Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

 
  


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-29-2009, 09:35 PM   #61
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Addie View Post
Comeback Foreman was a good fighter, but he lost to the likes of Morrison and was getting dominated by Moorer up until the knockout. Nothing to write home about, not at all.
He still beat Moorer and according to him his plan was to toy with him and give him the impression of vulnerability. As Jim Lampley said, "George, how are you going to get him to stand in front of you." George, "He won't at first, but sometime later in the fight he'll get confident and stand in front of me." Out-pointing Moorer probably wasn't the way to go. Thinking fighter Morrison ran from him. Holyfield and Morrison were the only fighters to loss to him in the comeback (He beat Briggs. Morrison wasn't too shabby).


Quote:
You seem to put a lot of stock in reading what is written on paper. Lewis didn't have a win over Bowe, but he defeated every fighter that was ever put infront of him. The fights he did lose, he won rematches in devastating fashion. Holyfield didn't beat every fighter he faced, and he didn't avenge all of his defeats. Likewise, when the two fought, Lennox won both fights pretty clear cut. Isn't that the end of the argument right there?

He kept losing it, that's why.
No because Holyfield was clearer old and past it in the Lennox fights and fought pretty competetively with him. Holyfield never got knocked out the way Lewis did except for Bowe III. Holyfield had heart problems and was seen was way past at that point, even Duva left him because of this. What's he do? Come back and defeat Mike Tyson. His resume is better than Lewis He lost, but he lost to some great fighters and some are very very close fights (Moorer, in which he had a heart problem or something odd).
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 09:43 PM   #62
Addie
MAB.
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK, England
Posts: 21,045
vCash: 842
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
He still beat Moorer and according to him his plan was to toy with him and give him the impression of vulnerability. As Jim Lampley said, "George, how are you going to get him to stand in front of you." George, "He won't at first, but sometime later in the fight he'll get confident and stand in front of me." Out-pointing Moorer probably wasn't the way to go. Thinking fighter Morrison ran from him. Holyfield and Morrison were the only fighters to loss to him in the comeback (He beat Briggs. Morrison wasn't too shabby).
Is a points win over 40 year old Foreman any better than a blowout over Ruddock? No.


Quote:
No because Holyfield was clearer old and past it in the Lennox fights and fought pretty competetively with him
Holyfield was no more past it than Holmes, Foreman, or Tyson.

Quote:
Holyfield never got knocked out the way Lewis did except for Bowe III. Holyfield had heart problems and was seen was way past at that point, even Duva left him because of this. What's he do? Come back and defeat Mike Tyson.
Coming back from defeats is a great thing to do as a fighter. Lewis knows all about this too. It erases the defeats in my book when you come and absolutely blow them away in rematches, which is what Lennox did. He avoided all his defeats, Holyfield did not.

Quote:
His resume is better than Lewis He lost, but he lost to some great fighters and some are very very close fights (Moorer, in which he had a heart problem or something odd).
I think Lewis established dominance that Holyfield was never capable of. He was clearly the number one guy who was peerless when it came to him retiring. Holyfield, just when he was getting on a winning track, lost, and he looked more vunerable against average opposition. Finally, he lost to Lewis twice.

Lennox is higher on the list in my book, and there is no way a fighter like Holyfield should be at top 5.

We'll agree to disagree.
Addie is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 10:04 PM   #63
OBCboxer
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 3,886
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
But the old version of Foreman was still terrific with tremendous power. Some say old Foreman was better (I don't think so) but at least a thinking man's fighter. And Foreman of 91 was very game especially for that fight. Holmes was past his prime. Holyfield's resume is far better than Johnson who have ranked #4 who has wins over old man or small man.
Old Foreman was easy to outbox. Look what Morrison was able to do with him and he's not even a slickster. I have Johnson ranked #5. How is Holyfield's far better? I want names.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
So then you got to concede Frazier didn't have the pressure or effective aggression against Ali in the 2nd fight while Ali remains active and moving. That's of course is if Frazier is that much on the other end. 73 Frazier isn't prime but he isn't shot or as bad as people suggest to me. Mostly, he was overweight, a bit too confident and lived the glamor as champ. Physically, I don't know what he could've been capable of since he wasn't as serious as he should have been. Got to look at both sides, and in either case than that's Frazier's fault and not something we can genuinely discredit Foreman for.
'73 Frazier still had some left in the tank but was not the prime beast he once was. Frazier's pressure and pace wasn't as fast as it once was. Frazier declined at a faster rate than Ali did. Physically, he wasn't the same either because of all the punishment he had taken throughout his career due to his style; it took a lot out of him. It's coupled with the fact that he wasn't as hungry as he used to be. He got cought up in being the Champ, was overconfident and became overweight.
OBCboxer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 07-29-2009, 11:00 PM   #64
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Addie View Post
Is a points win over 40 year old Foreman any better than a blowout over Ruddock? No.
That's tough. I'm not sure to be honest because Tyson really did a number on Ruddock. He was never the same afterwards.




