Holmes is a good pick. Id say Ali also, Louis, I think Ezzard Charles was a real complete fighter too. Its the guys who were good boxer/punchers with decent chins and good defense. Maybe Tunney too. He obviously boxed well and he had a little pop in his punches too.
I would agree, but I think many think he lacked power. But he had everything else in depth. And I think his power is somewhat underestimated.
Louis and Holmes also fit in this catagory along with Johnson.
barry you think Dempsey belongs here too? Rather than ask you what Jack's strong points were I'll ask what you think his weakest aspect was. And why he belongs on this list in spite of it.
>>>barry you think Dempsey belongs here too? Rather than ask you what Jack's strong points were I'll ask what you think his weakest aspect was. And why he belongs on this list in spite of it.<<<
I think his weakest point was his lack of activity during his championship years...he just didn't fight enough! Other than that, he was pretty well solid in most other categories!
As to why I would put him on the list...A+ in speed, power, toughness, chin, will to win, offense, he had about the perfect size. Maybe an A- in overall defense, but overall, in all categories, Dempsey matches pretty well with Louis and Johnson.
I think of Holmes, when I think complete fighter, also Ali when you add reflexes to the equation. Ali made Liston look like a sloth and he wasn't all that slow.
Holmes has the combination of chin, heart, toughness, speed, power, and a great great jab.
Holmes would be a good pick, but Holmes in my opinion only did enough to win. He lacked a killer attitude by and large. Myself I didn't think he had a great punch either and that's what the Heavyweight division is supposed to be about knock out's.
I would say the most perfect fighter would be a tie between Foreman and Louis.
If Foreman was more a swarmer than puncher, and also tried to use some more ring smarts in his prime, I truly do believe the man would have been the greatest Heavyweight champion of all time.
Louis, had great hand speed, great power, used great ring smarts, could get up off the floor to win. He had it all, maybe not speed in his legs or the greatest of chins---but speed is a thing for lighter weights and there has never been such a dominating champion in any weight class.
That's what seperates the lighter divisions from the HW class, the knowledge that a KO is always possible. That's why I don't really classify Holmes, Ali or any of the movers as the ALL-TIME champion or most complete.
Now I did make an exception of Jack Johnson as my #1 Heavyweight on a list in this forum before, but Johnson had great power as well as skill and speed---he had it all in my opinion and dominated the division before and after he was champion.
But Johnson did not have the KO's as did Louis or Foreman or Dempsey or Marciano had. In my opinion a Heavyweight is a KO artist, not some skilled pugilist who fancies a jab over a right cross or hook with speed and defense as his priority.
The way I would like to think of it is this, if the Foreman of 1974 had the smarts of Foreman of 1994---thats the best you could ever get. But since we are judging over-all records, I say Joe Louis is the best Heavyweight all around.
I know I'm gonna get ripped for this one but Lennox I think is the most complete heavy of all time . As far as him having a glass jaw goes I just totaly disagree with that. The 2 punches that knocked him out(even though he realy wasn't knocked out in either fight he beat the count in both)were punches that he didn't see. In the Tua fight Lewis got hit with one of the hardest left hooks Ive ever seen and he took it well. I don't know if anyone remembers this it was somewhere in the later rounds and you could see the bottom of his Jaw move. It was a wicked punch. Now bring on the insults.
barry wrote:Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey or Jack Johnson!!!
Neither Dempsey nor Johnson. Dempsey was an outstanding pressure fighter but lacked defensive skills. Johnson was the opposite - he fought purely defensively until his opponent tired out, then rushed in.
Ali, Louis and Holmes look like the best choices, which is why they are most people's top 3 all-time heavyweights.
Dempsey in his prime was a master of bobbing and weaving and the shoulder roll. He was very hard to hit cleanly.
Those who said Lennox Lewis-come on. The guy had clear stamina issues (he tired in 10 and 12 round bouts, never had to go 15), lacked a solid defense (mostly relied on his athleticism and reach to avoid shots), poor chin for a HW champ (what other HW champs were knocked out by single shots like that (Louis and Patterson took sustained beatings before they got stopped), and no way did he beat the count vs Rahman. Also was wobbled a number of times. Had a very good uppercut but beside that lacked inside fighting ability.
...nothing to add here..except i just want to get my vote in.....joe louis. no champion rated best in all categories...but i think the bomber was tops in more aspects than any other. he could box with the boxers...punch with the punchers.....foot speed deceptively fast (he was usually just where he wanted to be)....etc etc etc
....i think most veterans here know how highly i rate ezzard charles...i think he belongs in the best five p4p of all time....but i can't rate him at the top of the heavies ...because, even with all of his outstanding attributes....he wasn't strong enough...at that weight... to be able to muscle big heavies around...at least. not the way louis could....and sheer physical strength has to come into the equation in this division. marciano was as far from a complete heavyweight as one could be....but he was so strong that asset took him much farther than his limited abilities ever could. i rate his strength over his punch ( a lot...whole lot..of heavies punched harder) as the major reason he got as far as he did.
Jaclem wrote:...nothing to add here..except i just want to get my vote in.....joe louis. no champion rated best in all categories...but i think the bomber was tops in more aspects than any other. he could box with the boxers...punch with the punchers.....foot speed deceptively fast (he was usually just where he wanted to be)....etc etc etc
..hey john l....i haven't checked.....but i'm thinking we agree on more subjects than we disagree on.......and i resepect your interests and opinions on the bioxers from way in the past...
Jaclem wrote:..hey john l....i haven't checked.....but i'm thinking we agree on more subjects than we disagree on.......and i resepect your interests and opinions on the bioxers from way in the past...
Thanks. I guess you just don't agree with my opinions of the fighters that I grew up watching!!
..john l....i don't know offhand what fighters you grew up watching on whose opinions i disasgree (that is one messed up syntax..but it guess you can figure what i mean. i saw all the fighters you grew up on..just based on when guessing you grew up.. can you give me any examples on who we disagree on?
