I did this a few years ago but there have been a few new members on the site since then. Most of the time my choices will reflect the number one heavyweight of each year but there will be the odd exception. The exercise is to reflect what top heavy did the most impressive work between January 1st-December 31st in each particular year e.g. in 1980 my choice is Mike Weaver over Larry Holmes. This is not to say that I saw Weaver better than Holmes in that year - especially in light of Larry beating Mike the previous year. More so that Mike's opponents in 1980 were better than Larry's. So here goes - 1970 Joe Frazier 1971 Joe Frazier 1972 Muhammad Ali 1973 George Foreman 1974 Muhammad Ali 1975 Muhammad Ali 1976 George Foreman 1977 Ken Norton 1978 Larry Holmes 1979 Larry Holmes 1980 Mike Weaver 1981 Larry Holmes 1982 Larry Holmes 1983 Larry Holmes 1984 Pinklon Thomas 1985 Michael Spinks 1986 Mike Tyson 1987 Mike Tyson 1988 Mike Tyson 1989 Mike Tyson 1990 Evander Holyfield 1991 Mike Tyson 1992 Riddick Bowe 1993 Evander Holyfield 1994 George Foreman 1995 Riddick Bowe 1996 Evander Holyfield 1997 Lennox Lewis 1998 Lennox Lewis 1999 Lennox Lewis What is everyone's thoughts? Come out punching.
I have to agree with all this. Can't argue, maybe with Weaver in 1980 but I see why you placed him at the top. And maybe Holyfield in 1997 after beating Tyson and Moorer over Lewis beating McCall by DQ, Akinwande by DQ and Golota by KO. That's a tough one but I lean towards Holyfield.
Really interesting, but I have to put Holyfield at number one in 91, Mike was already showing a difference in tactics (most of which didn't do him a whole lot of favors outside of having well contested matches against a guy who soon after got ko'd in 2 by Lennox Lewis). Weaver in 1980...definitely an interesting idea. I just can't see that. That might have been Holmes' peak year, his head to head best imo. I like most of your list!
I like his choice for 1991. It's what most people felt at the time too. 2 wins over the #2 contender over Holyfield beating Foreman and struggling with Cooper.
What he means is that he considers Weaver's victory over Tate and Coetzee as better than Holmes over Zanon, Jones, LeDoux and the corpse of Ali....not that Weaver would beat Holmes H2H. Tate was extremely highly rated and his claim has heaps of merit.
So in short @Stevie G is simply making a resume based list year by year and rating the top heavyweight off it. It's a truly fascinating idea. Reputation means nothing.
Interesting idea. I might slide McCall in place of Foreman in 94 for beating a young Lewis, but I can see how a win over Moorer could be considered more valuable at the time. Kind of a down year surprisingly.
Excellent list mate Always strange to see George Foreman top of the list in the mid 70 s and the mid 90 s. Like when is that gonna happen again?!!
I like this thread mate heres some different options to try and get a little debate going. 1976 = Ali had wins over Young and Norton although they were close and controversial, Foreman had wins over Lyle in a real struggle and beat a faded Frazier again. I would say this one is debatable considering Foreman had already lost to Ali previously and was coming off a lay off. Ali was also still the champion during this period where as Foreman didn't hold a belt. 1994 = McCall had wins over Lewis, Holmes, I think that's a better resume than Foreman's win over Moorer. 1997 = I'd still go for Holyfield wins over Tyson and Moorer are better overall.
Oh was it 1995 ? i stand corrected then but still McCall over Lewis is a pretty big win especially in the context of what Lewis went on to achieve.