Quote:
Holyfield was no more past it than Holmes, Foreman, or Tyson.
Tyson, definitely not. Foreman and Holmes, definitely Holmes but Foreman was thought to be almost a better fighting in his second run. But that's not the point, I don't take that away from Holmes for losing, I just credit Holyfield. Same with the Lewis situation. Don't take it as much away from Holyfield.



Quote:
Coming back from defeats is a great thing to do as a fighter. Lewis knows all about this too. It erases the defeats in my book when you come and absolutely blow them away in rematches, which is what Lennox did. He avoided all his defeats, Holyfield did not.
Holyfield beat beat Bowe in the rematch and he beat Moore. So who didn't he redeem himself with? All other situations are a past his prime Holyfield so I don't hold it against him. It would be like holding it against Frazier for losing to Foreman twice.



Quote:
I think Lewis established dominance that Holyfield was never capable of. He was clearly the number one guy who was peerless when it came to him retiring. Holyfield, just when he was getting on a winning track, lost, and he looked more vunerable against average opposition. Finally, he lost to Lewis twice.

Lennox is higher on the list in my book, and there is no way a fighter like Holyfield should be at top 5.

We'll agree to disagree.
Well, the two big losses bring Lewis off his track. You have many champions in between those splits. I don't say Lewis dominated the era. But Lewis did take hold of the decade well. A lot of fighters didn't want to fight him, so they fought Holyfield. In a way, this allowed Lewis to mature with easier opposition. It let him grow and let him fill his frame out a bit. But really, Holyfield definitely has the bigger and better names on his resume.

Holyfield was 36-3 up until the age of 37. Everything from 37 to 47 I don't take much against him. He still has some decent wins to prove his worth. He also really beat Valuev which makes him regain the title a 5th time. If Holyfield does this officially, he might be an automatic top 5-10 for me.

I have him #11 so you know what I think. I think you can justify him at #5-10 though. #4, I think that's a lot to give for.

Remember, Ring Magazine (Which was up until 9 ranked Holyfield #3 HW champ on the top 50 list. Lewis was somewhere around 33 or something. Crazy shit, but true. He was behind Cleveland Williams or something.

Quote:
ld Foreman was easy to outbox. Look what Morrison was able to do with him and he's not even a slickster. I have Johnson ranked #5. How is Holyfield's far better? I want names.
Morrison ran the entire night. It was borderline disgraceful. Holyfield boxed him smartly, and Foreman made a good accounting of himself. Besides Foreman was better in 91 than he was when fought Frazier.

Holyfield's resume is far better, especially within the context of things. Look at the name and when he foughts them and who. Holyfield fought bigger, stronger guys and won. He also became the 4 time HW champion of the world. Johnson fought smaller men that were usually middleweights, or men that were old or inactive (Jeffires, Fitzimmons). However, I have Johnson in my top 10 but not Holyfield. Go figure. I just think #4 is offly steep.

