Heavyweights who were never the lineal champion but were the best on the planet

[Bummy Davis]

How can you can assume that a fighter was the best of his era but did not fight the best fighters of his era, Larry Holmes is the most guilty of this in his era, using his promoter to avoid the dangerous guys until they got picked off by one another and avoided the guys that would give him the most trouble...yet on this forum people chose to overlook this...that is why I have a high respect for champions who have fought their #1 contenders and rematched tough fights...I have a very high respect for Pac-man for rematching Marquez although a navigation would have been smarter.

Louis,Marciano and Ali all fought the toughest of their day and rematched tough fights

[ThinBlack]

Originally Posted by janitor

Interesting pick.

Justify.

He beat the man that arguably beat the man(Tim Witherspoon), to win the belt that the man threw away(WBC).And even though Coetzee was a good fighter, and Page was the most talented heavyweight out there, neither could be considered the best at the time Thomas was champ.

[Lord Tywin]

Jimmy Bivins was never the best heavyweight on the planet. There was never a point of during Louis' career that Bivins was better.

[lufcrazy]

Originally Posted by Lord Tywin

Jimmy Bivins was never the best heavyweight on the planet. There was never a point of during Louis' career that Bivins was better.

Whilst Louis was away in the war bivins was quite clearly the best active HW out there. Noone else even comes close.

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by janitor

Who are the heavyweights who were never the lineal champion, but were the best on the planet at one point?

How many have there been and how distinguished is the list?

For my money the clear cut examples are:

Peter Jackson

Sam Langford

Harry Wills

Klitschko Snr and Klitschko Jr depending upon whether their title claims are recognised.

In addition I would suggest that:

Ken Norton was probably the best heavyweight on the planet in the twilight years of Muhamad Ali's title reign.

One or more of the contenders of the 80s was the best fighter on the planet late in the title reign of Larry Holmes.

Anything that I should add?

I dont think it has been proven that either Wills or Langford were the best man .I would pick Dempsey to ko Wills .

You can say he was the standout contender ,and I would not argue,but he never proved he was better than Dempsey and their comparative results indicate other wise,imo.

Langford ? Certainly he improved, and Johnson did decline , but Langford was often as fat and out of shape as Jack during those years.
If they had met, Johnson would have had enough respect for Langford to come into the ring in shape, that means a dec win for him imo, a hard fought one but a win.
By the time Johnson beat Moran and drew with Johnson, Langford would be the better man IF he was in shape ,which is by no means a given.

A couple of weeks before Johnson drew with Battling Jim, Langford lost to Gunboat Smith.
Jackson I think was the best man during the last period of a semi -retired Sullivan's reign ,and Corbett blatantly refused a rematch to him.
Holmes was the better man during Ali's twilight years imo, but of course he was champ. Summarising I can only concede Jackson really.

[tezel8764]

Floyd Mayweather Jr.

[Stevie G]

Originally Posted by Stevie G

I would say that Ken Norton takes this accolade from early 1977,after George Foreman retired, up until June '78,when he lost to Larry Holmes. Prior to that,it's a little messy. Jimmy Young had the '77 Foreman's number. Norton beat Young,albeit by a small margin in November,but Foreman would still have beaten Norton.

What makes this even messier,was the fact that after 1976,although the ageing Muhammad Ali could no longer beat Norton and Young,I still see him winning a second fight with Foreman. Okay,Muhammad was no longer the force he was in Zaire two years previously,but neither was George.