Nat Fleisher's Top 10 Heavyweights

I question his standing as an ATG heavyweight .I don't believe he was ,neither he or Walcott. They were not judged so in their life times either by contemporary writers or their peers such as Joe Louis who stated categorically he would have ko'd Charles in about 6 rounds if he had been prime.Neither of them appear on the list of any credible writer as an ATG at heavyweight.


Concerning myself .
I don't care for your remarks, or their intervention in a petty and personal dispute.
Now I'll make this easy for all concerned because I haven't been getting much out of this forum for sometime and my contributions, as has been remarked on, are obviously superfluous to it.
Perhaps you'll have more fruitful exchanges with the newer posters?

I'm Gone Adios :hi:

 

Fleischer's list is 100% accurate. It's a list of his opinions and no one knew more about what Fleischer thought than Fleischer did.

 

Because one guy disagreed with one of your posts and Magoo jumped in and called you temperamental? I hope you'll reconsider.

 

McVey is one of the very few on here that knows boxing history. Huge hit if indeed he has left the forum.

 

Don't beg anyone to come back.
That'll cause more people to leave hoping to be asked back.

 

Nobody Told McVey to leave and from what I can see nobody directly insulted him. He was in a discussion that turned into an argument and got a bit heated.. So what? We've all done it here a thousand times and he's no exception. I probably should have kept my two cents to myself, but then again its a public forum and people are free to interject their opinions where they choose. Let's face it, Ed wasn't the one who called HIM names..

 

Charley Rose, an oldtime fight manager and contemporary of Nat Fleischer, posted his all-time top ten list in 1968. His list was very similar to Fleischer's, with differences being his listing of Langford as the #1 heavy, and the inclusion of Max Baer in the top ten.

A short time ago, someone posted Gilbert Odd's all-time heavyweight ranking, which was quite different than the Fleischer or Rose rankings. Seems Odd stressed the significance of a boxer's career over H2H.

Fleischer, Rose, Odd - agree or disagree with them, they were men who were around boxing for many years and saw most of the people they ranked. As such, I am very interested in anything they had to say. How I wish I could have been with Bummy Davis when he had those chats with Nat Fleischer!

 

True. The most controversial selection to me is Joe Louis. He should be higher. Nat never said in print as far as I know, but Louis didn't fight in a talent loaded era or beat anyone high on his list.

The other possibility is the old timers pre-Louis were better than we think with much of their best stuff NOT on film today.

I think its a mix of both, but I'd move Louis over Fitz and Corbett for sure who are way up there on the list.

I've seen many including Nat say Fitz was a deadly accurate power hitter. The best knockout artists of all time capable of ending it the blink of an eye with one single shot to the head or body, and some of his encounters produced tragic ring death. 3 to be exact.

 

I have about 60 archived lists from historians, fighters, managers, and modern day pundits. Send me a PM, and I can share most of them.

I find Odd's rankings to be rather poor.

 

Two predictions.

1 ) Happy trails. At times, you could be a good poster. I hope you enjoy the rest of your years and forget any back and forth stuff here.

2 ) You'll be back either as McVey or with a new poster name.

My guess is #2 is most likely, but if it's choice #1 take what I said to heart. I even sent you a recent PM message that was not acknowledged.

PEACE.

 

Could you share them?

Sounds pretty interesting.

 

Yes, but it feels like such a waste of experience when you read some of the more inane and off-the-wall things that guys like Fleischer write. Aside from some colorful anecdotes, what good is that wealth of experience if you're beholden to unreasonable biases and your own fairy tales?

 

It would be different if Fleischer was alone in his opinion of Johnson but he was not. The inane thing is people like you who did not even see Ali live trying to tell others a fighter everyone thought was an ATG was not......110 years after the fact.

 

I hear what you're saying. But consider that every day we hear and read opinions of others. Some of these opinions can be very delusional and even scary, as those of us who have worked in business management and academia can attest. By ****yzing and processing we separate the valid from the invalid, and the fact from opinion, drawing our conclusions and hopefully keeping our BS detectors in good working order.