This thread is a challenge. Pick something you believe about boxing that's an extreme minority opinion. And no, I'm not talking about the heated arguments like "Who won, Leonard or Hagler?" that are 50/50. I'm talking genuinely weird opinions. Carnera was more skilled than Bowe. Louis was a poor boxer. Ezzard Charles wasn't that good. Corbett beats Tyson Fury. Whatever it is, post your odd opinion in this thread. And give us the reasons you believe it. And if you're really, really brave...make a thread about it. Gauntlet thrown. Have fun.
I think Ezzard Charles and Holyfield have a similar HW record. While Holyfield gets overrated I feel Charles is severely underrated at HW. I have them both in the 14-18 area all time. Both fought way to long both always aimed for the best and were always active. Both were in between legends.
I’ve already done this with a stone face and sarcastically. Results the same it turns into a bit of a fruity circle jerk if you make it about a 70s HW.
I don't believe very much firmly enough to have revisionist positions. I mean, I already posted repeatedly on a thread where I argued that Bonecrusher has a chance to tire Foreman out with clinching. It's not as extreme as favoring him, but it's definitely a minority position. I've also stated that most of the ATG fantasy fights from wildly different eras would probably end in one-sided slaughters. And it would likely take the fans by surprise. Too many variables change when multiple generations have passed. What are the odds that boxing in Schmeling's era was just as good, or bad, as boxing in Fury's? Or Ali's compared to Johnson's? In general, my confidence in our ability to pick fantasy winners, "head to head" lists, and the like is very low. I think the 70s from 1974 onward were mediocre. I think people who claim that 30s, 40s, and 50s fighters look uncoordinated and slow seem to have a point. (They may still have been more skilled fighters, though.) I suspect most or all of the top boxers from the 90s onward secretly use(d) PEDs. Ali will be knocked off his head-to-head #1 spot within a generation. People will eventually rank the likes of Lewis, Fury, and the Klitschkos over him. (Correct or not.) Will any of those do, or shall I dig deeper into my bag of weirdness?
…you *******. Lol. There’s a few there but thank you brave soul for venturing forward. I don’t think any modern fighter at HW ever will come to within half the wins they need to surpass Ali and Louis at one and two…they just don’t fight each other like they should so men like Fury will always be a mystery to as what they could have been capable of. How can you rank a guy who beat three good contenders with men whom beat 30 plus? Impossible but I’m sure some today would like too. Men weren’t slower in the 30, 40, 50s. Cameras sucked. It’s amazing most men find the HW boxing started with Liston…well isn’t that just coincidental with color tv. It’s not just a coincidence. Although I tend to think come late 1930s because of Louis boxers started to all have similar things in common. All developed proper jabs and better combos because of Louis success. He certainly wasn’t slow either.., I agree with you on the 70s but damn from 65-75 was the real golden era.
I think Fa beat Parker by a huge margin. I don't even think there's an argument for Parker winning, honestly.
I have not revised these opinions since day 1 but people assign the revisionist tag to them. 1) John Ruiz reinvented the heavyweight division with classic old school technique. 2) An overweight past it Julio C Chavez rose to the occasion to hold a prime Pernell Whitaker to a draw in Whitaker's prime division. 3) Julio Cesar Vasquez was the greatest light middle ever.
You sir, are incisive. From my recent list for Rummy's thread: 11. Jack Dempsey 12. Jack Johnson 13. Evander Holyfield 14. Ezzard Charles 15. Harry Wills
I have had Juan Francisco Estrada as number 1 pound-for-pound for a long time now. I think Pernell beat Tito; hit him more than he was hit himself. Holyfield never won against Bowe, and is not a good foundational argument for smaller heavyweights overcoming larger heavyweights. Prime Tyson beats Holyfield. I favor Ali, but to say that Tyson wouldn't stand a chance, like I've seen others claim, is a colossal insult to Tyson's prowess.
