Rate these guys in terms of greatness and h2h

Greatness:
(Tier 1)
Charles
Fitzsimmons
Langford

(Tier 2)
Moore
Tunney
Spinks
Jones Jnr

(Tier 3)
Foster
Bivins
Patterson

 

Greatness:

Sam Langford
Ezzard Charles
Bob Fitzsimmons
Archie Moore
Gene Tunney
Michael Spinks
Jimmy Bivins
Roy Jones Jr
Floyd Patterson
Bob Foster

 

P4P greatness-wise, I'd say it looks like this:

Langford
Charles
Fitz
Moore
Tunney
Spinks
Jones Jr.
Bivins
Patterson
Foster

H2H is completely different. I tend to heavily base my opinions on styles.

I think Patterson and Fitz are the worst H2H here. Both lose to all of the above at 175, but that's no slight. Neither were prime during their stays at 175. Langford is similar, but he was prime and I can see him beating all of them if he turns up. But I can also see him losing all of them. He's a wildcard.

I find Tunney overrated H2H. His best wins are all past prime and he doesn't look as good as his contemporary, Loughran. I think he's a level below Foster, Moore, Spinks and Charles, H2H-wise. He's more on par with Bivins and the BMR. I think Bivins and Jones would beat him.

Ant pick involving Jones, at light-heavy, basically hinges on him not getting clipped. I think he gets KTFO'd by Spinks, Moore, Foster and Charles. Maybe Bivins gets to him too, but I kinda doubt that.

Moore vs Spinks is one of my favourite match-ups, but Spinks had wayyyyy too much trouble with Eddie Davis' cross arm guard and Moore-esque counter punching. That's not good, I pick Moore to win on points. Foster gets KOd by both, too chinny for my liking.

And obviously that leaves Mr. E Charles, and I think we all know my stance on him.

 

To be honest, I don't think Foster beats any of them. He's chinny and a bit too one dimensional for my taste to bet on him against such a well-rounded fighters as Patterson, Fitz or Langford.

 

One dimensional?

 

Yes, in a way that he couldn't deal with physical disadvantages. He was usually much bigger man in the ring (not in terms of weight but height and reach) but when fighters could overcome that or have their own advantages, he struggled.

I'm also not Foster fan because he has very shallow resume for someone ranked that highly and he translated to the HW division worse than any other great LHW.

 

Greatness:
Langford
Charles
Moore
Tunney
Bivins
Spinks
Jones Jr
Fitzsimmons
Foster
Patterson

H2h:
Foster
Charles
Moore
Spinks
Jones Jr
Tunney
Langford
Bivins
Fitzsimmons
Patterson

 

In what fights did Foster show this chinny trait at 175?

 

I don't think you can compare them at heavyweight. Foster is also the lankiest LHW great ever, and one with extremely skinny legs and a style that wouldn't work moving up in weight anyway, let alone from LHW to HW. Foster's legs didn't give him a foundation to move up in weight well.

I don't think that makes him one dimensional, though. And realistically, how many great LHWs are actually as tall/long as him? Just Spinks by my estimation. Yeah, can't see Foster being one-dimensional at all. He has a great jab, good boxing skills and was an elite pressure fighter who opened people up for his hellacious power. He's awful for most guys too, fighters who come to him or try and out-box him are sitting ducks. He's like the Tommy Hearns of LHW.

 

No, I'm just obsessed. And I ended up just doing the list P4P.

 

He'd still be where he is on the P4P list, and I prefer to keep them all the same size for the H2H stuff. Which made LHW the best place to compare them.

Heavyweight Patterson beats them all except HW Charles, and even that's 50/50.

 

Fair enough, I may underestimate him a bit usually. He was a great fighter of course, but I don't think he's as great (or as good) as some people believe. Definitely a nightmare to face, but far from unbeatable.