Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

[Holmes' Jab]

8th.

[itrymariti]

Originally Posted by Addie

When did the myth begin that the second fight was anywhere close to being dubious?

How was it unlucky that he was beaten into a pulp in the closing rounds of their thriller, and was forced to bow out by his trainer?

What the hell is going on here?

Well the thread is about what could be called. You could call the second fight dubious on the grounds that Ali was "octopussing" Frazier on the inside constantly. You could call the third fight unlucky given that there were rumors that Ali wasn't getting off his stool for the 15th. I wouldn't take that view, but you could.

[OBCboxer]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Not at this point, in fact before he lost to Jeanette he beat a lightweight. Yep... I know.

Not the point, he beat a lot of big guys.

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Williard, Brennan, Smith. Still, he was Koing most of his opponents. One of which was 240+ pounds.

Willard was a joke and only won the title because Johnson threw the fight. Brennan's good. Smith was 2-4-1 at the time. Like I said, he wasn't skilled and was very limited.

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Of course they were bigger punchers. What does skill have to do with power? Jeffries was brought out of the wind works to beat the "Black Champ" how can he be one of the best HW of the time when he hadn't fought in 6 years? He was a good referee though

I mean that Firpo had a big punch but he never was able to KO a top fighter that was any good. That's where he lacks skill, he was a very limited fighter.

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Well if you add Tunney on that list I don't think so. But he lost to Tunney.

I said Dempsey's resume wasn't as good. However, a lot of those names weren't seasoned fighters and a lot were small. Discrediting Firpo who was virtually KOing everyone while saying Langford was still good while fighting lightweights in previous matches is really overstating things while dowing Dempsey and his opponents. In my opinion, Dempsey defended his title against better opposition. Maybe if Johnson defends the Langfords and other black fighters that warranted a title then he gets props... but he didn't.

Again, Firpo never KO'd a good fighter. I would say Brennan is Firpo's best win. So the five opponents Dempsey defended his title against; Tunney (lost), Miske, Firpo, Carpentier and Brennan are better than Johnson's defenes? Okay, I'll agree. But his title reign wasn't as good as Johnson's. He didn't defend because oddly there was a color line to where Johnson can only fight white fighters. Same can be the said for Dempsey, he didn't defend against Willis when the NYSAC ordered the fight and fought Tunney in Philly instead......and lost.

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Legacy plays a small part of my criteria. Also Dempsey was a ferocious killer who KOed a lot of guys. Small points with that.

That's all fine and good but he doesn't have the resume that Johnson has. Johnson fought the better competition and won.

[PetethePrince]

Originally Posted by mcvey

Langford was 156 ,but Johnson was 185 ,neither were at their prime weight

But it was Langford much farther from his good heavyweight weight. Johnson was young but obviously not that far off from his prime weight. What would you say his best weight was? Considering he blows up, I think 190's was where he should be.

Jeffries was 35 not 37 and after 5 years of inactivity.

6 years of inactivity.

Are you confusing this with Johnson losing at age 37 to Willard?

I know he did. However, Johnson wasn't inactive. Do you seriously think taking 6 years off compared to being just to just being in your late 30's while champion is comparable?

Mcvey wasnt 19 in all their 3 fights , in fact in their 1st he was only a month short of 20.
Jeanette beat Johnson ONCE,on a foul, hardly earth shattering .

I know. A win is still a win. Why didn't he fight these black fighters while champion I think is the better question.

Johnson beat plenty of big guys look it up
Sorry to stick my nose in ,but facts are facts

And plenty of small men, and or old men. Did hardly any proving in this thread.

[PetethePrince]

Originally Posted by OBCboxer

Willard was a joke and only won the title because Johnson threw the fight. Brennan's good. Smith was 2-4-1 at the time. Like I said, he wasn't skilled and was very limited.

So should I not penalize Johnson for this? Other way we don't exactly know. If Williard is a joke and he had really lost that says worse for him.

I mean that Firpo had a big punch but he never was able to KO a top fighter that was any good. That's where he lacks skill, he was a very limited fighter.

Still a bigger puncher than anyone Johnson probably ever faced.

Again, Firpo never KO'd a good fighter. I would say Brennan is Firpo's best win. So the five opponents Dempsey defended his title against; Tunney (lost), Miske, Firpo, Carpentier and Brennan are better than Johnson's defenes? Okay, I'll agree. But his title reign wasn't as good as Johnson's. He didn't defend because oddly there was a color line to where Johnson can only fight white fighters. Same can be the said for Dempsey, he didn't defend against Willis when the NYSAC ordered the fight and fought Tunney in Philly instead......and lost.

Firpo KO'd a few good fighters I think. I think Johnson's resume is better. I said this, I just think Dempsey fought more bigger men while fighting better punchers. And I think Dempsey gets credit in his legacy for his impact and destuctriveness.

Dempsey gets penalized big for not fighting Harris. Should Johnson for not fighting other black fighters? We can argue that both were prohibited too, especially Johnson. And we can argue Dempsey tried to.

Anyway I've said my peace. But Johnson at 5 is actually better than 4. I find him/Dempsey to be close in ratings.




That's all fine and good but he doesn't have the resume that Johnson has. Johnson fought the better competition and won.[/quote]

[OBCboxer]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

So should I not penalize Johnson for this? Other way we don't exactly know. If Williard is a joke and he had really lost that says worse for him.

I think at 37, Johnson losing can't hurt him that much. Maybe he did throw the fight; we don't really know. If he did we don't know why. Maybe his life was threatened?

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Still a bigger puncher than anyone Johnson probably ever faced.

Again, I wouldn't say so. He might be a bigger puncher but that doesn't mean he's better. McVea, for example, I think is a better puncher.

