Floyd Patterson's regaining of the heavyweight Title.

cant actually refute my point though boxed ears...the reason why he was the first one to regain it is because he was the first one to have lost it while still in his prime to a equally flawed fighter.

 

Refute your point? You said most heavyweight champions were dominate (meaning dominant). Most of them actually weren't. So, there's not a great deal to refute with that. Colour-line champs, sibling champs, champs who ditch a guy they don't want and change over to another recognised title to avoid them, champs who don't actively defend their title for years. The entire history of the heavyweight division is evidence that most champions are not what a reasonable person would consider to be truly dominant throughout their reigns, if they care to think about it much. So, refuting that point isn't really an issue, is it? I mean, dominant means you are fighting all the worthy contenders, within a reasonable time frame between defences and for reasonable amount of time to clear out the best, actively defending against them, to me. I don't see how "most heavyweight champions" were, in fact, dominant. Whether it's a matter of their "fault" or not, regardless. The minority were dominant. Certainly not the majority. So, your point doesn't need refuting. It's simply the opposite of what the reality is, J.

 

Nobody had done it before...not Dempsey...not Schmeling...not Louis...others had tried..and the fact that he was destroyed by Ingo in June 1959 after being tagged with his right hand...his "toonder"...(thunder)..and floored time and time again no one thought that Floyd had a chance...Ingo would land his right in the rematch...and the fight would be over
...Floyd came into the second fight in great shape and KO'd Ingo with a BEAUTY of a left hook and won the title back in 1960...it was a great achievment...

 

Yes, it was a remarkable feat to come back from the horrendous beating Ingo put on him, reverse the outcome, and regain the title (something many great HWs had failed to do).

BUT ... I can't think of many great HWs who would have got brutally stopped by Ingo like that in the first place.

Over all, I think Patterson was one of the weaker heavyweight champions.

 

I totally agree.

 

I rank him #15 because of it.

 

gun to my head, that's probably where i have him to

 

It was a big deal at the time,the first to regain it,time and the fact it's been done several times since has diminished it.
Personally I loved Patterson flaws and all.

 

Tyson wasn't champ until he beat Spinks? Only according to ibf and the ring. The wba and wbc already had him as champ.

As far as lineal goes why would Spinks make a difference? Unless of course you don't see burns and hart as past champs.

Tyson is the youngest champ in hw history. It's a recorded fact.

 

When Ingo took the title from Patterson, he was undefeated as a professional and had stopped Henry Cooper and Eddie Machen. He was clearly a rising star. As I recall, his victory over Patterson was hailed as the start of a long and spectacular reign. Floyd was all but written off (as he would be again after losses to Liston and Ali). Very few gave him any chance in the rematch. "Nobody has ever done it" and "They never come back" were phrases constantly heard at the time. When Patterson regained the title (and in the way he did it) it was on the order of breaking the four-minute mile six years earlier. While the feat has been duplicated in the succeeding years, it nevertheless was a quantum leap at the time.

Looking back, there were times when regaining the title had a good chance of happening - rematches Schmeling-Sharkey III and Baer-Braddock II which never happened. Dempsey came close with the Long Count, and Charles may have deserved the nod in his fourth bout with Jersey Joe, but Patterson was the one to actually do it.

 

The first round of the rubber match between Floyd and Ingo deserves some mention here. Johansson himself almost regained the title in that first round. Watch the crowd reaction the first time Patterson hit the deck. For a moment it did not look like Floyd would get up. But he did, later went down again, and floored Ingo before the round ended. Floyd's fighting heart was unquestionably in evidence here!

 

If you say so...

 

not just on my say so, look at tysons age when he beat berbick compared to any he champ before him.

He's younger than them all.

 

Youngest belt holder...not champion. There needs to be a balanced criteria. Patterson and previous eras did not have the benifit of multiple belts, so in using the lineage of the championship is the only way to balance past, present and future by a similar guideline. Is that fair...NO, but boxing has never been fair.

 

Well, to be fair, I don't think Patterson's claim to the title for beating Archie Moore was actually based on anything stronger than Tyson beating Berbick for the WBC title.
No one bothered to dispute it but Moore was only the light-heavyweight champion, and I don't believe Floyd and Archie were clearly the only two 'heavyweight' contenders left to decide a new champion.
In fact, since getting battered by Marciano a year earlier, Moore had really just sat on the 'no.1' contender position that for some reason he retained, and fought light-heavies and nobodies. He did beat James J Parker but I'm not sure how good Parker was.
By mid-1956 I think Eddie Machen was probably just as worthy to contest either of those two for the championship.
There should have been a proper elimination tournament. But Patterson and Moore were the guys with friends in the press and elsewhere, and the fight sold.