BoxRec

REVISED

Underneath is an attempt to rank the top 6 heavyweights from the 1900s. Ideally one would go back to the 1880s, but from 1900 is enough work (I understand why Brockton delays his attempt to come up with the top 10 for each decade - btw, top 6 is tough enough, thus I didn't try top 10).

General comments: the 1900s, 1910s and 1920s are extremely difficult to rank due to the "color line". In case of doubt I ruled for the ducked fighter. Also, I considered only fighters who fought at least 2 or better 3 years at top level during the respective decade.

Specific comments are underneath each decade; and a general assessment of the quality of decades comes at the end.

Comments most welcome
P

-----------

1900s
1. Jack Johnson
2. Jim Jeffries
3. Sam Langford
4. Joe Jeanette
5. Tommy Burns
6. Marvin Hart

C: No idea how to rank Jeanette or Sam McVea relative to Burns or Hart (color line). Fitzsimmons and Corbett did very little in the 1900s, they are 1890s fighters.

1910s
1. Sam Langford
2. Harry Wills
3. Jack Johnson
4. Jack Dempsey
5. Jess Willard
6. Joe Jeanette

C: The hardest-to-rank of all decades. Johnson, Dempsey and Willard avoided Wills and Langford. Langford was better than Wills till about 1916. Dempsey came through at the end only.

1920s
1. Gene Tunney
2. Jack Dempsey
3. Harry Wills
4. Jack Sharkey
5. George Godfrey
6. Tom Heeney

C: Godfrey, Heeney could be replaced by others. Wills lost to Sharkey, but he was over the hill by then

1930s
1. Joe Louis
2. Max Schmeling
3. Max Baer
4. Jack Sharkey
5. Primo Carnera
6. Jim Braddock

C: Braddock is a bit of a sentimental pick. Baer beat Schmeling but achieved less.

1940s
1. Joe Louis
2. Jersey Joe Walcott
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Elmar Ray
5. Jimmy Bivins
6. Billy Conn

C: very tough to rank. Walcott, Charles came through towards the end only. Ray, Bivins,Conn are only 3 of several contenders around the mid-40s, others were Murray, Mauriello, Maxim, Buddy.

1950s
1. Rocky Marciano
2. Floyd Patterson
3. Jersey Joe Walcott
4. Ezzard Charles
5. Ingemar Johannson
6. Zora Folley

C: A decade that consists of two very different halves, Marciano, Walcott, Charles belonging to the first and the rest to the second. Other good candidates: Machen, Valdes. Archie Moore not ranked (essentially a l-h). Liston did not appear in serious before 1958 - too late.

1960s
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Sonny Liston
3. Joe Frazier
4. Floyd Patterson
5. Ernie Terrell
6. Jimmy Ellis

C: Terrel, Ellis can be argued.

1970s
1. Muhammad Ali
2. George Foreman
3. Joe Frazier
4. Larry Holmes
5. Ken Norton
6. Jimmy Young

C: Jimmy Young could be replaced by someone else (say: Shavers, Lyle)

1980s
1. Larry Holmes
2. Mike Tyson
3. Michael Spinks
4. Tim Witherspoon
5. Michael Dokes
6. Trevor Berbick

C: 4-6 difficult to rank - Thomas, Cooney, Coetzee, Ruddock are also candidates

1990s
1. Evander Holyfield
2. Lennox Lewis
3. Riddick Bowe
4. Mike Tyson
5. Andrew Golota
6. Michael Moorer

C: Lewis took over in 1999 only - too late to head the decade. Golota and especially Moorer could be repalced.

2000s (to date)
1. Lennox Lewis
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Vladimir Klitschko
4. Hasim Rahman
5. Chris Byrd
6. John Ruiz


------------------------

The 1930s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s and 1990s appear the decades with the greatest depth, with the top 4 or 5 all household names. I rank them

(i) 1970s,
(ii) 1930s,
(iii) 1990s,
(iv) 1950s, and
(v) 1960s,

but different orderings are possible. Then come

(vi) 1980s and
(vii) 1920s.

The least enticing decades are the

(vii) 1940s and - especially - the
(ix) 2000s.

1910s and 1900s are out of competition.

Great exercise Pundit. There's a magazine article in this.

I think Charles should be above Walcott in the 1940s. I think Frazier should be higher in the 1960s but I'd have to check his record in that decade to be certain of that.

Think you should have a absh at the Middles next...

Ezzard wrote:Great exercise Pundit. There's a magazine article in this.