Quote:
'73 Frazier still had some left in the tank but was not the prime beast he once was. Frazier's pressure and pace wasn't as fast as it once was. Frazier declined at a faster rate than Ali did. Physically, he wasn't the same either because of all the punishment he had taken throughout his career due to his style; it took a lot out of him. It's coupled with the fact that he wasn't as hungry as he used to be. He got cought up in being the Champ, was overconfident and became overweight.
Yes, I mentioned a lot of these things. I really think that you have to blame Frazier for being overconfident and overweight, living the glamor life as champ. We can't discredit Foreman. Fighters go into fights overconfident like this all the time. I think Frazier was past his best days but I don't buy that Frazier was this guy who had significantly declined. I don't think there's even enough fights on film to prove this. Frazier had a few fights up until Foreman from FOTC. I also think we don't know how Frazier could've been physically if he would've kept lighter and fighter, but he didn't. So I blame Frazier for this more and not discredit Foreman for this.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 11:09 PM   #65
OBCboxer
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 3,886
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Jack Johnson's best wins not in any order:

Sam Langford: Arguably the greatest fighter ever

Sam McVea: Former Colored HW champion who beat the likes of McVea and Harry Willis.

Bob Fitzsimmons: Former HW champion, one of the greatest fighters that ever lived.

James Jefferies: Undefeated former HW champ and one of the best of his time.

Tommy Burns- Current World HW Champion; beat Marvin Hart who beat Johnson

Joe Jeanette- Could have been the World Champ if not for the Color Line. Beat McVea and Langford.

Fireman Jim Flynn- Upset the likes of Jack Dempsey.

Battling Jim Johnson- Had fierce rivalries with Langford, Jeanette and McVea; beat Harry Willis.
OBCboxer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 11:22 PM   #66
OBCboxer
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 3,886
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Langford weighed 156 pounds, Jeffries was old and returning to the ring after a 6 year layoff. Ketchell is a terrific win but a win in where he was outweighed by 35 pounds and a fighter who weighed 170 pounds and gave up nearly 5 inches. Burns? Another fat 5'7 middlweight. He lost, no contested and beat Jeannette who had less than 20 fights on numerous occasions. One of those occasions is when Jeanette was 0-3 . And Bob was 44 years old. In context, his wins aren't that terrific. Either green fighters or small fighters. I actually like his Flynn victory.

Dempsey on the other hand, although maybe a less impressive resume destroyed much bigger men and better punchers. Dempsey won the title of Williard not Carpentier. He also beat the bigger Firpo, Gibbons and Jack Sharkey. The names aren't as good. But Dempsey destructiveness and historical impact can't be denied. Beating bigger guys is also more impressive than beating smaller men. I think there rankings are close, it's just you have Johnson much too high in my opinion.
His wins are certainly better than Dempsey's. Johnson fought plenty of punchers like McVea, Langford, Jeffries, Burns, etc. In fact they were better than Dempsey's opponents and more skilled. Size means nothing; it's how skilled and accomplished your opponent is. He doesn't have a resume as good as Johnson. He didn't defend the title nearly as much and was largely inactive during his reign.
OBCboxer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 11:24 PM   #67
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by OBCboxer View Post
Jack Johnson's best wins not in any order:

Sam Langford: Arguably the greatest fighter ever

Sam McVea: Former Colored HW champion who beat the likes of McVea and Harry Willis.

Bob Fitzsimmons: Former HW champion, one of the greatest fighters that ever lived.

James Jefferies: Undefeated former HW champ and one of the best of his time.

Tommy Burns- Current World HW Champion; beat Marvin Hart who beat Johnson

Joe Jeanette- Could have been the World Champ if not for the Color Line. Beat McVea and Langford.

Fireman Jim Flynn- Upset the likes of Jack Dempsey.

Battling Jim Johnson- Had fierce rivalries with Langford, Jeanette and McVea; beat Harry Willis.
We're going to do this dance again?

Langford was 156 pounds at the time. Weighed less than a middleweight.

Fitzsimmons was 44 years old. On the tail end of his career and just got KOed by a 165 pound fighter while weighing 165 pounds in his last fight.

Tommy Burns was another midget middleweight. He was 5'7, 168 pounds and chubby.

Jeanette lost to Langford 3/5 times while being knocked out in one of the fights. At the time he fought Johnson he was raw. Infact, the first fight he drew with Johnson his record was an amazing 0-3. And Frazier was green against Bonavena? It's also important to note that he beat Johnson in his 10th fight.

Jeffries was 37 years old with 6 YEARS OF INACTIVITY.

LoL you mention Flynn after I mention that name because I believed it was one of his solid wins.

Mcvea is a great figher but he was rather raw being 19 years old with 6 fights in the first fight he had with Johnson. He also lost to Langford 3-4X as many times as he beat him.

