BoxRec

Getting bored

Wlad at #9 of all time heavyweights!!!!! Now my feeling on that is one of outrage.
Some of you will say "Calm down Dog, its just a list"
A fair few of you will beligerently (and honestly) have Wlad and his broski even higher!!!!
That is your opinion and I respect it, but will not agree on it.

I would commit to collating all your opinions on this subject.

Like others I started looking at another top million or so of heavyweight boxers (ok 500)

entirely subjective of course

I'm thinking, top 30.
your #1 would score 30 pts
#2 would score 29 and so on down to 1 point for 30th position

I would do this for serious punters.

No pi$$take lists with "Sauerland only rosters" will be allowed
similar for other biased onesided lists. Anything potentially contentious will be posted for general comment.

Let me know if you are interested. If not, then I am right. I will be able to name 30 all time fighters better than Wlad. (see thread on CS (Bhop))

If yes, I'll start it at beg of April (no joke)

Having read hundreds of heaveyweight top 10s and top 20s and top 50s since joining I have to respectfually say - fornicate yeah!

I just geek out to this kind of thing...even though the results will probably annoy me.

Count me in.

That list is clearly computerised. That's half the problem.

this is my favorite topic to argue
count me in

why not.....but we may need to confer on what constitutes a "bogus" list.

I'm open minded to unusual lists, and we may well want to consider the history of the poster when making a decision of whether or not to "disallow" a list.

If a brand new moniker drops in and attempts some sort of buffoonery we will all be able to recognize the sham.

However if a well known poster offers up an unusual list, it should not be deep sixed' just for it's diverse elements. Especially if it appears consistent with their past contributions, and they offer testimony to support it.

This is at the end of the day, a very subjective undertaking.

You will find names like Jerry Quarry in my top 30, and some will say I've lost my mind, but I assure you, I believe it....even if you fault me for it. Not sure anyone from Klitco Inc will appear in my top 30.

BoxBuzz wrote:why not.....but we may need to confer on what constitutes a "bogus" list.

I'm open minded to unusual lists, and we may well want to consider the history of the poster when making a decision of whether or not to "disallow" a list.

If a brand new moniker drops in and attempts some sort of buffoonery we will all be able to recognize the sham.

However if a well known poster offers up an unusual list, it should not be deep sixed' just for it's diverse elements. Especially if it appears consistent with their past contributions, and they offer testimony to support it.

This is at the end of the day, a very subjective undertaking.

You will find names like Jerry Quarry in my top 30, and some will say I've lost my mind, but I assure you, I believe it....even if you fault me for it. Not sure anyone from Klitco Inc will appear in my top 30.

i agree with you on the criteria for a bogus list
all of us will differ on our top 10 let alone top 30

but we all know who is elite as a heavyweight

I think a few years ago we tried to do a top 100 heavyweight list, with Kym Robinson at the head of the helm compiling all the data into a computer.

Problem is you need a poll before the actual poll so we can decide who is allowed to vote in the main poll.

I can easily provide you a top 30 list without the Klitschkos . . . DD

dempseyfire wrote:I can easily provide you a top 30 list without the Klitschkos . . . DD

I got trashed for saying something similar
I still slept that night, clear conscience and all

I'm not sure what poll means, but I'm always down to vote on and argue all time rankings. Count me in for Vitali being nowhere near the 30. Wlad might sneak in mine.

Ezzard wrote:Problem is you need a poll before the actual poll so we can decide who is allowed to vote in the main poll.

why not just everyone list there top 30
and he can add them up
30-1
29-2
1-30

simple enough...and i do think there will be a few surprises in the bottom 5

I'll contribute if necessary. It's been done to death here, but oh wells.

HomicideHenry wrote:I'll contribute if necessary. It's been done to death here, but oh wells.

yeah but you love your time spent with saad....you know this will cause
at least one good argument between you two

MEISINGER wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:I'll contribute if necessary. It's been done to death here, but oh wells.

yeah but you love your time spent with saad....you know this will cause
at least one good argument between you two

Haven't had a good one yet, but I'll look forward to him calling me an Ali super fan & a Marciano hater again.

Ok, I'm not researching anything but to get the ball rolling.