I think Charles should be above Walcott in the 1940s. I think Frazier should be higher in the 1960s but I'd have to check his record in that decade to be certain of that.

Think you should have a absh at the Middles next...

Why don't you - I did my part....

Decagon wrote:You complain that Dempsey only came through at the end, but what about Jack Johnson? He was really only at his best at the beginning of the decade.

Almost 6 years dominance suffices for #1 in my book. Or who would you put there?

Pundit- This is a great post. I'm with you about 95% of the time. I am in complete agreement with you on who is #1 for each decade.

Of course you won't find two people who it exactly the same, so here is where I differ:

1910's - You had Willard #4, I wouldn't have him in the top 6. I would put Sam McVey in the top 6.

1920's - You have Frank Maloney at #6 ( I assume you meant Jim Maloney). There are a lot of guys that are close. Maybe Heeney or Risko should be #6.

1940's - I'm skeptical of Tami Mauriello at #6. Maybe Buddy Baer ?

1970's This may be surprising, but I would list Norton higher than Holmes for the decade. Up until 1978, Norton was the better fighter, and then they were about even in 1978.

1980's - Wouldn't have Ruddock in top 6. There are several guys who were about even. Thomas, Cooney, Coetzee as you mentioned, and also Tucker, Berbick, Page, Tubbs. I would lean toward Tucker.

1990's - I would defintely throw out Golota, move Moorer up to #5, and put Mercer at #6.

For the most part I'm just nitpicking here. This was a great idea to do, and was well done.

just to let all of u note, i am FINALLY done with my rankings. i have decided to post a picture for each fighter, my stuff should be out within a day or 2.
sorry for the delay, i been very busy and these rankings took a lot of thought.


i have made top 15 rankings of each decade instead of top 10.

this is a good thread

one thing though...
with the 90's i would rate Lennox above Evander, and i wouldnt put Golata in my top 5, horribly overated. i would replace him with George Foreman perhaps

This is a great idea for a tread, btw...Here's my take.

1900s
1. Jack Johnson
2. James J. Jeffries
3. James J. Corbett
4. Bob Fitzsimmons
5. Sam Langford
6. Marvin Hart


1910s
1. Jack Johnson
2. Sam Langford
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Jess Willard
5. Harry Wills
6. Luis Angel Firpo


1920s
1. Jack Dempsey
2. Gene Tunney
3. Jack Sharkey
4. Harry Wills
5. Primo Carnera
6. Tony Shucco


1930s
1. Joe Louis
2. Max Baer
3. Max Schemling
4. Primo Carnera
5. Jack Sharkey
6. Jim Braddock


1940s
1. Joe Louis
2. Jersey Joe Walcott
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Jimmy Bivins
5. Billy Conn
6. Elmar Ray


1950s
1. Rocky Marciano
2. Jersey Joe Walcott
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Floyd Patterson
5. Roland La Starza
6. Archie Moore


1960s
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Sonny Liston
3. Joe Frazier
4. Floyd Patterson
5. Ernie Terrell
6. Jimmy Ellis


1970s
1. Muhammad Ali
2. George Foreman
3. Joe Frazier
4. Larry Holmes
5. Ken Norton
6. Ernie Shavers


1980s
1. Mike Tyson
2. Larry Holmes
3. Michael Spinks
4. Tim Witherspoon
5. Leon Spinks
6. Trevor Berbick


1990s
1. Lennox Lewis
2. Evander Hollyfield
3. Mike Tyson
4. Riddick Bowe
5. Shannon Briggs
6. Ray Mercer


2000-present
1. Lennox Lewis
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Chris Byrd
4. John Ruiz
5. Lamon Brewster
6. Vladimir Klitschko

Decagon wrote:Jack Johnson from 1912 to 1915 was no more impressive than Jess Willard of 1915 to 1919. Johnson really only had two or three years of good work in the 1910s, while Dempsey had about two.

But Jack Johnson in 1910/11 was very impressive, and Willard never was.

Anyway, how would you rank them? If Johnson isn't number one it must be either Langford or Wills. In fact, I've been toying with this idea.

Conversely, in the 1900s Johnson could be put above Jeffries.

A few comments:

Crease wrote:This is a great idea for a tread, btw...Here's my take.

1900s
1. Jack Johnson
2. James J. Jeffries
3. James J. Corbett
4. Bob Fitzsimmons
5. Sam Langford
6. Marvin Hart

Jackson above Jeffries is OK. But Corbett, Fitzsimmons? Corbett lost twice to Jeffries in the 1900s and otherwise did nothing, and Fitzsimmons went down to light-heavyweight. They belong at the top of an 1890s rating (#2 and #3 after Jackson), but not into a 1900s ranking. And Burns did more to earn a spot than Hart.


