BoxRec

Who makes the list of your ATG HW.

Be as bias as you like. Its YOUR list.

Go for it :)

Also lets make the criteria based on displayed talents. As opposed to legacy, historical impact so for example being the first coloured champion does not really transfer over into over all talent as it does to social and historical significance.

The talents displayed plas the physical and mental attributes of these men..

Kym

Sorry, with the heavyweights, I think you have to take into account historical significance, as well as the quality of the competiton in the era in which they fought:

Thus, Ali, Jeffries, Louis, Dempsey, and Sullivan.

Im not interested historical significance...just how they would fare in say an ATG round robin tourny.

RAte them as you would by all the above mnetioned factors. talents, attributes..skills...toughness...

My head to head would happen to look fairly similar to my actual list which includes historical significance:

1) Joe Louis

2) Cassius Clay/Ali

3) Jack Johnson

4) Jack Dempsey

5) Sonny Liston

Liston jumps higher than he would be on my ATL . .many will put Holmes but Holmes looked so vulnerable vs an array of fairly ordinary challengers in Snipes/Weaver/aging Shavers. I think his lack of a knockout punch really hurts him in head to head matchups with the best of the best, although he was without a doubt an all-time great fighter. But the likes of Carl Williams never last the distance with even an older Liston. Liston had very solid, under-rated boxing skills/defense, was very hard to hurt, and had a dynamite punch. Hard combination to beat.

"...But the likes of Carl Williams never last the distance with even an older Liston..." - Dempsey

You're underestimating Carl. Don't you know those Moran boys made the same mistake?

1. Ali- The G.O.A.T.

2. Marciano

3. Joe Louis

4. Foreman- this is where the bias kicks in

5. Sonny Liston

tzyuforever wrote:1. Ali- The G.O.A.T.

2. Marciano

3. Joe Louis

4. Foreman- this is where the bias kicks in

5. Sonny Liston

I would take Liston to best Foreman if pressed for a choice, but I sure wouldn't lay any money on the outcome.

Robinson wrote:Im not interested historical significance...just how they would fare in say an ATG round robin tourny.

RAte them as you would by all the above mnetioned factors. talents, attributes..skills...toughness...

I tried to delete my original list, but I couldn't. I took you literally when you said it was MY list. Sorry.

Based on your critieria then, substitute Marciano for Sullivan. And, based on your criteria, my list is not in any particular order. These are just the guys I think are in the top 5 - no idea who was better than who. I don't know how you can do a round-robin and compare Ali with Jeffries since they fought under different rules and different conditions.

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Johnson
5. Marciano

Leaving out Foreman, Lewis, Frazier, Dempsey and Liston was not easy, but Rock never lost and that just edges it for him.
These 5 make up my top 10.

Ali
Louis
Johnson
Holmes
Dempsey/Liston

Louis
Ali
Holmes
Liston
Foreman

Talk about dead horse.

1) Ali
2) Holmes
3) Liston
4) Louis
5) Foreman

1. Joe Louis/Muhammad Ali

2. Rocky Marciano

3. James Jackson Jeffries

4. Jack Johnson

5. George Foreman

Honorable Mention: John L. Sullivan

Joe Louis

Rocky Marciano

Gene Tunney

Jack Dempsey

Muhammad Ali






msc

- Ali

- Louis

- Tyson

- Jack Johnson

- Liston

To rate Tyson in the top five or even 10 I think you have to have certain conditions.

You can make the case if you only take his best work and leave out from the day of his flame out forward. But that doesn't seem a good idea. I think you sort of have to take into account a champions entire body of work. And once he lost it he lost it so profoundly as to affect one's ability to count him in the top tier. IMHO.

I mean Ali, Foreman and Holmes sort of sputtered out slow and still had moments of brilliance long beyond their prime, and sometimes pulled out wins due to their ageless hearts even when their aged bodies had seen their better days. (Foreman in a very dramatic way.) That's why those three deserve to be in the top tier. Jeffries as well, Louis too. Heart is such a big factor for me when I'm considering the best of the best. Hard to leave Frazier out of that equation as well.

But Tyson? I just struggle with including him these days. He just imploded so dramatically. Part of a Champion is his psyche....and Tyson's had a short shelf life, was pretty brittle and seemingly limited.

But while he was confident he was a force of nature. And during his peak it seems his opponents were just as confident of MIKE'S abilities as he was of his own. He got into the public psyche quicker and with more potency than any fighter in history. Partly due to the times I think.

I remember when he was just getting started I would kid with friends that I wanted to see a fighter come along that just heard the bell ring, confidently stepped to the center of the ring, let go with one punch, sent his opponent to the canvas, turned confidently to the crowd and accepted their cheers and walked back to the dressing room. This in order to clean up and clear out the division. We would all laugh at this "characature" of a fighter that I was imagining. And then word was getting out that in fact my cartoon character seemed to exist in the form of Mike Tyson. So my friends and the whole world got on board and watched as this guy took us all on a ride. It was a great ride, but from this vantage point it seems more heat than light.

But It was some great heat.

BoxBuzz wrote:To rate Tyson in the top five or even 10 I think you have to have certain conditions.

