BoxRec

Just interested to hear what heavyweights, that never won a title, you would actually rate in a top 10 all time heavyweight list. Most peoples top 10 only includes champs, but of course many non-title holders were better than many who have been crowned 'champ'

Several names that normally get mentioned, Wills, Langford, Quarry, Tua, Shavers to name a few.

So if you were to include non-champs in your top 10 list who would you pick and how high would you rate them?

Are you talking about a top ten of the division's all-time contenders, or asking if anyone has a someone within their top ten who never held the main strap?

I think in the hw division the only non-champs you could make a credible argument for are Langford and Wills.

David Tua????

dempseyfire wrote:I think in the hw division the only non-champs you could make a credible argument for are Langford and Wills.

David Tua????

I don't think a credible case can truly be made for any one them --- there's got to be ten title-holders who were better than all contenders in the division's history. Surely, though, Jeanette would also be on that list, if you were including those two?

dempseyfire wrote:I think in the hw division the only non-champs you could make a credible argument for are Langford and Wills.

David Tua????

What I meant is Tua is better than some fighters who have world the world title, in the 80s he could have quite easily have won a version of the title.

Controversial wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:I think in the hw division the only non-champs you could make a credible argument for are Langford and Wills.

David Tua????

What I meant is Tua is better than some fighters who have world the world title, in the 80s he could have quite easily have won a version of the title.

Really?
Who would he have beat then? I can think of no 80s title holder that I would put money on Tua to beat.

Byrd and Ibeabuchi both beat him(I thought the Ibeabuchi fight was a draw)and they were'nt better than the likes of Thomas, Weaver and Berbick.

Controversial wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:I think in the hw division the only non-champs you could make a credible argument for are Langford and Wills.

David Tua????

What I meant is Tua is better than some fighters who have world the world title, in the 80s he could have quite easily have won a version of the title.

- Tua could've won a title quite easily in the 90s-00s but for poor training and atrocious management problems.

Dempster is just jealous that he can never get Tua's weight right or that on a one on one basis Tua and Ike beat the dumplings out of many past heavy champs and HOFers.

Matters barely a whit to Tua's mythical ranking in the historical pantheon of heavies compiled by modern day "experts" who can't even come close to winning their predictor leagues, much less become wealthy seers of the fight picking business. Most fighters should be ranked according to what they did in their eras, and on that front, Tua becomes probably the best heavy to not pick up a title in his era.

Sam Langford is Ibro's highest ranked "non-champ" at 15th in spite of winning and defending oodles of black titles and even picking up English and Mexican titles. His career record from the time he first fought Johnson in 1906 until Johnson was dethroned some 9 long years later is better than Mr. Larry's entire career record and Langford's level of competition makes most heavies look like they were fighting schoolgirls, yet Sam can garner no better than 15th.

So when dempster slams Tua, it's really just too much koolaide doing the talking for him that the "boxing experts" have distilled for him. The real dempster is buried deep and pickled under a lake of the stuff and probably never saw a single boxing match in his life.

Tua is generally considered the best modern day HW, considering the opposition he defeated....but for my money, the greatest non-undisputed champion was Ray Mercer. Mercer was the WBO champ, true, but at the time it was considered a cheap, worthless belt [and in alot of ways still is]. He gave Holyfield and Lewis hard fights, and he defeated the likes of Tommy Morrison and many of the top tier heavyweights of the time.

HomicideHenry wrote:Tua is generally considered the best modern day HW, considering the opposition he defeated....but for my money, the greatest non-undisputed champion was Ray Mercer. Mercer was the WBO champ, true, but at the time it was considered a cheap, worthless belt [and in alot of ways still is]. He gave Holyfield and Lewis hard fights, and he defeated the likes of Tommy Morrison and many of the top tier heavyweights of the time.

Tua-Mercer at their respective bests would've been a GREAT fight . .

Tua-Mercer is an exciting match indeed. I have often wondered
how this one would play out. Both guys have the chins and the
power to thump into one another hard.

Mercer-Cooper
Tua-Ike
are good examples as to how cool a fight this one could be.

Mercer, IMO, would be too busy for Tua. Really, both of them sold themselves short with their diets.

[quote="HomicideHenry"]Tua is generally considered the best modern day HW


huh ?