Who would you consider the most overrated heavyweight of all time?

Depends on the circles. American boxing press was very critical of him.

 

Not even a little bit. Hyped to the moon. Still over-hyped today.. in some circles.

 

In no order
Wilder
Joshua
Fury
Baer
Willard
Johansson
Braddock

 

Do I really have to type out the name of the guy I believe is the most overrated HW champ?

 

Because he's judged uncritically, almost like a superhuman.
He has a fantastic resume, the best of all heavyweights, absolutely.

I agree that he's number 1 or 2, but...

1. In my opinion, the best, and really the only, heavyweights he's faced are Frazier 71, Holmes 80, and maybe Norton. He was the underdog in almost all of those fights.
2. His most important and best fight with Frazier was in 1971, and he lost, but that doesn't change the perception that he's Frazier's best. Seriously? The third fight is a coin toss. Neither of them won or lost.
3. He receives enormous credit for beating the favored kings KO Foreman and Liston, but all three of those fights were... strange!! Strange circumstances, and in my opinion, they're overhyped. I appreciate it, a great success, but still overrated. Especially historically.
4. I don't think any other boxer has had such luck with the judges. He should have had a 1-2 with Norton.
5. He gave the belt to an amateur.
6. His personality and self-promotion influenced how he was perceived.
7, 8, 9...
Ali is still the greatest

 

Jack Dempsey
Muhammad Ali
John L Sullivan

 

You dared !

 

It's not that he wasn't great. It's just his cult thinks he was some sort of Superman and Hercules wrapped in one.

 

If we take all emotion out of it

And I repeat, you dared ! LOL

 

That's the problem with talking to uncritical fans
Who says Liston and Foreman weren't great?? They WERE!! But not as good as they've been described. They were considered unbeatable when they fought Ali, but that wasn't the case. Liston was almost certainly past his prime. He was addicted!! He wasn't hungry!!
Check how many rounds he spent in the ring before Ali. He had injuries. He was old, he was burned out, but the fight was still more even than people describe.
Kinshasa was a nightmare for Foreman. Extreme conditions for his style. Why is Ali's win valued higher than Young's? With Young, Foreman was smarter...
Ali lost to Young.
Ali's first fight with Frazier is the most important; it's at the highest level, and both were closest to their primes. Ali could have won. 10 more fights because Frazier was aging faster, but in his prime, Joe was better, as he proved in the ring. And yet, many people would more easily dismiss Frazier from the top 10 than Ali from the top 1.

 

He still is.

You could match him with King Kong and some fanboy will pop up and give you the old “Rooney trained Tyson before King (Don) and Givens blasts out the 100ft tall primate in 1-2 rounds tops. Too fast, skilled snd powerful derp”

 

No.
Fanboys are a different breed, but Tyson is often ranked outside the top 10, which is irrational. Many find it controversial to place him in the top 5, which he shouldn't. Of course, Tyson is historically underrated, but he has the most fanboys, who in turn overrate him.

 

I'm probably gonna step on some toes here, but imo it's the whole 60's-70's "Golden Era".

A mix of guys that most likely would've fought at LHW today (like Henry Cooper and Doug Jones, two guys who gave Ali some of his toughest fights), and many undersized cruiserweights for the heavyweight division today.

You also hade very little diversity and few fighters from Europe, Africa, Asia or Oceania (and forget the Cubans and Soviet block Boxers.)

It was an entertaining era with very good fights for sure... But a lot of those guys probably would not qualify for the HW division today.