1910s
1. Jack Johnson
2. Sam Langford
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Jess Willard
5. Harry Wills
6. Luis Angel Firpo

Wills is too low there for my taste. Most people agreed that he deserved the shot at Willard, not Dempsey. Also he holds a slight balance above Langford in direct comparison. And Firpo is a 1920s fighter in my book...
Someone else argued McVae would be missing here. Well, I've tried to find a spot for him but I don't have him higher than #7...

1920s
1. Jack Dempsey
2. Gene Tunney
3. Jack Sharkey
4. Harry Wills
5. Primo Carnera
6. Tony Shucco

I really disagree with putting Dempsey above Tunney (but what would a discussion forum be without disagreement...).
And Carnera did very little in the 1920s. Uzcudun, Rikso would seem better picks.

1930s
1. Joe Louis
2. Max Baer
3. Max Schemling
4. Primo Carnera
5. Jack Sharkey
6. Jim Braddock

Can be argued.

1940s
1. Joe Louis
2. Jersey Joe Walcott
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Jimmy Bivins
5. Billy Conn
6. Elmar Ray

OK

1950s
1. Rocky Marciano
2. Jersey Joe Walcott
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Floyd Patterson
5. Roland La Starza
6. Archie Moore

Johannson handled Patterson (in the 1950s), Moore didn't...

1960s
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Sonny Liston
3. Joe Frazier
4. Floyd Patterson
5. Ernie Terrell
6. Jimmy Ellis

OK

1970s
1. Muhammad Ali
2. George Foreman
3. Joe Frazier
4. Larry Holmes
5. Ken Norton
6. Ernie Shavers

OK

1980s
1. Mike Tyson
2. Larry Holmes
3. Michael Spinks
4. Tim Witherspoon
5. Leon Spinks
6. Trevor Berbick

Leon Spinks had a couple of goood fights in the late 1970s, but then shriveld. Berbick OK.

1990s
1. Lennox Lewis
2. Evander Hollyfield
3. Mike Tyson
4. Riddick Bowe
5. Shannon Briggs
6. Ray Mercer

Golota gave Bowe hell twice; I don't know why people think so lowly of him.

2000-present
1. Lennox Lewis
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Chris Byrd
4. John Ruiz
5. Lamon Brewster
6. Vladimir Klitschko

OK (though - Brewster? After his recent fight?)

Cheers, P

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:just to let all of u note, i am FINALLY done with my rankings. i have decided to post a picture for each fighter, my stuff should be out within a day or 2.
sorry for the delay, i been very busy and these rankings took a lot of thought.


i have made top 15 rankings of each decade instead of top 10.

Have you put in the 1880s and 1890s? This may be worth it.
P

Some remarks on your comments...

Ambling Alp wrote:Pundit- This is a great post. I'm with you about 95% of the time. I am in complete agreement with you on who is #1 for each decade.

Of course you won't find two people who it exactly the same, so here is where I differ:

1910's - You had Willard #4, I wouldn't have him in the top 6. I would put Sam McVey in the top 6.

Can be argued

1920's - You have Frank Maloney at #6 ( I assume you meant Jim Maloney). There are a lot of guys that are close. Maybe Heeney or Risko should be #6.

Yeah, Jim, of course (I corrected this). Sure you could substitute Maloney for Heeney or Risko or Delaney or Paolino Uzcudun.

1940's - I'm skeptical of Tami Mauriello at #6. Maybe Buddy Baer ?

Or one of the other contenders - Murray, Conn, etc.

1970's This may be surprising, but I would list Norton higher than Holmes for the decade. Up until 1978, Norton was the better fighter, and then they were about even in 1978.

But Norton never led the division while Holmes did in the late 70s

1980's - Wouldn't have Ruddock in top 6. There are several guys who were about even. Thomas, Cooney, Coetzee as you mentioned, and also Tucker, Berbick, Page, Tubbs. I would lean toward Tucker.

Fair enough. Except for the 1930s, #4-6 are normally contenders who didn't quite make it, and these are hard to rank

1990's - I would defintely throw out Golota, move Moorer up to #5, and put Mercer at #6.

As I said earlier, Golota gave Bowe hell twice - I don't know why people think so lowly about him. But he's not a "Must" on that list

For the most part I'm just nitpicking here. This was a great idea to do, and was well done.