Again, some great names here. But a lot of these guys are old, inactive, or very small and overmatched physically.

I think I have Johnson ranked around #8-9 but #4 is quite steep.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 11:26 PM   #68
OBCboxer
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 3,886
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Morrison ran the entire night. It was borderline disgraceful. Holyfield boxed him smartly, and Foreman made a good accounting of himself. Besides Foreman was better in 91 than he was when fought Frazier.

He was still outboxed by someone who is not known as a slick fighter. I thought you said Old Foreman wasn't as good as young Foreman? I think youre very wrong with that statement. He was better technically but that wasn't him at his best, certainly not.



Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Holyfield's resume is far better, especially within the context of things. Look at the name and when he foughts them and who. Holyfield fought bigger, stronger guys and won. He also became the 4 time HW champion of the world. Johnson fought smaller men that were usually middleweights, or men that were old or inactive (Jeffires, Fitzimmons). However, I have Johnson in my top 10 but not Holyfield. Go figure. I just think #4 is offly steep.

Again, it's not about size. It's about how skilled and accomplished your opponent is. Johnson fought some smaller men but when fought them, he weighed well under 200 and the difference was not all that great. I rated him at #5 not #4.




Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Yes, I mentioned a lot of these things. I really think that you have to blame Frazier for being overconfident and overweight, living the glamor life as champ. We can't discredit Foreman. Fighters go into fights overconfident like this all the time. I think Frazier was past his best days but I don't buy that Frazier was this guy who had significantly declined. I don't think there's even enough fights on film to prove this. Frazier had a few fights up until Foreman from FOTC. I also think we don't know how Frazier could've been physically if he would've kept lighter and fighter, but he didn't. So I blame Frazier for this more and not discredit Foreman for this.
Agreed.
OBCboxer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 11:34 PM   #69
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by OBCboxer View Post
His wins are certainly better than Dempsey's. Johnson fought plenty of punchers like McVea, Langford, Jeffries, Burns, etc. In fact they were better than Dempsey's opponents and more skilled. Size means nothing; it's how skilled and accomplished your opponent is. He doesn't have a resume as good as Johnson. He didn't defend the title nearly as much and was largely inactive during his reign.
McVea was raw, though. Jeffries had 6 YEARS of inactivity on top of being 37 years old. Burns was a midget 5'7 168 pound men. Langford weighed 156 pounds!

I am not big on weight not being everything. I make a big stance that bigger isn't better and that the bigger heavyweights that are fat and slow aren't better and that many old fighters could beat them. However, 5'6 156 pound guys beating bigger, stronger, and in shape heavyweights is a bit of a stretch.

Firpo is a better puncher than any of this fighters were except Jeffries who was old and inactive for 6 years. Williard is 250 pounds and very strong.

I said Johnson had the better resume but Dempsey destroyed bigger men and bigger punchers. This much is true. And he fought more fighters when they were at a better stage in their careers. Most people talk about Williard being inactive but Jeffries was inactive for twice as long.

Dempsey wins in rankings for his destructiveness, fighting bigger man rather than much smaller win and historical impact. He completely changed boxing with his glitz. Not fair, though. Their rankings are close to me but Johnson being #4 while Dempsey off a top 10 list is bit harsh I think.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 11:40 PM   #70
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by OBCboxer View Post
He was still outboxed by someone who is not known as a slick fighter. I thought you said Old Foreman wasn't as good as young Foreman? I think youre very wrong with that statement. He was better technically but that wasn't him at his best, certainly not.
He wasn't, especially at that point. But I'm saying some thought the Old Foreman was the better version. I really think the one against Holyfield was better than Morrison, at least. Out-boxing/running from an older Foreman was much easier. However, he was definitely a better thinking fighter.






Quote:
Again, it's not about size. It's about how skilled and accomplished your opponent is. Johnson fought some smaller men but when fought them, he weighed well under 200 and the difference was not all that great. I rated him at #5 not #4.
When it becomes that drastic a difference it is. You are saying that fighting a 156 pound fighter compared to a 256 or 224 pound fighter shows little difference? Size isn't everything, but it has an affect to an extent.

