These fellas were not top 100 all-time Hwts.

Very interesting looking forward to the list. Many of the fighters selected usually make these lists through force of habit but generally if you look deeper the merit is lacking. I will investigate some later but I def think Braddock and Williams are iffy at best. Bugner I could see making the list on back end he did defeat a few contenders, had a long career and went the distance with the divisions best more than once.

 

for what it's worth Matt from a British stand, you couldn't list Bruno above Farr or Wood**** or Cooper or Bugner, if indeed you have - H2H they were tougher and/or better than the much loved Big Bear Bruno.

 

Bruno would stop Wood**** without much trouble his record is very thin.A suspicious win over an in and out Oma, a dsq win over a ring worn Savold , a stoppage win over lhy 181lbs Lesnevich who had scaled 175lbs 4 months earlier in beating Mills and would weigh inside 175, 5 months later.

Baksi at 213 proved much too powerful and hard hitting for Wood****, demolishing him comfortably.Tami Mauriello, a blown up lhv stopped Wood**** in 5.

Bruno would wreck him.

Cooper would have his work cut out with Bruno too,he was kod by right hands from Ingo and Floyd,and Folley, if Bruno lands he is gone.

 

I'm not that knowledgeble on this topic compared to other posters, but perhaps it would be better to list 100 other heavyweights above those Bugner, Cleveland Williams, Braddock, and see who among those 100 those names should be bumped off for them to be included.

For example, if I would include Wiliiams, who would I remove from the top 100 list?

See my dilemma?

For example, I don't include Sonny Liston in my top 10, but he has an argument. If I put him, I might, for example, have to bump off Evander Holyfield to number 11.

 

Henry has a few good wins over Baker,Thompson,Bivins,Agramonte,Satterfield ,perhaps he is borderline marginal?

Ruhlin ? Extremely difficult one ,so inconsistant.
He has wins and a draw over a washed up Maher,a draw with Hart, a win over a past it Sharkey,a win over fringe contender O Donnell,2 wins over a 40 + Goddard,a draw with Jeffries when both were green,and 2 draws with Ferguson.
Perhaps his best result is a win over a 30 years old Choynski who had drawn his last 2 fights with Sharkey and Jeffries?

Valdes has wins over Dejohn x2,Summerlin,Holman,Jackson,a faded Charles, a faded ****ell,Agramonte,Carter,Bethea,Erskine,,Jackson ,Richardson, and McMurtry.I think he just scrapes in. I'll have another look later.

 

I would place Farr above them all for the UK followed by Bugner and then Wood****.

I think Bruce is too strong (physically) for Cooper and Bruce a genuine contender was leading both Savold and Mauriello before the stoppages. he was a very good basic boxer albeit one dimensional and had a punchers chance. he belonged in the Top 10 of a tough era and though Joe Louis would have picked him to pieces he did offer that strength and punch.

might be wrong but Id say all of these UK HWs beat big Frank.

 

The Savold fight only went into the 4th.
The Mauriello fight only went into the 5th and Tami had him down in that round so leading in both fights means nothing.

Wood**** lost to the best heavyweights he faced and none of them were great fighters.

Mauriello failed to survive one round aginst Joe Louis in his next fight.

Baksi was beaten in his next bout by the moderate Ollie Tandberg and , in his next bout,Savold was manhandled and kod by a faded Joe Louis who never scored another stoppage win after. Bruno would ko Wood**** who was dropped by men who lacked his power, size ,and strength.imo

 

I don't even know who would make the lower reaches of a top 100, so it wouldn't be fair to exclude any of those guys. I mean, i doubt whoever is #90 on the list being much better than those. The placings on these lists get a bit arbitrary at some point.

 

I think Frank Bruno has a case for squeaking in to the top 100 even if its just on the ass end of it. He did win a title over the man who sparked Lennox Lewis, beat a few other guys who were at least halfway decent and never lost to anyone who was less than world class.

 

I'll pass on Bruno and Bugner. Others know much more about them.

Williams--No. Very overrated. His best win is over the green Terrell, whom I would have some doubts about anyway.

Ruhlin--No. Drew with a neophyte Jeff, and has a big win over Sharkey. But overall not that impressive.

Buddy Baer--No. Other than a flash knockdown against Louis, never showed all that much.

Valdes--Possible. Has a big win over Charles, which stands out like a sore thumb in his resume. Otherwise he could be counted on to get past the second stringers (sorry but this includes the Euro and Brit heavies of his era) and lose very consistently to the best Americans-Moore (2), Baker (2), Johnson, Satterfield, Machen (2), Folley. He managed to stay high in the ratings from 1953 to 58 (except for 56), so pretty good longevity. His win over Charles was legit, but his handlers avoided a rematch, even with the winner to get Marciano. Still a lot of good wins, so marginal.

Bruce W--Not on this list, but talked about. No. Not even close. McVey hit the nail on the head. Lost to his better heavy opponents, and they weren't the best out there. The win over Savold was by DQ, and he was stopped in the rematch. I'll assume the Oma win was legit, but so what? Oma was stopped 17 times in his career. He was very erratic. Bruce W's best wins were over the lightheavy champs Lesnevich and Mills. Not impressive enough to get him anywhere close to a top 100.

Henry--No. Resume is overrated. Managed wins over Baker and Satterfield, but lost to Moore and Johnson and faded fast due to injury. Just not enough good wins to rate him high in my judgment.

Braddock--Possible. One of the poorest records of all champs. After a flat career, got it together to beat Lewis and Lasky to earn a shot at Baer, and then won. Depends on criteria. He might well lose to several on this list, but he beat the champ when he was the champ.

Layne--Yes. Okay, shoot me, but Layne is the only fellow on this list with wins over two champions, Charles and Walcott. The Walcott win was decisive and Walcott would take the championship the next year. The Charles fight was controversial, but off the reading I have done (including Nat Fleischer's Ring report) it was a very close fight which several seasoned observers (Dempsey, Hurley) saw for Layne, and Fleischer saw as even. He also has an impressive KO over Satterfield, and a number of good wins over Thompson, Brion, Kahut and others. Layne was thrown to the wolves and probably poorly managed, but his overall record, despite his rather quick fade, is still better than either Braddock or Valdes, and he has more big wins.

 

here is a good resource for you Matt (and others), you might find helpful for your work...

http://heavyweightaction.com/heavyweight greats 29-55.html

 

Interesting site.:good