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 10-13-2007, 01:06 PM   #1
mattdonnellon
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
vCash: 1000
Default Top 20 HW's by Decade, Part 4. (1970-date)

Here is the last of the ratings. Comments and critisms welcome. I was a bit surprised at the lack of depth to the 70's but this can in part be explained by the quantity of good 60's fighters who extended their career's well into the 70's and also Larry Holmes, whom I rated in the 80's. The top 5 I thought rated themselves.
The 80's led to a big call, Tyson or Holmes. I plumped for Larry on the basis of his longevity, consistantcy and a reasonable second career. To-morrow i might go for Tysons sheer power and speed. The hardest call I had to make.
The rest of the alpha boys are a matter of opinion, I tried to rate them on what they achieved rather than their potential.
The 90's I lead with Holy rather than Bowe despite the latters head-to-head superiority based on a far better career resumee. The 2000 on I perhaps should'nt have touched at all and after Lewis and V.Klit i think it is fair to say that the jury is still out on a lot of them.
One comment I would make is that after completing this exercise I am surprised to see the strenght in the 10-20 ratings of the 80's-the best of all in my opinion.
See below the caviate I attach to all of the ratings.
"I am in the process of rating the top 200 Heavyweights of alltime, a daunting task. The methodology I am applying is to rate the top 20 for each decade, a total of 260 boxers and then use this template to do up the 200.
I intend to post my ratings for the decades in four parts as the total would be too big a post for forum readers to absorb in a short span of time and offer their criticisms and opinions.
NB A fighter is rated in only one decade, the one in which IMO he did his best work. Sometimes this can be arbitary, think Jeffries, Louis, Doughlas for example but in the final shake-up it wont matter.
NB2! While I have rated the men by decade I'm rating them on them on their career body of work.
The main criteria is career accomplishments, not potential or peak performance. Head to head comes into play only when I find it hard to split two fighters and I'm sure the biggest factor is my own biases and lack of knowledge."
1970-79
1 foreman
2 norton
2 young
4 lyle
5 shaver
6 tate
7 bugner
8 knoetzee
9 bobick
10 middleton
11 l.spinks
12 h.smith
13 LeDoux
14 l.jones
15 ward
16 merritt
17 garcia
18 ocasio
19 bordeaux
20 kirkman

1980-89
1 holmes
2 tyson
2 witherspoon
4 doughlas
5 m.spinks
6 tucker
7 tubbs
8 cooney
9 dokes
10 coetzee
11 thomas
12 weaver
13 berbick
14 smith
15 ruddock
16 page
17 c.wlliams
18 snipes
19 damiani
20 mason

1990-99
1 holyfield
2 bowe
2 moorer
4 mercer
5 ikebuchi
6 byrd
7 tua
8 mccall
9 bruno
10 akiwanda
11 morrison
12 grant
13 golota
14 briggs
15 donald
16 seldon
17 hunter
18 norris
19 botha
20 schulz

2000-07
1 lewis
2 v.klitscho
2 w.klitscho
4 Peter
5 toney
6 maskaev
7 rahman
8 ruiz
9 valuev
10 sanders
11 chagaev
12 igbramov
13 k.johnson
14 lyakhovich
15 brewster
16 oquendo
17 mccline
18 povetkin
19 mesi
20 brock
mattdonnellon is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 10-13-2007, 01:13 PM   #2
TBooze
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: South of London
Posts: 10,592
vCash: 469
Default Re: Top 20 HW's by Decade, Part 4. (1970-date)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattdonnellon
The 80's:

The rest of the alpha boys are a matter of opinion, I tried to rate them on what they achieved rather than their potential.
1980-89

4 doughlas
Ok apart from choking in big fights, and getting blown away by the likes of 'The Giant' White, what did Douglas (who won no alphabet crap in the 80s) achieve to beat the alphabet crap holders and a Legitmate Champion in Spinks?
TBooze is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 01:22 PM   #3
mattdonnellon
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Top 20 HW's by Decade, Part 4. (1970-date)

Doughlas is hard to rate. He did beat McCall and Berbick and of course he did beat Tyson. He also did pretty well against Tucker. It is possible to pick holes in most of the alpha boys but Doughlas was more inconsistant than most. However I cant ignore his high, he delivered an ATG his first defeat. Got to be worth a lot of ABC wins.
mattdonnellon is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 01:33 PM   #4
TBooze
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: South of London
Posts: 10,592
vCash: 469
Default Re: Top 20 HW's by Decade, Part 4. (1970-date)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattdonnellon
Doughlas is hard to rate. He did beat McCall and Berbick and of course he did beat Tyson. He also did pretty well against Tucker. It is possible to pick holes in most of the alpha boys but Doughlas was more inconsistant than most. However I cant ignore his high, he delivered an ATG his first defeat. Got to be worth a lot of ABC wins.
But he did not beat Tyson in the 80s. You are rating him fourth on a strength of a victory over Berbick who was at least four years past his best (maybe eight); and a victory over McCall who at the time was considered a sturdy journeyman. Blowing the fight against Tucker because of a lack of dedication is hardly a plus IMO.
TBooze is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 01:35 PM   #5
OLD FOGEY
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Top 20 HW's by Decade, Part 4. (1970-date)

I must have missed something, but where is Ali rated?

