre.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 16:06
by Ezzard
Wlad
Calvin Brock 3
Ray Austin 2
Lamon Brewster II 5
Sultan Ibragimov 5
Tony Thompson I 5
Hasim Rahman 4
Ruslan Chagaev 5
Eddie Chambers 5
Samuel Peter II 5
David Haye 7
Jean-Marc Mormeck 3
Tony Thompson II 5
Mariusz Wach 2
Francesco Pianeta 2
Alexander Povetkin 7
Alex Leapai 2
Kubrat Pulev 5
Bryant Jennings 5
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 16:06
by Ezzard
gilgamesh wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 15:59
Ezzard wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 15:57
He did beat McCall at some point.
Yeah he did. Rahman too. But those were title wins, not defenses.
And for the record I'd rate the Rahman win in the rematch pretty highly for him. He dominated the sh*t out of Rahman, and pretty much made it look like the 1st win was a complete fluke.
The 2nd McCall fight is just f*cking bizarre.
Got it. Thanks.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 11 Jan 2023, 16:52
by Ambling Alp II
gilgamesh wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 15:09
Lennox Lewis
1st reign
Tony Tucker 5
Frank Bruno 5
Phil Jackson 3
2nd reign
Henry Akinwande 5
Andrew Golota 6
Shannon Briggs 6
Zeljko Mavrovic 5
Evander Holyfield I 8
Evander Holyfield II 8
Michael Grant 5
Francois Botha 3
David Tua 7
3rd reign
Mike Tyson 5
Vitali Klitschko 10
This is how I'd rate Lennox's title defenses. I'm not gonna give him anything for McCall and Rahman because we didn't even start that sh*t until Lennox.
If we're counting guys they lost to, then Wladimir surely gets a 9 or 10 for Tyson Fury does he not? But it didn't even get a mention among Wlad's title defenses.
Nor should it mind you.
A title fight you lost is....a fight you lost. It's not exactly a feather in your cap is it? In some rare instances a guy's status is elevated in defeat if it's a truly great fight, but that damn sure wasn't the case with Fury-Wlad
Vitaly is a 10??
That means in the history of boxing you aren't going to give anyone a higher number. Of all the ones I have seen, this is by far the worst. Unbelievable.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 12 Jan 2023, 02:14
by gilgamesh
It's not the only 10 in the history of Boxing there Alp.
But yes I think Lennox Lewis' victory over Vitali is one of the best Title defenses that any Heavyweight Champion has to his credit, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find too many examples that surpass it.
You almost never see a Boxer in his Final Fight beat a guy who's going to go on to remain a formidable force in his division for the better part of the next 10 years.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 12 Jan 2023, 11:51
by Ambling Alp II
Formidable force in the division because the division sucked. Half the guys mentioned would have done the same thing. Many would have beaten the legendary Chris Byrd as well.
Literally half the guys mentioned were at least good as Vitaly. Vitaly had already lost to Byrd, by far the best fighter he ever fought besides this faded version of Lewis. If Vitaly was very good he would have easily defeated that version of Lennox Lewis.
We also aren't supposed to take the stage of the champion's career when doing this anyway.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average
Posted: 12 Jan 2023, 12:58
by gilgamesh
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 11:51
Formidable force in the division because the division sucked. Half the guys mentioned would have done the same thing. Many would have beaten the legendary Chris Byrd as well.
Literally half the guys mentioned were at least good as Vitaly. Vitaly had already lost to Byrd, by far the best fighter he ever fought besides this faded version of Lewis. If Vitaly was very good he would have easily defeated that version of Lennox Lewis.
We also aren't supposed to take the stage of the champion's career when doing this anyway.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average - Heavyweights
Posted: 14 Jan 2023, 10:00
by Ezzard
Looking back over ratings (Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Wlad) after doing them without counting or referencing other champions' defences I feel like they're all comparable. Some are better but they are close enough give or take. That seems about right as all were dominant champions.
Coming at it in a different way who did they miss? Not counting guys they fought outside of a defence and being critical as can be...
Ali: Foreman II
Holmes: Thomas, Witherspoon II, Page, Dokes, Tubbs
Lennox: Bowe, Ike
Wlad: Vitali, Solis
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average - Heavyweights
Posted: 15 Jan 2023, 02:25
by HomicideHenry
Ezzard wrote: ↑14 Jan 2023, 10:00
Looking back over ratings (Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Wlad) after doing them without counting or referencing other champions' defences I feel like they're all comparable. Some are better but they are close enough give or take. That seems about right as all were dominant champions.
