Good comments. I cant factor in anybody pre Joe Louis era, i struggle to relate to it. Even anything pre 1960's is hard , because you didnt 'live it'. I think you best evaluate the eras you 'lived'. As for Wlad, his era turned my interest off. Its the emergence of Wilder/Fury/Joshua etc that switched it back on.
Fitz was coming out of a 2 years retirement both times he fought Jeffries. Both major promoters Sunny Jim Coffroth and Barney Curley stated that two blacks fighting won't draw flies ,which is of course why the White Hope crusade got off the ground in the first place,if either promoter thought they could make money promoting an all black heavyweight title fight they would have done so ,business is business.
Its not as insane as having Foreman as high as many people seem too. Even some respected posters seem blinded by him. Im giving up trying to introduce some sanity regarding Foreman. This is a man who at his peak was spanked by Jimmy Young and had a drunken brawl with Ron Lyle and at the other end of the spectrum during a time where he's given more credit he was schooled by Tommy Morrison. Yet some have him as high as 4. Now that IS crazy.
I would like to hear your reasoning for ranking Wilder above Foreman at this moment in time as opposed to what Wider may or may not achieve further down the line. Deontay Wilder has just ko'd Gerald Washington to reach 38-0 George Foreman destroyed the unbeaten Joe Frazier to reach the same milestone. I know which name i would prefer on my win resume. When you look at that in black and white it kinda makes your current ranking of Wilder @ 10 somewhat farfetched.
I agree with you in large parts, but it's dependent largely on what you emphasize when you rank. Those who rank Foreman highly probably emphasize achievements, and destroying undefeated Frazier and winning the undisputed HW back 20 years after you lost it are two absolute monster achievements. For me the emphasis is what a fighter did during his best years, and there George doesn't have much of substance besides Frazier and Norton, so he probably doesn't make my top 10.
Ali and Louis at the top. Then probably Holmes. Then probably Lewis and Wlad. And perhaps Johnson should round off the top 6. Holy would be next, or on the same tier perhaps. Perhaps Marciano there as well. Then Frazier and Tyson. After that Jeffries, Dempsey and Liston perhaps. Probably Foreman somewhere there as well. And Charles have a shout as has Vitaly. Tricky business this. But something like Ali, Louis - Holmes - Lewis, Wlad, Johnson, Holy, Marciano - Frazier, Tyson.
Ali Louis Holmes I'll have to think about numbers 4-10. I know who I would feature in there but I've got to sort the order of sequence out.
It's not just posters you'll have to re-educate though. It's Emmanuel Steward, Kevin Rooney, Cus D'Amato, etc. Some of those guys are dead, so it'll be extra difficult, but you get the point.
1. Joe Louis 2. Muhammad Ali 3. Larry Holmes/Lennox Lewis 4. Lennox Lewis/Larry Holmes 5. Wladimir Klitschko 6. Mike Tyson 7. Evander Holyfield 8. Rocky Marciano 9. George Foreman 10. Joe Frazier
Anyone and I mean ANYONE who ranks Wilder who has not attained the true worlds hwt championship and has not even proved himself in the ring has no idea what they are talking about.
Yeah, Wilder is a disaster. He's beaten ONE ranked fighter (TBRB or Ring). One. That's incredible avoidance. Whatever the reason, there's no excuse - he's fought six "world" title fights, not to mention established himself as a contender and fought one ranked contender, #6 of the top of my head, and he was diagnosed with a mad illness after the fight.
Only in the boxing world of 2017 could a fighter fight six world title fights and still not attain the worlds hwt championship.
Well, I wouldn't exactly question his sanity on account of his underrating Big George by a couple of spots !
I believe the great Marciano v Wilder thread settled the issue for good when it proved decisively that Wilder is to be ranked above Marciano. Can we please move on now?
