On or below 175lbs and you are a light heavyweight. Carpentier and Ketchel were in heavyweight fights but they were not heavyweights! Both were inside the lightheavyweight limit! Moore was 188lbs for Marciano ,since he was over the light heavyweight limit and there was no cruiserweight division at that time, he was a heavyweight ! It isn't that hard to understand surely? Tunney and Carpentier's weights for their fight below. Taken from Box rec. "1924-07-24 : Gene Tunney 173ΒΌ lbs beat Georges Carpentier 173 lbs by TKO at 0:14 in round 15 of 15". Jones scaled 198lbs for Ruiz, so a cruiser weight by todays weight strictures, fighting a heavyweight. Look in the mirror and quietly say to yourself ,"actually I was wrong,", you'll feel better for it.
Further to this Denver Ed Martin was the coloured champion, he challenged all the leading white heavies,in1900 he challenged Tom Sharkey who replied in print." I never barred nobody outside of a n*gg*r.I will fight no n*gg*r. I did not get my reputation fighting n*gg*rs and will not fight a n*gg*r.Outside of n*gg*rs ,I will fight any man living" In 1901 Jeffries then champion was asked to fight Martin the coloured champion.His manager Delaney interjected," no we won't fight a Negro for the championship.Suppose we were to fight Martin for the championship and be defeated, which does not seem possible. America would have to bow to a Negro champion. " National Police Gazette Dec 7th 1901. Speaking about Martin the Gazette said".He is young,almost if not quite as clever as Ruhlin,can punch harder is ambitious and thoroughly game.As I said several weeks ago,of all the men now looming up on the pugilistic horizon,not one has better qualifications for usurping the title than he." Jeffries was quoted in the San Francisco Examiner Dec 28, 1901 as saying, " I will ignore Martin's challenges,while I do not draw the color line strictly,when it comes to championship bouts,the Heavyweight championship was a White's only position,and therefore only whites could challenge for the title". Pretty much a "Catch 22 "situation for leading black contenders then. Martin managed to get a promoter willing to put up a big guarantee for Jeffries to defend against him but Jeffries again ignored the challenge,he would fight blacks when his title was not at risk ,but would not take a chance of being defeated by one in a title defence. He subsequently added Sam McVey and Jack Johnson to the list of black challengers that he refused to defend against . Since you have Jim Jeffries at number 9 in your All Time list and he refused to fight his top 3 leading black challengers and given your views on the black champions who were denied a title shot, I find his prominent position there somewhat contradictory.I'm sure you have valid reasons for your placings and I would be interested in reading them.
"Pretty much a 'Catch 22' situation for leading black contenders then.' I think we are in essential agreement.
I do think Wills has a stronger case than the others. Martin was coming on strong, but went down to Johnson, Armstrong, and McVea. He simply didn't sustain himself as a contender. Godfrey lost in 1926 to Sharkey, in 1928 to Risko, in 1930 to Carnera (on a foul & there were several other of these type of losses), in 1931 to Jack Gross, and badly in 1932 to Walter Cobb. I think he was a guy who liked to train at the dining table eating second & third helpings of chocolate cake deserts. He seems to have been a lot heavier than he should have been more often than not, and faded fast if he didn't score an early KO. Larry Gains--a very good fighter. The win over Schmeling was when Max was not yet 20 and inexperienced. He followed the win over Carnera with losses to Neusel, McCorkindale, Harvey, and Peterson. He was contender level, not championship level. Langford, McVea, and Jeannette--They differ from Wills in that they did fight Johnson for the colored championship and lost. Johnson should have given them shots in the 1913-1914 period, but by this point this trio was aging also. However, thinking about it, I'm going to edit Langford into my list replacing Bowe. I am just a wimpy change-my-mind type. Note that McVea never lost to a white fighter, and Jeannette only to Sandy Ferguson, whom he stopped in his very next fight. Most of Langford's defeats were to black fighters also. There simply were two parallel divisions going on during the color line era. Wills--He established himself during the late teens as the best black fighter, but there was no way that Willard would get in the ring with him. Nor did Dempsey. Hard to put down his record versus white opponents when he didn't lose to any of them until 1926 when he was 37, and easily beat the top men (Fulton, Firpo, Weinert) who did get in the ring with him. It might not be entirely Dempsey's fault that a fight didn't come off, but for me the fairest approach is to rate them even historically.
Thanks for taking the time to get back to me,I wasn't criticizing just interested. I'd agree that Wills has the strongest case out of the others, he was the clear number contender for some time. Willard wouldnt touch him with barge pole . Godfrey I think is very hard to assess. There is perhaps a case for calling all heavyweight champions before Burns just White champions since none of them defended against Jackson. Certainly Sullivan, who was past his best and Corbet who made tons of excuses not to cross swords with him again are guilty as charged Fitz is a bit more complicated. Hart said he would never fight another black man after his controversial win over Johnson. Burns was willing to fight McVey but one of them got injured, I forget which at the moment. Perhaps in the end we have to factor in which black heavies were a round and whether they were serious threats to the White champions, the problem is looking at their records we see so many white contenders missing which of course is not their fault, Catch 22!
This was the written entry for the Klitschkos: #16 Wladimir Klitschko: "We can't be too American-centric. Boxing is a world sport. The Klitschko's are two big, well conditioned guys fighting in an era when the best big guys are going into sports other than boxing. Give Wladimir credit for staying the course but he has never seemed to have his heart in it." #17 Vitali Klitschko: "Vitali didn't have the resume or talent of his brother. But if they fought, I'd pick Vitali. And his role as a serious player in Ukrainian politics adds to his stature." Looks like an ignorant hit piece more than anything.
I'd agree with the underlined, as you know historical importance was factored in. Wlad has actually gone up to my no 10 spot after his gutsy challenge of Joshua,Ill get hate for this, [no change there,] he now displaces Marciano who drops down to 11.
In that fight Wlad at 41 , showed me qualities I was not sure he possessed. That's why he takes the ten spot for me.Just my opinion.The idea that Marciano merits a 3 spot is ludicrous to me.
What qualities if you don't mind me asking? I thought he preformed good as well btw and have a new found respect for the man , but there was nothing there on display to warrant knocking another ATG off his spot and taking his place.
Questionable. He said himself he held back to focus on winning the fight on the cards. . A real ATG would have capitalised on the opportunity and went in for the kill when he had his man hurt. It was no certainty he was was even going to win a decision.