Coming at it in a different way who did they miss? Not counting guys they fought outside of a defence and being critical as can be...
Ali: Foreman II
Holmes: Thomas, Witherspoon II, Page, Dokes, Tubbs
Lennox: Bowe, Ike
Wlad: Vitali, Solis
As far as Holmes is concerned...
I think it more appropriate to say he missed out on Gerrie Coetzee because that was the closest Holmes came to being undisputed champion, even though he was already the lineal champion and the consensus "man" of the division.
The other matches I don't think was ever really on the table for Holmes as most of these men lost the WBA title in their first defense. As for "Witherspoon 2", I'm not sure a return bout was really warranted considering Holmes won and the following year Witherspoon lost his momentum losing a decision to Pinklon Thomas.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average - Heavyweights
Posted: 17 Jan 2023, 08:37
by Ezzard
Think Spoon 2 should have happened but agree on Coetzee.
Larry missed quite a few compared with the others.
I can't really hold it against Wlad that he didn't fight Vitali. And I believe he would have fight Solis if not for the injury ruining his career,
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average - Heavyweights
Posted: 17 Jan 2023, 12:09
by Ambling Alp II
Ezzard wrote: ↑14 Jan 2023, 10:00
Looking back over ratings (Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Wlad) after doing them without counting or referencing other champions' defences I feel like they're all
comparable. Some are better but they are close enough give or take. That seems about right as all were dominant champions.
Coming at it in a different way who did they miss? Not counting guys they fought outside of a defence and being critical as can be...
Ali: Foreman II
Holmes: Thomas, Witherspoon II, Page, Dokes, Tubbs
Lennox: Bowe, Ike
Wlad: Vitali, Solis
Sure, if we rig the ratings it all seems close. We have people giving Lewis credit for 10 vs Vitali and Wladimir gets 8 for frikkin David Haye and 8 for Povetkin. Anything to make it comparable.
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average - Heavyweights
Posted: 17 Jan 2023, 12:14
by Ambling Alp II
Ezzard wrote: ↑14 Jan 2023, 10:00
Looking back over ratings (Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Wlad) after doing them without counting or referencing other champions' defences I feel like they're all comparable. Some are better but they are close enough give or take. That seems about right as all were dominant champions.
Coming at it in a different way who did they miss? Not counting guys they fought outside of a defence and being critical as can be...
Ali: Foreman II
Holmes: Thomas, Witherspoon II, Page, Dokes, Tubbs
Lennox: Bowe, Ike
Wlad: Vitali, Solis
That is being critical in some cases.
Ali didn't miss Foreman. Foreman didn't fight in 1975, and lost to Young in 1977. Ali fought the top 2 contenders in 1976, which is very rare.
Holmes was usually fighting someone comparable.
Lewis-Could have fought Wald, but doubtful that was Lewis; fault. That the hw fight for more than 2 years.
Coincidentally Wlad missed non title fights against Ibeabuchi and Tua)
Re: Title Defenses: Quality on Average - Heavyweights
Posted: 17 Jan 2023, 12:14
by gilgamesh
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑17 Jan 2023, 12:09
Ezzard wrote: ↑14 Jan 2023, 10:00
Looking back over ratings (Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Wlad) after doing them without counting or referencing other champions' defences I feel like they're all
comparable. Some are better but they are close enough give or take. That seems about right as all were dominant champions.
Coming at it in a different way who did they miss? Not counting guys they fought outside of a defence and being critical as can be...
Ali: Foreman II
Holmes: Thomas, Witherspoon II, Page, Dokes, Tubbs
Lennox: Bowe, Ike
Wlad: Vitali, Solis
Sure, if we rig the ratings it all seems close. We have people giving Lewis credit for 10 vs Vitali and Wladimir gets 8 for frikkin David Haye and 8 for Povetkin. Anything to make it comparable.
Vitali is a 10. Lennox was past his prime, and he beat a guy who would be a Titleholder and major threat in the division for the next 10 years pretty much.
It's kinda like if Ali had beaten Ken Norton in 1979 or 1980.
Except...Ali COULDN'T have done that. Lennox DID.