[Deleted by user.]

Let’s hear yours first lol

 

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 think Archie Moore beats Evander Holyfield. Clearly. I say that totally stone faced too.

 

Lol I’ve stated the same

 

I’m standing by my Ezzard Charles opinion.

 

…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're a bigger fool then me then and your opinion should be as rare as a Tasmanian Tiger.

 

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.

 

I rate current fighters on resume (I don't actually believe Estrada is the best around), but my all-time rankings are my own estimations of each boxer's capabilities head-to-head.

 

Estrada is arguably undefeated against Chocolatito, Cuadras and Sor Rungvisai. I think he beat the latter two in each of the four meetings. I've never been able to produce a score for either one of the encounters against Gonzalez, but I came away with the impression that he won those as well.

Usyk is actually undefeated and has an amazing resume in his own right, but that isn't enough to depose Estrada in my view.

Before last Saturday, I had Canelo in the third spot. I haven't decided if the loss to Bivol slides him down a rung or two.
Alvarez has a spotty record south of super middleweight, but his performances against Golovkin and Jacobs, no matter how I personally scored them, did a lot to redeem him in my eyes. Securing undisputed status, albeit in a less talented division, is also impressive. Unlike many, I give him massive respect for beating Kovalev. And from the Saunders fight, he faced opponents who had his stylistic number back-to-back-to-back.