But come on Burns was a joke of a fighter and small to boot. The rest are old and inactive guys, or much smaller or much more inexperienced fighters.

Dempsey beat the much bigger Williard. Beat Gibbons, Carpentier, Firpo, and Sharkey. He destroyed most of these fighters. A lot of the fighters were at great stages of their careers when they fought Dempsey (Besides Williard). On the other hand, a lot of those big names from Johnson aren't great wins in the context of things. Bob being 44 years old and recently KOed at 165 pounds and Jeffries being old and inactive for 6 years.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 11:46 PM   #71
OBCboxer
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 3,886
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

[quote=PetethePrince;4597847]We're going to do this dance again?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Langford was 156 pounds at the time. Weighed less than a middleweight.
And was also arguably the Greatest Fighter of All Time and had beaten plenty of big fighters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Fitzsimmons was 44 years old. On the tail end of his career and just got KOed by a 165 pound fighter while weighing 165 pounds in his last fight.
Fair enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Tommy Burns was another midget middleweight. He was 5'7, 168 pounds and chubby.
Really? Chubby? It should be noted that he was in the best shape of his life. He was also the current HW World Champion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Jeanette lost to Langford 3/5 times while being knocked out in one of the fights. At the time he fought Johnson he was raw. Infact, the first fight he drew with Johnson his record was an amazing 0-3. And Frazier was green against Bonavena? It's also important to note that he beat Johnson in his 10th fight.
Jeanette maybe was green but he was also 6-4-1 when he beat Langford. What does Frazier have to do with this? Why does he always have to come up?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Jeffries was 37 years old with 6 YEARS OF INACTIVITY.
Fair enoug, but he was still undefeated and considered one of the best HWs of his time and beat the likes of Fitzsimmons and Corbett. Plus this was due to the fact that they were running out of challengers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
LoL you mention Flynn after I mention that name because I believed it was one of his solid wins.
No need to laugh out loud. I actually didn't see you post his name. So let's not draw straws here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Mcvea is a great figher but he was rather raw being 19 years old with 6 fights in the first fight he had with Johnson. He also lost to Langford 3-4X as many times as he beat him.
Johnson was 12-3-5 in his first fight with McVea, hardly a seasoned veteran Johnson was then. McVea still holds a win over Langford.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Again, some great names here. But a lot of these guys are old, inactive, or very small and overmatched physically.
Some are, some aren't. Still a great resume

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
I think I have Johnson ranked around #8-9 but #4 is quite steep.
I ranked him at #5.
OBCboxer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2009, 11:57 PM   #72
OBCboxer
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 3,886
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
McVea was raw, though. Jeffries had 6 YEARS of inactivity on top of being 37 years old. Burns was a midget 5'7 168 pound men. Langford weighed 156 pounds!
I went through this another post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
I am not big on weight not being everything. I make a big stance that bigger isn't better and that the bigger heavyweights that are fat and slow aren't better and that many old fighters could beat them. However, 5'6 156 pound guys beating bigger, stronger, and in shape heavyweights is a bit of a stretch.
The fact is Langford, while small, beat many big men. Size really means nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Firpo is a better puncher than any of this fighters were except Jeffries who was old and inactive for 6 years. Williard is 250 pounds and very strong.
I disagree, Firpo's KO wins aren't impressive as he never KO'd a good fighter. He was very limited. Someone like McVea is much better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
I said Johnson had the better resume but Dempsey destroyed bigger men and bigger punchers. This much is true. And he fought more fighters when they were at a better stage in their careers. Most people talk about Williard being inactive but Jeffries was inactive for twice as long.
Size means nothing and they weren't bigger punchers than what Johnson fought. Willard was never skilled to begin with but Jeffries was considered one of the best HWs of all time at that time. His inactivity takes a lot away from Johnson's win though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
Dempsey wins in rankings for his destructiveness, fighting bigger man rather than much smaller win and historical impact. He completely changed boxing with his glitz. Not fair, though. Their rankings are close to me but Johnson being #4 while Dempsey off a top 10 list is bit harsh I think.
What he did outside the ring should have nothing to do with his ranking. The men he fought were not nearly as skilled as the fighters Johnson fought.
OBCboxer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2009, 12:00 AM   #73
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

[quote=OBCboxer;4597944][quote=PetethePrince;4597847]We're going to do this dance again?