You can make the case if you only take his best work and leave out from the day of his flame out forward. But that doesn't seem a good idea. I think you sort of have to take into account a champions entire body of work. And once he lost it he lost it so profoundly as to affect one's ability to count him in the top tier. IMHO.

I mean Ali, Foreman and Holmes sort of sputtered out slow and still had moments of brilliance long beyond their prime, and sometimes pulled out wins due to their ageless hearts even when their aged bodies had seen their better days. (Foreman in a very dramatic way.) That's why those three deserve to be in the top tier. Jeffries as well, Louis too. Heart is such a big factor for me when I'm considering the best of the best. Hard to leave Frazier out of that equation as well.

But Tyson? I just struggle with including him these days. He just imploded so dramatically. Part of a Champion is his psyche....and Tyson's had a short shelf life, was pretty brittle and seemingly limited.

But while he was confident he was a force of nature. And during his peak it seems his opponents were just as confident of MIKE'S abilities as he was of his own. He got into the public psyche quicker and with more potency than any fighter in history. Partly due to the times I think.

I remember when he was just getting started I would kid with friends that I wanted to see a fighter come along that just heard the bell ring, confidently stepped to the center of the ring, let go with one punch, sent his opponent to the canvas, turned confidently to the crowd and accepted their cheers and walked back to the dressing room. This in order to clean up and clear out the division. We would all laugh at this "characature" of a fighter that I was imagining. And then word was getting out that in fact my cartoon character seemed to exist in the form of Mike Tyson. So my friends and the whole world got on board and watched as this guy took us all on a ride. It was a great ride, but from this vantage point it seems more heat than light.

But It was some great heat.

Some good Points There BoxBuzz, and you are probably Right, but the Reason i included him there as i felt he had an incredible Foundation to Work On. As i Explain here...

Like All the Highest rated Boxers, Physically, they may Worsen with Age, but their Boxing Skills may Improve with Age.

Reason i Included Tyson is, had he Progressed like ever other Boxer in their Career, he would have dominated the HW Division, IMO, throughout the 90's. He was there. The Skills were there, The Talent and Tools were all there, but guy's Mind was Somewhere Else (No Need to Go There, Since we All Probably Know How His Life Spiralled out of Control just before going to Prison).

In Terms of Career-Wise Achievments, Tyson would not even be in the Top 5, not even Top 10.

...But i Feel, had Each Boxers had 1 Fight against Each other, Just 1, where you Pit them Together, no Belts, No Money, No Media, No Outside Influences, just straight up Boxing, Tyson Would Beat All Except Ali, Louis, IMO. You may and probably will Disagree, but thats My personal View.

No Career, No Nothing, Just 1 Fight against anyone, i feel that would be the Case; Tyson Coming out on top.

Reasonable in my opinion. He had a potent peak. But the shortness of it places him outside the best. Part of being an all time great is to have some "time" where you hold it together as a great. In the most extreme of examples you could claim someone who turned in an a single miraculous performance could have been the greatest on the basis that on that one night no one could beat him.

And that's not enough in my book to take you to the stratospheric levels. Even if there is truth in it.

ali
louis
daylight
foreman
holmes
liston

Based on head to head match ups in their prime:

1.Ali
2.Foreman
3.Holmes
4.Frazier
5.Tyson

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Holmes
4. Johnson
5. Liston

For H2H Prime matchups in general I know many would disagree with me, but I actually believe the current crop of HWs would give anyone in history tons of trouble because despite their inaddequacies in fast-paced excitement and sometimes stamina, their sheer size and power give them a major edge over many historical HWs, that said though, I wouldn't necessarily anoint any of the to the very top of my lists, maybe borderline though... That said, here's mine:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. George Foreman
3. Mike Tyson
4. Joe Louis
5. Joe Frazier

Honorable Mentions: Larry Holmes, Rocky Marciano, Lennox Lewis, Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston

Diamond WEAPON wrote:For H2H Prime matchups in general I know many would disagree with me, but I actually believe the current crop of HWs would give anyone in history tons of trouble because despite their inaddequacies in fast-paced excitement and sometimes stamina, their sheer size and power give them a major edge over many historical HWs, that said though, I wouldn't necessarily anoint any of the to the very top of my lists, maybe borderline though... That said, here's mine:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. George Foreman
3. Mike Tyson
4. Joe Louis
5. Joe Frazier

Honorable Mentions: Larry Holmes, Rocky Marciano, Lennox Lewis, Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston

I like your list; very similar to mine.

Hard to say.

Ali
Louis
Lewis
Jeffries
Dempsey

I'm sure I'll get blasted for my picks, maybe not. It's my list though.

In no particular order.

Joe Louis
Larry Holmes
Muhamed Ali
Rocky Marciano
Lennox Lewis (and I'm not a fan, but it is hard to argue with a 15-2-1 title fight record with 10KO)

On another note my next 5 would be (in no particular order)
Joe Frazier
Mike Tyson
Jack Johnson
Evander Holyfield
George Foreman

It think if you have a tournament putting these guys against each other at their best, that Ali or Holmes would win it.