Who were the top 5 heavyweights of the 90`s?

Norton and Schmeling have their lowlights as well.

 

It is a good question. One that I wish I had a more concrete answer to but that's my best guess. Ali and Louis are basically unanimously seen as top 2.

 

Norton and Schmeling couldn't pull off their win again either. I'm not saying that McCall should be seen as great as those two but I am saying that it's weird how his win just gets glossed over.

 

Well it's a bit different most people see the McCall loss as a bit of fluke, where as Norton proved against Ali it wasn't a fluke as he run him very close in 3 fights, and also run another ATG in Holmes in another very close fight. McCall cried and gave up vs Lewis in the rematch, and outside of the Lewis win there wasn't that many other stand out performances. I don't think beating a 45 year old Larry Holmes by a single point on two of the judges scorecards, or beating a 6-0 Maskaev is anything to shout about, McCall also lost near enough every single round to Frank Bruno.

 

Or that Foreman is being tossed around at 5th best of the 90s for a behind on the cards win against a top 40 heavyweight all time and no other wins a against top ten fighters or any future/former champions.

 

Executing a game plan devised by Manny Steward isn't luck. And beating Seldon, Damiani, Maskaev, and Holmes is as good of a supporting cast or better than anyone in the 90s who thinks they deserve to be at 5.

And BTW 6-0 Maskaev had already beaten Miroshnichenko.

 

Foreman was ranked in the top 10 for 6 years in the 90s and won the lineal championship, compared to McCall who was only ranked in the top 10 for 2 years in the 90s.

 

The Damiani hype ended when Mercer splattered his nose and made him quit, Masakev was a 6-0 novice, Seldon was nothing special and got blown away by Bowe in a single round after McCall fight. I'll give you the Holmes fight but again Holmes was 45 years old, and it was a terrible performance by McCall in which he only won by a single point on two of the judges scorecards.

I get the point your trying to make but i think some of these wins would've looked better, had McCall beat Seldon when he won a version of the title. Even though i don't think Seldon was that good anyway and was very fortunate be in that position. Or if McCall had beaten a 92 version of Holmes, or if he would of beaten a more experienced version of Maskaev.

 

The wins matter more than the rankings.

 

You can't be a novice after stopping Miroschnichenko.

Seldon beat Tucker, the man Foreman openly ducked and dropped a belt to avoid.

Holmes could still fight.

Damiani was fat, like I said, but had never even been down on the cards heading into the McCall fight.

This is compared to two guys with worse best wins and limited supporting casts.

 

Like i said you bring up a decent points but i'm not sure i agree with all of it, but wins over Lewis and Holmes are a good case TBH. Wasn't Holmes ranked in the top 10 aswell in 1994 ? i do agree though that McCall does a get bit underrated, he even had a solid little run in 2000s beating Akinwande, Oquendo, Samil Sam, etc.

 

Holmes finished at 7 in 94.

 

My opinion (looking at the whole decade): Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis, Riddick Bowe, Mike Tyson, George Foreman.

 

The 1999 Vitali h2h could be top 5