BoxRec

The 1970's is often called The Golden Era Of Heavyweight Boxing and with very good reason. But not every Title fight and Title Challenger was great either.

Today we may have the weakest bunch of top ten Heavyweights in the long history of Boxing.

So my question is would any of the following 1970's Heavyweight Title challenger been able to win a World Title if they were in their primes today?

Dave Zyglewicz.
Ron Stander
Alfredo Evangelista.
Richard Dunn.
Jean-Pierre Coopman.
Chuck Wepner.
Joe Bugner.
Terry Daniels.
Manuel Ramos.
Oscar Bonavena.
Buster Mathis.
Jose Roman.

All the above named fighter got a shot at the Heavyweight crown and all failed. Some were very good fighters, some less so but none were great fighters.

So if the above were all fighting today how many of them would finally win the Title?

Bonavena, Bugner, Mathis and Wepner in that order have the best chance in my opinion, but what of the others?

Any views fight fans?

Bugner is the star of that group IMHO Bovavena could certainly rest a belt from someone as well.

bonavena,easily,
Bugner certainly
a few of the others were more than good enough,but



chuck wepner,awful
richard dunn,your having a laugh

I would say that todays top heavyweights fit somewhere in between the formentioned fighters and Ali, Fraizier, and Foreman. Better on average than that group, not as good as the top fighters. Perhaps a motivated Joe Bugner has a shot. Buster Mathis was sort of similar to a proto typical modern day heavyweight. He possesed the size, stregnth, and quickness, and a fair amount of boxing skill. However he lacked the intangables that make a fighter great. A few others would have been contenders, someone like Terry Daniels was no more than a get paid to lose fighter in any era.

Obviously Bonavena would cause havoc in today's heavy division. And I could also see Bugner compete with todays "champs." Could you imagine if the 1970's heavyweight class were competeing with todays class? Damn would that be a massacre.

Decagon wrote:I wouldn't even pick Wepner over the winner of Lyakhovich/McBride or Valuev/Beck.

Decagon wrote:I wouldn't even pick Wepner over the winner of Lyakhovich/McBride or Valuev/Beck.

Agreed. Besides being able to take a beating, Wepner offered very little else. He even had a very short reach for a 6’5” fighter. Of course, he didn’t throw a very effective jab either so I guess that didn’t really matter.

From the list mentioned, Bugner and Bonavena were the best and would pretty much walk through the current HW crop. Mathis was the next best, but was really at his best in the 70’s. I’d say he would be competitive with just about any current HW, winning some and losing some. The rest were pretty bad and would look bad even against todays crop of HW pretenders.

wepner is the worst heavyweight title challenger i have ever seen on film. he does nothing right.

Baltimore's Larry Middleton came over here and busted Joe Bugner's jaw. He was stuck in the wrong era.
So was Roy Tiger Williams.

Of the challengers mentioned, I believe Bonavena and Bugner would be able to win titles today; they would both beat Byrd and Valuev, and have a good chance of beating Rahman

bennie wrote: Roy Tiger Williams.

It's been often said that neither Earnie Shavers and Larry Holmes were in no rush to fight Tiger Williams, a very capable and intimidating fighter by all accounts.

Bennie, I dont suppose you have any memories of Roy Williams losing to Richard Dunn on these shores do you?

I started a thread on it a while ago but nobody knew anything about this great (on paper) win for Dunn.

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35712

KOJOE90 wrote:The 1970's is often called The Golden Era Of Heavyweight Boxing and with very good reason. But not every Title fight and Title Challenger was great either.

Today we may have the weakest bunch of top ten Heavyweights in the long history of Boxing.

So my question is would any of the following 1970's Heavyweight Title challenger been able to win a World Title if they were in their primes today?

Dave Zyglewicz.
Ron Stander
Alfredo Evangelista.
Richard Dunn.
Jean-Pierre Coopman.
Chuck Wepner.
Joe Bugner.
Terry Daniels.
Manuel Ramos.
Oscar Bonavena.
Buster Mathis.
Jose Roman.

All the above named fighter got a shot at the Heavyweight crown and all failed. Some were very good fighters, some less so but none were great fighters.

So if the above were all fighting today how many of them would finally win the Title?

Bonavena, Bugner, Mathis and Wepner in that order have the best chance in my opinion, but what of the others?

Any views fight fans?

Every single one of them would be champs, and it would add to the alphabet soup we have today, except these guys actually have skill.

Bugner and Bonavena would.

The others would fair also well in this modern day division. I think other honorable mentions would have been:

1.) Brian London
2.) Henry Cooper
3.) Jack Bodell
4.) Jerry Quarry
5.) Karl Mildenberger
6.) Ernie Terrell
7.) Ron Lyle
8.) George Chuvalo
9.) Earnie Shavers

among several others.

Danny Williams and Matt Skelton are better than Jack Bodell and Brian London!

KOJOE90 wrote:

bennie wrote: Roy Tiger Williams.

It's been often said that neither Earnie Shavers and Larry Holmes were in no rush to fight Tiger Williams, a very capable and intimidating fighter by all accounts.

Bennie, I dont suppose you have any memories of Roy Williams losing to Richard Dunn on these shores do you?

I started a thread on it a while ago but nobody knew anything about this great (on paper) win for Dunn.

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35712

Dunn fought a smart fight, jabbing effectively and refusing to get involved with the strong, determined American, especially in the middle rounds, when Tiger put in a big effort.
Dunn paced himself expertly: starting strongly and finishing strongly - and was always jabbing well. He basically out-cuted the American.
Harry Gibbs made him a clear enough winner.

Incidentally, Larry Holmes broke his right hand when also outpointing Williams three years later. The layoff Larry endured afterwards undoubtedly cost him Marciano's record.

bennie wrote:

KOJOE90 wrote:

bennie wrote: Roy Tiger Williams.

It's been often said that neither Earnie Shavers and Larry Holmes were in no rush to fight Tiger Williams, a very capable and intimidating fighter by all accounts.

Bennie, I dont suppose you have any memories of Roy Williams losing to Richard Dunn on these shores do you?

I started a thread on it a while ago but nobody knew anything about this great (on paper) win for Dunn.

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35712

Dunn fought a smart fight, jabbing effectively and refusing to get involved with the strong, determined American, especially in the middle rounds, when Tiger put in a big effort.
Dunn paced himself expertly: starting strongly and finishing strongly - and was always jabbing well. He basically out-cuted the American.
Harry Gibbs made him a clear enough winner.

Incidentally, Larry Holmes broke his right hand when also outpointing Williams three years later. The layoff Larry endured afterwards undoubtedly cost him Marciano's record.

Cheers Bennie your a star.

With regards to Holmes vs Williams I've heard that Holmes has a copy of that fight.

Wish he would release it on DVD.