Cheers
P

I made some revisions, owing largely to stuff read here that made me reconsider.

P

1910s:
1. Jack Johnson
2. Jack Dempsey
3. Sam Langford
4. Harry Wills
5. Joe Jeanette
6. Jess Willard

jess willard over sam mcvey?


o mcvey should be over burns

1950s
1. Rocky Marciano
2. Sonny Liston
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Jersey Joe Walcott
5. Archie Moore
6. Floyd Patterson

why moore over patterson? they fought for the vacant title and patterson knocked him out and was the heavyweight champion of the late 1950s.

1970s
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Frazier
3. George Foreman
4. Larry Holmes
5. Ken Norton
6. Earnie Shavers

earnie shavers over jimmy young and ron lyle? lyle destroyed shavers in 6. a green young was robbed vs earnie in a draw. shavers was knocked out by jerry quarry in 1 round.

1940s
1. Joe Louis
2. Ezzard Charles
3. Joe Walcott
4. Jimmy Bivins
5. Elmer Ray
6. Billy Conn

bivins over billy conn? just compare common opponents, the clear ege is to billy. on film, conn looks better as well. conn almost beat the greatest heavyweight who ever lived!







i agree with the rest, overall ur rankings look excellent!

#


# Shavers beat Ali, Ellis and Norton in my book. That counts for something. He easily could've won the real title in 1977 and Holmes's title in 1979. McCall didn't hurt Lewis nearly as much in 1994 as Shavers hurt Holmes in 1979.

ellis was shot. shavers did not beat ali, ali clearly won. and ali was nearly shot by that time.

he knocked out norton, but norton was ruined by holmes

. Also, he didn't have a huge win like Willard over Johnson

mcvey beat harry wills, sam langford, joe jeanette. all 3 guys are better wins than over a 37 year old jack johnson

I think McVey must be rated over Willard and Burns. McVey has the better wins.

Pundit...nicely done.

I liked Decagon's nod to Jeanette, I grudgingly agree about Moore not being rated above Patterson. In fact it makes me uncomfortable to see Archie in the HW ratings. Just leave him as ruler of the LH's.

Both Decagaon and BB can make pretty good arguements for their positions on this.

The person that left out Jeanette.....please get familiar with this fighter and his history (granted there is not a lot to be found but what there is makes for a compelling case to rate him about where Decagon has him).

Also why must Carnera even show up? I know...it's on the record...oh well, I'm not going to win this one I see.

Another asterisk, it's amazing how fast Tyson has slipped in light of his later work. I hope time helps us work this out. I'm just not sure what to do with him. At this time I agree that Holmes should be rated above him and I think what we saw later in Mike was always there and was finally "brought to light" but he remains an enigma......one of the greatest that simply peaked fast or ....never that great and enjoyed a reputation won on luck, happenstance and some truly great but not sustainable performances.

To me he fall in the latter catagory for the moment, not to the extent of an Aaron Pryor but still in that catagory.

This one is outstanding.

I don't mind saying, pundit, that you have made an almost perfect list.

Cheers.

In fact it makes me uncomfortable to see Archie in the HW ratings. Just leave him as ruler of the LH's.

sorry archie accomplished WAY too much at heavyweight and beat way too many solid heavyweight contenders not to put him in. he was afterall the
# 1 rated heavyweight contender by the ring magazine for years.


i rate archie moore # 32 greatest heavyweight of all time

i rate archie moore # 2 greatest light-H of all time

well perhaps you over rate him as a heavy

and certainly under rate him as a LH

However I understand why, your right he was rated there for quite some time.

BoxBuzz wrote:well perhaps you over rate him as a heavy

and certainly under rate him as a LH

archie moore shutout hall of fame heavyweight clarence henry, knocked out top 50 heavyweight of all time jimmy bivins, twice clearly outpointed big # 1 rated heavyweight contender nino valdes, knocked out big top heavyweight contender bob baker, moore knocked down rocky marciano.......ENOUGH SAID!

even in 1961 at age 45, he was rated in the top 10 heavyweight contenders by the ring magazine and he he nearly killed ranked heavyweight big alejandro lavorante, sending him into a coma.

just watched archie moore vs big embrell davidson 1951. embell looked pretty good, he had solid skills, defense and good movement. embrell had a very modern style hands up high and everything. however moore hit him with the EXACT same punch he hit rocky marciano with, a straight right hand except embrell fell to the canvas OUT COLD!

Professor X wrote:This one is outstanding.

I don't mind saying, pundit, that you have made an almost perfect list.

Cheers.

Thanks, P