saw this a couple of days ago and my jaw dropped. it think it goes to show how disrespected current fighters are by boxing historians. corbett and fitz above ali is biggest joke i've ever seen. then 20 yrs later, ring says ali was the best. i think you'll eventually see holyfield get way more respect than he does now. he's a top 10 heavy in my book. http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Division-By-Division_-_The_Greatest_Fighters_of_All-Time The top 10 from the Ring in march of '75 (in order) Joe Louis Jack Dempsey Jim Jeffries Jack Johnson Rocky Marciano Gene Tunney Bob Fitzsimmons Jim Corbett Muhammad Ali Joe Frazier
I love seeing these lists. Gentleman jim is the most underrated fighter in history imo and should just be a shade below tunney imo (makes him about 20th on my list) Interesting how there's no liston at all there. By contrast my top ten at time is Louis Ali Rocky Johnson Frazier Liston Dempsey Foreman (just first career) Sullivan Jeffries.
I think most sane 'historians' would accept that Holy', Mike and Lennox are ll top ten heavys. That list is horrid.
Don't make the mistake of using The Ring to form an opinion that their ratings were the consensus back then, when they were regarded as antiquated by many boxing observers (the all-time ratings improved slightly when Loubet was editor, but not enough and one of the first things Bert Sugar did when he took over was do away with their "awful" all-time ratings, which he did, hence the revamped version in the 1980s and onwards. By the time Ali beat Foreman he was a lock for Top 5 in most observers eyes; Boxing Illustrated rated him #2 by 1978 behind only Louis and Boxing News already had him Top 5 in 1971 behing the 'usual' four of Louis, Dempsey, The Rock and Johnson (don't remember the exact order).
Care to expand on Corbett? And is there any sane reason why you would only rate part of a fighters career?
In 1969 they rated the GOAT in each division. Jack Dempsey was the almost-unanimous choice at Heavyweight, with one guy voting for Johnson.
Imo james easily matches the success of tunney against names just as credible. The only difference is that james carried on when shot whereas gene hung them up at the right time. But past prime losses should make no difference imo. James should be round about the same ranking as tunney in any atg lists imo. Yeah it's 75 therefore his second career hasn't happened yet.
How is Jeffries 3rd? This is my list if it were March '75. 1) Louis 2) Marciano 3) Johnson 4) Dempsey 5) Liston 6) Tunney 7) Ali 8) Charles 9) Walcott 10) Jeffries This is a crappy list regardless of year.