Quote:
And was also arguably the Greatest Fighter of All Time and had beaten plenty of big fighters.
Not at that stage in his career. In fact, he weighed 140 pounds 3 years earlier. He didn't establish himself as a force as a heavyweight until later.


Quote:
Really? Chubby? It should be noted that he was in the best shape of his life. He was also the current HW World Champion.
Right. He beat Hart to win the title after it was vacated when Hart beat Root I think. Hart beat Johnson early too. On film he looked chubby though. He had basically been ducking Johnson for awhile there till he finally fought him.



Quote:
Jeanette maybe was green but he was also 6-4-1 when he beat Langford. What does Frazier have to do with this? Why does he always have to come up?
Less-established as a Heavyweight and smallish Langford. He wasn't 180+ at this time.



Quote:
Fair enoug, but he was still undefeated and considered one of the best HWs of his time and beat the likes of Fitzsimmons and Corbett. Plus this was due to the fact that they were running out of challengers.
That says a lot about the era at that point. He did beat an older Bob and Corbett especially. I can't say how they were then much, it was the tailend of their careers and I don't know tons on the era.



Quote:
Johnson was 12-3-5 in his first fight with McVea, hardly a seasoned veteran Johnson was then. McVea still holds a win over Langford.
Still older and more experienced.


Quote:
Some are, some aren't. Still a great resume
It's got some nice names. Who aren't?

Quote:
I ranked him at #5.
Generous in my book. Justifiable certainly, though. I probably had him ranked 5 a year or so ago. Time goes by Dempsey and Johnson decline in the ratings.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2009, 12:09 AM   #74
PetethePrince
Slick & Redheaded
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,395
vCash: 1200
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by OBCboxer View Post
The fact is Langford, while small, beat many big men. Size really means nothing.
Not at this point, in fact before he lost to Jeanette he beat a lightweight. Yep... I know.

Quote:
I disagree, Firpo's KO wins aren't impressive as he never KO'd a good fighter. He was very limited. Someone like McVea is much better.
Williard, Brennan, Smith. Still, he was Koing most of his opponents. One of which was 240+ pounds.



Quote:
Size means nothing and they weren't bigger punchers than what Johnson fought. Willard was never skilled to begin with but Jeffries was considered one of the best HWs of all time at that time. His inactivity takes a lot away from Johnson's win though.
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

Quote:
What he did outside the ring should have nothing to do with his ranking. The men he fought were not nearly as skilled as the fighters Johnson fought.
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.

Legacy plays a small part of my criteria. Also Dempsey was a ferocious killer who KOed a lot of guys. Small points with that.
PetethePrince is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2009, 03:34 AM   #75
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 21,992
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Frazier - A Top 4 Heavyweight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PetethePrince View Post
We're going to do this dance again?

Langford was 156 pounds at the time. Weighed less than a middleweight.

Fitzsimmons was 44 years old. On the tail end of his career and just got KOed by a 165 pound fighter while weighing 165 pounds in his last fight.

Tommy Burns was another midget middleweight. He was 5'7, 168 pounds and chubby.

Jeanette lost to Langford 3/5 times while being knocked out in one of the fights. At the time he fought Johnson he was raw. Infact, the first fight he drew with Johnson his record was an amazing 0-3. And Frazier was green against Bonavena? It's also important to note that he beat Johnson in his 10th fight.

Jeffries was 37 years old with 6 YEARS OF INACTIVITY.

LoL you mention Flynn after I mention that name because I believed it was one of his solid wins.

Mcvea is a great figher but he was rather raw being 19 years old with 6 fights in the first fight he had with Johnson. He also lost to Langford 3-4X as many times as he beat him.

Again, some great names here. But a lot of these guys are old, inactive, or very small and overmatched physically.

I think I have Johnson ranked around #8-9 but #4 is quite steep.
Langford was 156 ,but Johnson was 185 ,neither were at their prime weight

Jeffries was 35 not 37 and after 5 years of inactivity.
Are you confusing this with Johnson losing at age 37 to Willard?
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 .

Johnson beat plenty of big guys look it up
Sorry to stick my nose in ,but facts are facts
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013