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Holyfield
5. Foreman
6. Frazier
7. Johnson
8. Lewis
9. marciano
10. Liston
11. Jeffries
12. Charles
13. Walcott
14. Dempsey
15. Tyson
16. Schmeling
17. Wills
18. Langford
19. Norton
20. Jeanette
21. McVey
22. Bowe
23. Tunney
24. Young
25. Patterson
26. Baer
27. Moore
28. Quarry
29. Conn
30. Moorer

my top 6 are solid i will not move them
7-15 are interchangeable
16-30 well draw a number these change every time i do this

1.holmes
2.ali
3.louis
4.lewis
5.foreman
6.johnson

7.holyfield
8.marciano
9.langford
10.dempsey
11.liston
12.jeffries
13.frazier (yes i moved him up from 15th i had a month ago)
14.tyson
15.walcott

16.schmelling
17.baer
18.patterson
19.charles
20.jeanette
21.norton
22.bowe
23.witherspoon
24.moore
25.corbett
26.young
27.walcott
28.wills
29.quary
30.wlad klitschko (i do this with hesitation do to lack of competition)

Orders could change but off the top (Langford, Tunney, Moore ranked at 175 and not included; I made an exception for Charles due to his lengthy title reign and stay at HW):

1) Joe Louis
2) Muhammad Ali
3) Jack Johnson
4) Jack Dempsey
5) Larry Holmes
6) George Foreman
7) Joe Frazier
8) Sonny Liston
9) Rocky Marciano
10) Jim Jefferies
11) Evander Holyfield
12) Ezzard Charles
13) Jersey Joe Walcott
14) Mike Tyson
15) Lennox Lewis
16) Joe Jeannette
17) Harry Wills
18) Sam McVey
19) Max Schmeling
20) Jack Sharkey
21) Jim Corbett
22) Max Baer
23) Ken Norton
24) Floyd Patterson
25) Jerry Quarry
26) Riddick Bowe
27) Jimmy Young
28) Billy Miske
29) Fred Fulton
30) Tim Witherspoon

The klitchkos are hard to rank, I would pick Wladimir to beat a lot of the smaller heavyweights of the past, I also think he could have beaten most, if not all of the guys Holmes did. But at the same time the competition has been pretty average

#1- Larry Holmes
#2- Muhammad Ali & Joe Louis
#3- Sam Langford
#4- Rocky Marciano
#5- Jack Dempsey
#6- Jack Johnson
#7- George Foreman
#8- James J. Jeffries
#9- Lennox Lewis
#10- Klitschko Brothers
#11- Evander Holyfield
#12- Mike Tyson
#13- Joe Frazier & Ken Norton
#14- Ezzard Charles & Jersey Joe Walcott
#15- Max Schmeling
#16- Sonny Liston
#17- Max Baer
#18- Floyd Patterson
#19- Harry Wills & George Godfrey
#20- Primo Carnera
#21- Tim Witherspoon
#22- Michael Dokes
#23- Jimmy Young
#24- John L. Sullivan & James J. Corbett
#25- Jerry Quarry
#26- Gene Tunney
#27- Archie Moore
#28- Buster Douglas
#29- Sam McVey & Joe Jeanette
#30- Bob Fitzsimmons

HomicideHenry wrote:#1- Larry Holmes
#2- Muhammad Ali & Joe Louis
#3- Sam Langford
#4- Rocky Marciano
#5- Jack Dempsey
#6- Jack Johnson
#7- George Foreman
#8- James J. Jeffries
#9- Lennox Lewis
#10- Klitschko Brothers
#11- Evander Holyfield
#12- Mike Tyson
#13- Joe Frazier & Ken Norton
#14- Ezzard Charles & Jersey Joe Walcott
#15- Max Schmeling
#16- Sonny Liston
#17- Max Baer
#18- Floyd Patterson
#19- Harry Wills & George Godfrey
#20- Primo Carnera
#21- Tim Witherspoon
#22- Michael Dokes
#23- Jimmy Young
#24- Ken Norton
#25- Jerry Quarry
#26- Gene Tunney
#27- Archie Moore
#28- Buster Douglas
#29- Sam McVey & Joe Jeanette
#30- Bob Fitzsimmons

you have norton at 13 and 24?

Oh shit my bad lol, hold on let me re-do that.

You also have 37 fighters.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You also have 37 fighters.

Yeah, I tied some of them at certain rankings. It's too hard to rank some above one another.