Can I Reasonably Omit Marciano& Frazier From My Ten ?

35-1 or 42-1, depending on source.

 

The Dokes and Qawi fights were life and death for Holyfeild..And unranked substitute Bert Cooper, troubled a winning Holyfeild more than Frazier or marciano were whilst they successfully defended their titles as more dominant champions than Holyfeild was.

Do I think Evander was at his HW best against Dokes and Qawi? I think it is clear Evander had reached World championship level for those fights so they cannot therefore be measured or excused as learning fights. These were important key fights at world level.

One was a 15 rounder, the other a title eliminator. So they must qualify for scrutiny within greatness discussions.

That one of these fights was officially in a weight categorie that falls well within earlier historical heavyweight limits proves it should not be omitted from a historical debate like this. Can you even dispute this?

 

I'd pick Golovkin to stop Cockell

 

Would you risk money on it though? Lastarza and Cokell were justifiably highly rated contenders against Rocky.. Cooper and Dokes especially were certainly of less dependable stature against Holyfeild.

 

Would you pick Golovkin to beat Lloyd Marshall and Harry Mathews with as much certainty?

Don earned his place in the ratings. His loss to Turpin is often said to have been due to weight problems.

 

You might lose every penny if they made it into the top ten in the 1950s because it would not have been possible to develop into the way they did in the future. Functional artificial weight was not available. Excess weight slowed heavyweights down. Until 1980 the vast majority of heavyweight champions met the US army weight requirements for their height. Now the vast majority dont.

 

Yes, but the same alleged weight problems (glandular disorders) were the reason he was in the heavyweight division at all.
In other words, he was no heavyweight at all, he wasn't carry the extra weight because he wanted to, he was carrying it because his body was clinically messed up.

Lloyd Marshall was way way past his prime when he fought C0ckkell, btw.
He was losing to various nobodies before he lost to C0ckell.

 

I doubt they even test his samples.

 

I agree.

Douglas doesn't make the top 5 because of many other factors.
Ali was better than Tyson, imo, for a start.
But it's Douglas's losses to ordinary fighters and shortage of second-tier wins and championship defences that put him below Frazier.
Frazier has SOME decent "second tier" wins, of course, and only lost to Ali and Foreman.

 

This is all true but Don still earned his shot and his ranking despite this. Bert Cooper was a substitute by comparison and Holmes and Foreman were grandparents by the time Evander fought them.

 

You're correct, but maybe the fact that C0ckell's high ranking was 'legitimate' just shows how weak the division was at that moment?

 

It's certainly a point worth making, however in all of history even in strong divisions career timing can allow not necessarily the strongest contenders legitimately making it into a fight with the champion. Jimmy Braddock being a case in point. Richard Dunn and Evangelista made it to the title in the 1970s.