I agree with almost all of this, I'd just throw johnson in the mix, but otherwise it is dead on. That is just white fantasy to think Holmes belongs in the top 20. No, he did not avenge it he lost twice. Holmes never unified the belts, he was not a lineal champion, he vacated belts to avoid fighting guys he should have and who were dangerous. Him being 3/4 makes no sense, when we have fighters like marciano, johnson, ali, and louis who ducked no one. In fact I'd even rate k2 above larry because those guys actually made an attempt to fight 90% of the best fighters around. I don't see any other heavyweight but riddick bowe trying to give up titles to avoid tough fights. And if larry was so great how did he manage to slip the 90s without fighting lennox, foreman, tyson etc? Ducked guys in the 80s, ducked in the 90s, ducked guys forever. In all fairness Alli would have to come before Lewis. I struggle to see how Holyfield, tyson, or wlad or vitali would rank above joe frazier. Or how wlad would rank above vitali He fought cooney who was the next best hw and who was knocking out everyone and put a beating on holmes. If he isn't great then larry cannot because larry lost 2x to him and he beat larry's toughest opponent in half the time. I am more impressed by a lhw who beats the hw champion twice and the number 1 contender than a hw who beat medicore opponents but lost to his best challnengers and often got knocked down or came close to losing to those challengers. It is more impressive if Bernard Hopkins beat Wlad K 2 times and ko vitali in 5 rounds. Than say for deontay Wilder to beat another 10 or 20 sub par bums. Its not the number of opponents, it is the quality. this is the only reason why marciano or joe frazier would get near a top 10 for me. It is far more impressive to beat muhammad ali once than to beat 10 tim witherspoons by a inch.
Agreed the second Holmes-Spinks decision was undeserved and a strange one. Larry was clearly past his best at this stage and you could really see the slowing down starting in the William's go. Agreed also that he was the best of the 80's beating seven undefeated challengers. Anyone not met had zero chance of beating him.
Very close to my picks Andrei but I have to ask, do you really think Frazier would have ever beat Foreman, Dempsey, or a prime Tyson?
I think he beats Tyson and Dempsey, and I think any version of him pre-FOTC gives Foreman hell, althouh I'm not so sure Joe would still be able to beat him.
Frazier would never give Foreman a fight. He had two shots and was destroyed both times. In terms of heart and determination Frazier far outshines Tyson. the question is does Joe last long enough to take Mike into deep waters. My gut feeling is no. Dempsey was a far greater fighter than Frazier. Jack had two good hands whereas Joe really only had that hook...his left. Late in his career Joe developed his right but it still lacked coordination to use effectively with his left. Joe could only fight one way which made him more easily timed...predictable...than Dempsey.
First fight against Foreman, he underestimated him, that's his mistake. But the second fight between the two of them came shortly after Thrilla in Manilla. Considering he also developed a cataract in his left eye, I think it's fair to assume that pre-FOTC Frazier would do so much better. I still think he beats Tyson and I still think he beats Dempsey. He did fine his whole career with just that left hook, Jack does not have the same physical advantages over him that Foreman did nor do I think he's as good at using his reach and punching power to keep Frazier at distance and hit him at will. As far as I'm concerned, there aren't many boxers before the 70's whom I'd take over Joe in a fantasy match-up.
It's a matter of styles. No fighter can walk into George in a crouch and survive...that's the only way Joe can fight effectively. In fight two Joe did everything he could to try to last 5 rounds thinking Foreman would tire....he moved, he layed on the ropes. The problem was Frazier took a huge battering in the process and since George was not being pressured to fight hard he was not getting overly tired. Those body shots in fight two nearly broke Frazier in two. I could see Joe outgutting Tyson....however my gut feeling is the fight would not go long enough to let that occur. Tyson is explosive early and Joe s a very slow starter. Similar with Dempsey ...jack was a very quick starter so he would be dropping bombs from the first bell. Once it got past 5 rounds it could be a war but I don't see it going that long.
Right we are debating if Dempsey or tyson can beat frazier. Pure Fantasy. Frazier pulverized every fighter he came across until foreman, and that includes Ali who fought like Hell. Dempsey got beat by guys like fireman jimm flynn by a flash ko, and was flash ko'ed by several small or smaller guys several times. Mike Tyson stuggled with guys the size of frazier like his closest fight in his prime not the tucker one but the other one. Tyson always had trouble with small heavyweights because small heavyweights would force him to in fight, and he needed space to land those big shots. Tyson hits hard, but he would not beat frazier. We are talking about a guy who lost to foreman, who came back when tyson was champ as an old man to win the title, vs a guy who lost to buster douglas, lennox lewis and holyfield and had close figts with tony tucker and mike smith. Frankly, Its insulting. Could tyson drop Joe, sure, but Joe hits harder than Douglas and holyfield and he sure could take a beating. There is no reason to believe that Frazier would have been ko'ed by Tyson because Tyson is so different in style. In fact he'd be proned to lose to Frazier given his record of losing to small heavyweights and having close fights at his best with guys his size. Once you are 5'11 fighting someone 5'10, all that ducking under punches and coming back with that left hook is out the window. Tyson would be forced to change his style. Something tyson never did. Where foreman knocked out most regular opponents, frazier got up every time. When tyson got knocked down he didn't get up until the fight was near over. Further frazier isn't stick and move, Tyson style isn't working on someone who isn't just jabbing. Frazier whoops tyson
Please tell everyone who koed Dempsey aside from Flynn? Dempsey koed Flynn in the rematch a year later in one round. Lots of evidence that their initial bout was fixed. Issue is that Joe was a very slow starter and both Dempsey and Tyson were very fast starters. Both Tyson and Dempsey had the power to ko anyone very quickly. Fraziers heart, will to win, determination exceeds that of Tyson but I do not think he would get the chance to show it. Fraziers slow start dooms him with both Tyson and Dempsey.
A combination of being the best of their day, resume, and how they'd do H2H vs. the others on the list. 1. Ali 2. Holmes 3. Foreman 4. Holyfield 5. Louis 6. Marciano 7. Frazier 8. Tyson 9. Lewis 10. Bowe When the Klitschko boys retire they will be top 10.
Frazier simply wasn't as much of a slow starter as you make him to be, he would have no problem getting in the fight quickly if the situation would require it.
No, Jack was not ko'd by anyone other then the one time by Flynn. Where in the world did you come up with that stuff?
I agree he wasn't like a terrible slow starter but it did take him a round or two to get in full gear as in his first go with Jerry Quarry and Manual Ramos. In both of those bouts his opponents came out loaded for bear and caught Joe clearly several times on the button. Then you have the prime Tyson who Rooney felt had atom bombs in both hands and the first round speed to hit anyone with them. Dempsey also had first round full into it speed and could Joe's chin take Dempsey's right hand the way Quarry's kept landing on it? Joe was great, no question, but I see two early stoppages of him against those two.