I see, you have him stuck over the sixties. I missed that. Sorry.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 02:36 PM   #6
mattdonnellon
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Top 20 HW's by Decade, Part 4. (1970-date)

The ratings are not of the decade, they are the lifetime ratings of guys who i adjudge did the greater body of their work in a particular decade.
you are right about the Tucker performance, he gave a glimps of his ability and then quit.If I had rated him in the 90's I would have him at three. Spinks beat Holmes and an old Cooney and Tucker was fed on a diet of has-beens and faded badly. There is no stand-out to displace Doughlas even though your critisms of him are valid. the McCall win may not have seemed much at the time but we're more interested in substance that perceptions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBooze
But he did not beat Tyson in the 80s. You are rating him fourth on a strength of a victory over Berbick who was at least four years past his best (maybe eight); and a victory over McCall who at the time was considered a sturdy journeyman. Blowing the fight against Tucker because of a lack of dedication is hardly a plus IMO.
mattdonnellon is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 02:52 PM   #7
TBooze
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: South of London
Posts: 10,592
vCash: 469
Default Re: Top 20 HW's by Decade, Part 4. (1970-date)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattdonnellon
The ratings are not of the decade, they are the lifetime ratings of guys who i adjudge did the greater body of their work in a particular decade.
RightVirtually Douglas entire body of positive work consists of what happened on February 11th 1990. The biggest positive thing that happened to Buster in the 80s was Ribalta looked so bad against Jeff Sims that he blew his pencilled in rematch with Tyson freeing the date for Douglas.
TBooze is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 04:24 PM   #8
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,799
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Top 20 HW's by Decade, Part 4. (1970-date)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattdonnellon
Here is the last of the ratings. Comments and critisms welcome. I was a bit surprised at the lack of depth to the 70's but this can in part be explained by the quantity of good 60's fighters who extended their career's well into the 70's and also Larry Holmes, whom I rated in the 80's. The top 5 I thought rated themselves.
The 80's led to a big call, Tyson or Holmes. I plumped for Larry on the basis of his longevity, consistantcy and a reasonable second career. To-morrow i might go for Tysons sheer power and speed. The hardest call I had to make.
The rest of the alpha boys are a matter of opinion, I tried to rate them on what they achieved rather than their potential.
The 90's I lead with Holy rather than Bowe despite the latters head-to-head superiority based on a far better career resumee. The 2000 on I perhaps should'nt have touched at all and after Lewis and V.Klit i think it is fair to say that the jury is still out on a lot of them.
One comment I would make is that after completing this exercise I am surprised to see the strenght in the 10-20 ratings of the 80's-the best of all in my opinion.
See below the caviate I attach to all of the ratings.
"I am in the process of rating the top 200 Heavyweights of alltime, a daunting task. The methodology I am applying is to rate the top 20 for each decade, a total of 260 boxers and then use this template to do up the 200.
I intend to post my ratings for the decades in four parts as the total would be too big a post for forum readers to absorb in a short span of time and offer their criticisms and opinions.
NB A fighter is rated in only one decade, the one in which IMO he did his best work. Sometimes this can be arbitary, think Jeffries, Louis, Doughlas for example but in the final shake-up it wont matter.
NB2! While I have rated the men by decade I'm rating them on them on their career body of work.

The main criteria is career accomplishments, not potential or peak performance. Head to head comes into play only when I find it hard to split two fighters and I'm sure the biggest factor is my own biases and lack of knowledge."

1970-79
1 foreman
2 norton
2 young
4 lyle
5 shaver
6 tate
7 bugner
8 knoetzee
9 bobick
10 middleton
11 l.spinks
12 h.smith
13 LeDoux
14 l.jones
15 ward
16 merritt
17 garcia
18 ocasio
19 bordeaux
20 kirkman

1980-89
1 holmes
2 tyson
2 witherspoon
4 doughlas
5 m.spinks
6 tucker
7 tubbs
8 cooney
9 dokes
10 coetzee
11 thomas
12 weaver
13 berbick
14 smith
15 ruddock
16 page
17 c.wlliams
18 snipes
19 damiani
20 mason

1990-99
1 holyfield
2 bowe
2 moorer
4 mercer
5 ikebuchi
6 byrd
7 tua
8 mccall
9 bruno
10 akiwanda
11 morrison
12 grant
13 golota
14 briggs
15 donald
16 seldon
17 hunter
18 norris
19 botha
20 schulz

2000-07
1 lewis
2 v.klitscho
2 w.klitscho
4 Peter
5 toney
6 maskaev
7 rahman
8 ruiz
9 valuev
10 sanders
11 chagaev
12 igbramov
13 k.johnson
14 lyakhovich
15 brewster
16 oquendo
17 mccline
18 povetkin
19 mesi
20 brock
I think Lewis was best in the 1990's, not the 2000's. Toeny the #5 heavy in the 00's? Not a chance.
Mendoza 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 07:28 PM.


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