Dempsey was basically a better version of rocky for me. He was too hittable to survive against langford. Frazier and holy seem obvious choices to me.
Do you have any lists to counter with? Yeah i'd like to think i've been consistent as I feel that is the only negative on any list imo.
With sullivan perhaps you're right, but unless i've missed any obvious names i'm afraid I just don't rate his resume that highly. Jeffries was prime in 04 and 05 whilst johnson was pretty much the number 1 contender desperate for a title shot.
Thanks! Yeah larry gets under appreciated I think. He was pretty a much a complete package all things considered. Yeah I find a lot of people make a big hoo haa about whether or not they should be classed as lineal and they forget what they've actually achieved with respect to their era. I ignore all this "hw is now a weak division" bull**** because it's totally irrelevant to anything imo.
Dempsey was absolutely not a better version of Rocky. Rocky was far more proven than Dempsey against top opposition as well. Rocky was the smarter fighter, better stamina, stronger..with power being equal. I like Rocky to survive Dempsey early, and to overtake Dempsey late. It would be all Marciano after round 7 Langford looks very hittable on film against Jeanette. Stands straight up, stationary, no head movement, he would be a sitting duck for a non stop punching machine like Marciano. It would be a war, but I like rocky's superior workrate to enable him to pull out the decision against Sam. Rocky has the chin and toughness to take some of Sam's heavy artillery. Holyfield would brawl against Marciano, and that would be his downfall. Rocky was the superior two handed puncher with strength and stamina being equal. If we take the roided 217lb Holyfield, then Marciano might lose, but Rocky also didn't take steroids. Rocky beats Frazier..in a brawl you take the guy with the slighty better chin, the guy whose stronger, and the the guy with the superior TWO handed punching ability. Rocky beats Joe. This would be another War!
He never actually cracked the monthly ratings. He might do so in future and earn a retrospective placing however.
Marciano going 0-4 against Dempsey, Holyfield, Frazier, and Langford is quite a big travesty in my opinion.
Yeah I thought he was the future. Infact at one point I favoured him over every active hw. With hindsight I can see it was all hype and no substance. He never cracked the monthly top ten.
I value resume above all else. Judging by your list I'd say dominance is the most important factor for you, right? Anyway, my list. I've split the list up into tiers. If two fighters are in the same group that simply means I could convince myself of a valid argument for either one to outrank the other. 1. Muhammad Ali 2. Joe Louis 3. Evander Holyfield 4. Larry Holmes 5. Lennox Lewis 6. George Foreman 7. Rocky Marciano 8. Joe Frazier 9. Mike Tyson 10. Jack Johnson 11. Sonny Liston 12. Jim Jeffries 13. Harry Wills 14. Jack Dempsey 15. Ezzard Charles 16. Sam Langford 17. Jersey Joe Walcott 18. Floyd Patterson 19. Gene Tunney 20. Wladimir Klitschko 21. Riddick Bowe 22. Peter Jackson 23. Max Schmeling 24. Ken Norton 25. Joe Jeanette Or something like that.
That's the point isn't it, it's all opinion. Another way of looking at it is a man who comes in the ring about the same weight as chad dawson is a top ten atg heavyweight. Mythical match ups will never be proven. I have no reason to think frazier has a worse chin than rocky because I envision rocky suffering the same fate vs big george. It's all opinion with none more valid than the next.
This is your personal monthly top ten? You have put some "real killers" in there for the other boxers but a RING TOP10 HW, Olympic Gold Medalist and multiple World Amateur Champion is not good enough for you?