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Firpo KO'd a few good fighters I think. I think Johnson's resume is better. I said this, I just think Dempsey fought more bigger men while fighting better punchers. And I think Dempsey gets credit in his legacy for his impact and destuctriveness.

Firpo KO'd maybe one or two good fighters, hardly an accomplishment in itself. Dempsey fought big men and arguably better punchers than Johnson. But his resume and his opposition are very weak compared to Johnson's which is where I seperate the two and rate Johnson well ahead of Dempsey.

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Dempsey gets penalized big for not fighting Harris. Should Johnson for not fighting other black fighters? We can argue that both were prohibited too, especially Johnson. And we can argue Dempsey tried to.

Anyway I've said my peace. But Johnson at 5 is actually better than 4. I find him/Dempsey to be close in ratings.

Johnson couldn't fight other black fighters because of the color line. The NYSAC had called for a fight with Willis against Dempsey. Dempsey and Promoter Tex Rickard balked and elected to fight Tunney in Philadelphia.

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

But it was Langford much farther from his good heavyweight weight. Johnson was young but obviously not that far off from his prime weight. What would you say his best weight was? Considering he blows up, I think 190's was where he should be.



6 years of inactivity.



I know he did. However, Johnson wasn't inactive. Do you seriously think taking 6 years off compared to being just to just being in your late 30's while champion is comparable?




I know. A win is still a win. Why didn't he fight these black fighters while champion I think is the better question.



And plenty of small men, and or old men. Did hardly any proving in this thread.

Considering Langford was a shade under 5 feet 7 inches, I think his best weight would be around 187-188lbs,given his upper body development.
Johnson said he was in the condition of his life when he fought Jeffries ,he weighed 208lbs.
So, by my reckoning, Langford would be 32lbs under his optimum weight ,Johnson 23lbs.
Johnson was making a fortune fighting the likes of a spent Jeffries,plus he got a sizable chunk of the movie rights,
Which promoter could offer him a comparable purse to meet a black challenger?
Where was the white audience to pay to see film of two black men fighting for the title?
It might not have been justice ,but I think it was good business sense,add to this the black challengers were considerably more dangerous than the white ones ,what would you have done?

[SuzieQ49]

If OBCboxer was smart, he would have listed Denver Ed Martin and Frank Childs as two of Johnsons better wins. Martin and childs were FAR better fighters than Flynn and Jim johnson

[he grant]

Frazier's prime was 68 - 72, a good five years ... he is definatly top ten and stylistically matches up better with some all time greats than others ..

I can see him beating Holmes and Holyfield but losing to Tyson and Liston ... I like him over Dempsey and Marciano and he might surprise v.s. Louis but see him losing to Lennox Lewis ...

Many interesting match ups ... an exceptional fighter ...

[PowerPuncher]

I think potentially he could rate over the following (not that I rate him over all of these):

Jeffries
Johnson
Dempsey
Marciano
Holyfield
Foreman
Charles
Walcott
Bowe
Liston
Schmelling
Tunney

For me he can't rate over:

Ali
Lewis
Louis
Holmes
Tyson

So no I don't think he can

[kolcade4]

shoot i can't remember past top 10 lists that ive posted, but im pretty sure i didnt have him inside of 5 . though my thoughts on fighters seem to constantly change after i watch different fights i haven't seen in a while or even at all. honestly though i like frazier years beyond the way i like ali.

[Addie]

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

I think potentially he could rate over the following (not that I rate him over all of these):

Jeffries
Johnson
Dempsey
Marciano
Holyfield
Foreman
Charles
Walcott
Bowe
Liston
Schmelling
Tunney

For me he can't rate over:

Ali
Lewis
Louis
Holmes
Tyson

So no I don't think he can

Explain your rather high rating of Mike Tyson to me?

[DamonD]

I have him 7th myself...just behind Foreman, just ahead of Holyfield.

I know it's all pretty arbitrary...we're talking tiny margins when you get up to talent of this calibre.

[fists of fury]

Top four is too high, any which way you want to slice it.

Louis and Ali, as far as career accomplishments go, are streets ahead. For me, guys like Holmes and Lewis are also comfortably head, accomplishments-wise.

One can argue Holmes didn't fight all the top contenders of his era, but neither did Joe. Leiws doesn't have a win anywhere near Joe's best, but he defended the title more times and also faced several powerpunchers in his time. Frazier definitely didn't.

Lewis lost early to McCall, but avenged it. Frazier could never beat Foreman on the best day he ever saw.

Then you have Marciano who didn't denfend the title as many times, and doesn't have the gleaming win over a fellow ATG that Joe does, but he never lost. To me that is very impressive. Take your pick here.

Then there's Tyson, who on film (to me) is a lot more impressive than Joe. Vastly superior combination puncher, better all-round puncher, two-fisted power, better technique in general, better chin...although he does not have Joe's staying power and heart.
In terms of accomplishent it's close.
Frazier again has the better win (against Ali) but if you look at overall opposition I think Tyson edges it. Joe stayed around as champion longer, but Tyson made one more title defense. Overall he had more longevity than Joe did.
Neither avenged a loss. Joe doesn't have the somewhat embarrasing loss to a heavy underdog (Douglas) but Tyson was never blown out by anyone.

In any event, I think there are at least four heayweights that have superior career accomplishments.

In temrs of H2H, there are more than four heavyweights that would defeat Joe.

Lewis, Tyson, Ali, Holmes I would give all a good chance of beating him. Guys like Tua (don't laugh), Bowe, Marciano, Liston etc. I give at least a 50/50 chance.

[OBCboxer]

Originally Posted by SuzieQ49

If OBCboxer was smart, he would have listed Denver Ed Martin and Frank Childs as two of Johnsons better wins. Martin and childs were FAR better fighters than Flynn and Jim johnson

Dang. That's true. My bad.