ATG HW: No.1 Ali ; No.2 Louis ; No.3 Usyk ; Can it be like this?

It depends on how you are evaluating.

If you are doing a H2H comparison, you could argue Usyk into more or less any spot you want. The man is a ****ing wizard in the ring, and it is obvious that he trains like a spartan. He is 'small' for today but he'd have been decent sized or big in most other eras.

On 'greatness' - ie, dominance, length of reign, amount of styles faced, records of opponents before and after etc ... it is kind of hard to place him in the top 10 even. I'd have him in the lower top 10 at HW. He just hasn't been around for long enough for people to talk about stuff like "the Usyk Era" for instance.

 

I like this take - and would add that overall list rankings really can be swayed heavily by personal preference:-

+ How much does H2H matter? Some folks get massive cognitive dissonance by ranking someone above a fighter they are sure they would beat H2H 100% of the time
+ How much does resume matter? Some folks really value scalps against other ATG, champs or HOF fighters, and others - will even value a loss against an ATG better than not having the names as it 'validates' the resume more and proves 'best fighting best'; some fighters can have padded resumes beating cans, and if they don't fight the ATG/Champs/HOF level their resume is weaker as a result regadless of eye-test
+ How much do special 'achievements' matter? Champ, undisputed, defences, undefeated etc etc
+ How much does context matter in all the above?

That's why it's damn hard to get a concencus across he board!

 

Great post. And even with best fighting best we have problems.

For instance, is beating an old champion 'worth' a lot? How old is OLD? What if the champion is on a nice winning streak but he is old? Marciano liquidizing Joe Louis falls into this category.

Some fighters just get better as they age, but eventually they seem to 'grow old' overnight. My view on this is that serious fighters apply themselves to their craft through their careers and simply become more skilful. They even become stronger as they age. However, they also become slower and (often) more chinny. One day they run into a young lion with oodles of speed and stamina and they find their timing simply can't keep up with the younger man. We've all seen this.

One of the reasons I rate Usyk so highly is because he is the reverse: an old fighter using speed and skill to batter his younger challengers. This is extremely rare, and it shows how hard he has worked at his craft. Respect.

 

Yeh exactly what are the criteria being used here? Head to head I wouldn't put Louis above Usyk, no way. If it's length and dominance of reign then it's hard to beat Holmes or Wladimir Klit.

So @ikrasevic answer your own question and let us know what the criteria are.

 

Larry Holmes is #3

 

I certainly can't see him above Larry Holmes, Wladimir Klitschko, Lennox Lewis, Joe Frazier, or even George Foreman.
You might be able to persuade me he is there at #8
Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and Rocky Marciano would probably be ahead of him on my list too.

 

H2H rankings are totally subjective; you could make Tye Fields number one if you wanted to.

ATG rankings must include criteria such as resume (opponents) and historical significance (title defenses, legacy outside of ring), and overall record.

Usyks resume must fall short here. He'll never fight enough times because of his long amateur career to compare favorably with the acknowledged greats. He has a very high grade with respect to historical significance: undisputed at both CW and HW, symbol of a nation at war.

I don't have a list but somewhere 15th and below is where he belongs IMO. Certainly not #3.

 

You can make an argument for it certainly his resume is one of the best among HWs especially accounting for the fact he beat men who are all bigger then him which not many HWs can say they did.

 

Probably not enough heavyweight fights for 3rd.

 

Right at the top, with Lewis thrown in, it’s a toss up. Put them where you want.

I have Ali at 1 but Usyk is right up there with him imo

 

Usyk would never have lost to Muhammad Ali (or Clay) or Louis, no way. Crazy to think he wouldn't have totally schooled them and most likely knocked them both out especially given the number of rounds.

 

Usyk is great but he only beat 5 heavyweights and only 3 of them was world Champions.

Usyk can not compete (so far) with his resume, it’s too thin at heavyweight.