The Three Worst Heavyweight Title Challengers?

Scott Frank

 

Jimmy Darcy, easily

 

Tony Ross
Mike "Coke & Donuts" Dokes (vs. Bowe)
Richard Dunn

 

I would have to question Ross as a choice.

He was at the top of a short lived hiatus when he was given his title shot.

 

Don't know why Wepner, Dunn, Evagenlista and Spinks get thrown aroound since they weren't even Ali's worst challengers. That dubious honour goes to Coopman. And then we also have Daniels and Standers during the 70's, who also did less than the four mentioned. And the guy Foreman defended against besides Norton. That's only one decade mind you.

If we go further back we have guys like Ketchel and Carpentier. Had they even beaten one HW before they got the title shot? How about Conn's credentials at HW? I think we can find plenty challengers pre 1950 that are worse than the names bandied about here.

 

I would have to take issue with all those choices.

Ketchell you could argue, but he was the champion in a lower weight class.

Conn and Carpintier both had prety good heavyweight credentials, excelent in Conn's case.

 

:good

As for Rademacher, he had an illustrious amateur career and knocked Patterson down. Hardly a patsy. Numerical records don't tell the whole story.

Dave Zyglewicz never beat anyone remotely of note. His best win was probably over the hapless Sonny Moore and even then he needed a split decision in his hometown the first time around.

I think Mendoza makes a good point about incomplete records. One could add a lack of footage. So I'm not going to go back before WWII. Peter Okello is my number three: his best win is probably over Bob Mirovic. He lost just about every minute against Maskaev (not the world's most dominant boxer) and got knocked down. Maskaev was shot at this point.

 

On that reasoning, wasn't Spinks-Holmes I a joke fight?

 

MW right? Wonder how many would see Sergio Martinez as a legit challenger for a HW title.

Who had they beat that were better than European champion or fringe contender level at HW then?

EDIT: Just had a look at Conn's record, and, yes, he seems to have had some good wins at HW prior to meeting Louis. (The one just before the rematch was a decision win over Tony Zale, though)

 

Yeah, it certainly is a bit dubious that someone moves up and get an immediate shot at the HW title. If we are slamming challengers who actually had beaten other HWs, how about those who hadn't? This of course goes for Spinks as well.

 

He had won one of his previous eight fights going into the Johnson match.

 

By that logic, it gets hard to rank champions pre-WWII at all. If we don't know how bad their challengers were, we shouldn't know how good they were either. Just as they could have had wins that's gone missing from the record, they could have had losses that's gone missing just as likely.

 

Scott Frank.

Pete Rademacher.

Marvis Frazier.

 

Just had a look at Conn's record, and, yes, he seems to have had some good wins at HW prior to meeting Louis. (The one just before the rematch was a decision win over Tony Zale, though)