Their ranking arent lifetime achievement awards. Secondly if your going to cherry pick opponents from each resume at least disguise it by listing the same number of fights for each guy
Hughie is no better than Malik Scott, if that, and Ustinov never got anything done. That’s all irrelevant though because Pulev just got his ass beat by Joshua and didn’t resemble top ten material.
I think you're deluded. More than Fury or AJ would "have a chance". Every 70s era fighter you listed - in their primes - would be full CW to small HW today. Size matters, that's why they have weight divisions Only older, second career Foreman has the size of top, modern HWs. From that era I think Foreman would be the most competitive for various reasons. Foreman had his weaknesses too. For one he didn't have the greatest engine when he was young and barely 220#. The older, heavier Foreman learned how to pace himself and did well for a fighter late 30s to late 40s. He beat Moorer for a belt, but lost to Morrison and Briggs (his last bout). I can see a well trained 30 y/o Foreman crack today's top 10, maybe top 5. But he wouldn't dominate. I'd pick Fury and AJ to win over Foreman. Now let's take a HW near the bottom of today's top 10 - Parker. You think Parker wouldn't even be competitive with that list? I think he beats most everyone on that golden 70s list - and would give the rest hell, win/lose/draw. Parker has a very good chin, moves well, and is fast for a 240+# HW. He's used to fighting big, modern HWs like AJ, Whyte, Ruiz. Not 198-210# HWs like Quarry, Frazier, Shavers, Chuvalo. Like many here, you're suffering from nostalgia bias, or other not as nice ones.
Firstly, Pulev beat Hughie and Chiosra more recently than Ortiz beat Jennings. Secondly no one beyond Jennings and Hammer on Ortiz or Rivas resume was Dimitrenko and Ustinov level worthy to mention.
Malik scott has always been useless and overrated. Scott claim to fame is taking a dive against Wilder and beating a past it overrated 44 year Tony Thompson. Hell even beating a overrated past it 36 year old Samuel Peter is better than that (which Pulev did ).
He beat a top ten fighter who was undefeated. You can go on boxrec and try to figure out who that was.
Jennings best wins Perez - lost a SD to Jennings wrongly and controversially had a point taken away which would resulted in a draw on the judges card hwo thebref not made the wrong call. I had perez edging the fight myself. Perez also controversially was very lucky to get draw against Takam. Chisora KOed Takam. Chisora also KOed Malik scott who you seemed to rate highly yet not rate Chisora? After Perez Jennings best wins are between Spzilka (who Chisora delt with much more easily), Dimitrenko (who dropped Jennings) and Fedosov.
Ring ratings and official judges, bro. If you want to bring the ghost of Spzilka into this or a faded Takam, it just shows your education level.
Glazkov? Again one of the poorest and most questionable HWs to be included in the Ring Magazine top 10 (which says a lot). Neither prime Glazkov or Thomspon would stand a chance against any current top 20 fighter.