Stonehands' (~Objective) Top 10 HW Champions.

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Stonehands89, Jan 27, 2009.


Page 5 of 7
  1. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,597
    27,270
    Feb 15, 2006
     
    janitor, Jan 29, 2009
    janitor, Jan 29, 2009
    #61
  2. prime

    prime BOX! Writing Champion Full Member

    2,564
    90
    Feb 27, 2006
    ali - 48: 10; 9; 9; 9; 10; 1
    louis - 47: 8; 10; 9; 10; 9; 1
    marciano - 45: 7; 10; 8; 10; 10
    foreman - 44: 9; 8; 10; 9; 8
    frazier - 44: 9; 9; 8; 9; 9
    johnson - 42: 8; 8; 8; 9; 8; 1
    dempsey - 41: 7; 9; 8; 9; 8
    holmes - 41: 7; 9; 8; 8; 9
    tyson - 39: 8; 9; 7; 10; 5
    lewis - 39: 8; 8; 8; 9; 6
     
    prime, Jan 29, 2009
    prime, Jan 29, 2009
    #62
  3. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    I have not done everyone but will do Sam and Harry .... But only if you do first.
     
    Stonehands89, Jan 29, 2009
    Stonehands89, Jan 29, 2009
    #63
  4. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    Dempsey is a 9 for Dominance? That is far too high. He came very close to getting beaten by Firpo, struggled against Gibbons, and lost to Tunney. Twice. He fought no black worthies. He was slothful in his willingness to defend the title.

    You have him at an 8 for longevity? Too high. Hollywood living sapped him. He was done at 31.

    Adversity is at an 8? Defend that.

    Frazier is at a 9 for dominance and an 8 for longevity? Those are far too high. Defend them.
     
    Stonehands89, Jan 29, 2009
    Stonehands89, Jan 29, 2009
    #64
  5. prime

    prime BOX! Writing Champion Full Member

    2,564
    90
    Feb 27, 2006
    My Dominance rating reflects how largely a champion loomed over his division; it does not factor in his manager's decisions or other politics outside the ring. As champion, Dempsey was head-and-shoulders above his peers. His prowess was compared by Carpentier to that of a jungle beast. The capable Gibbons was reduced to survival. Firpo was unequivocally kayoed in 2. How many clamored for a rematch? Tunney lay awake at night drenched in perspiration at the thought of having to face this most formidable champion. In contrast to champion Holmes, always perceived as beatable, Jack was a foregone conclusion as the greatest fighter of his time, while on top, and when looked backed on by future generations, and that includes Harry Wills.

    Nearly 70 fights for a heavyweight is not too shabby, longevitywise. And despite his prodigal son ways, the Mauler still had enough to beat a prime Jack Sharkey.

    Frazier's Dominance rating is also 9 because he decisively beat back all challengers, including Muhammad Ali. He was so dominant comparisons with Louis, Marciano and Liston were made.

    My ratings strongly factor in the fighter's abilities in the ring as much as possible, whether always actually shown in defenses, or sometimes in extrapolation, simply because I personally prefer to rank the champions head-to-head. Thus, two different reigns such as Dempsey's and Frazier's are classified as equals, for rating purposes.

    I am content with Frazier's 8 for Longevity, as for his style he proved he could climb the ranks, become champ, defend some 10 times, still defeat top-ranked challengers, and take the GOAT very close to life and death eleven years after winning a gold medal.

    I also notice that my ratings are sometimes a bit more generous than yours, but they seem pretty consistent. Tyson's Longevity gets only a 7 in my book.

    Speaking of Longevity, I am upgrading Holmes and his 20 defenses to 9, as I don't see why he should be in the same boat here with other guys at 8. This catapults him like in the Berbick video, this time over Dempsey, to 7th place.
     
    prime, Jan 29, 2009
    prime, Jan 29, 2009
    #65
  6. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,597
    27,270
    Feb 15, 2006
    Chicken!

    Langford

    E-10
    D-7
    L-10
    RG-9
    A-10
    *-3
    Total-I dont want to think about it


    Wills

    E-10
    D-8
    L-10
    RG-7
    A-9
    *-3
    Total-47
     
    janitor, Jan 29, 2009
    janitor, Jan 29, 2009
    #66
  7. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    I suppose the 3 bonus points are for being small (Langford) and being ducked (Wills) ?
     
    ChrisPontius, Jan 29, 2009
    ChrisPontius, Jan 29, 2009
    #67
  8. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    -I'd argue that defining Dominance like that risks romanticization. You can get more exact by defining Dominance by how many highly ranked or (considering the era) how many highly regarded/feared contenders he faced. How long did he hold the title and how many times did he defend it and against whom and how often did he struggle?

    Carpentier wasn't even a heavyweight. Nor was Gibbons. Nor was Miske. Nor was Tunney. Dempsey defended his world HW title like what 5 times? Firpo was a HW... but I never thought much of him and most who did did so because he was inflated. History should help us get the stars out of our eyes to see clearly.

    So, four out of five of Dempsey's defenses were against light heavies. And he got beaten by a light heavy.

    That ain't dominance!

    This strikes me as romanticization. I think that fighter's comments at the time are as suspect as old men's about their hey-days.

    I love that shot he finished off Sharkey with. But that wasn't a dominant performance and he wasn't the champ.

    Sure such comparisons were made. Remember how highly touted Michael Grant was? Frazier being a "dominant" champion is rarely asserted. I wouldn't assert it either... but, that's your opinion.

    Okay.... but a question for you: Which of the champions on your top 10 would not beat Frazier?

    37 fights is longevity?

    That's not consistent. Tyson had almost 60 fights and was still beating respectable guys 18 years in. Was Frazier?

    How about lowering the other guys?
     
    Stonehands89, Jan 29, 2009
    Stonehands89, Jan 29, 2009
    #68
  9. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    MooooHAHAAHAHAHAAA! You fell into my trap! Here are the real stats:

    This content is protected
    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    TOTAL= 32
    Same here.... Wills is tied with Tyson at #9.
     
    Stonehands89, Jan 29, 2009
    Stonehands89, Jan 29, 2009
    #69
  10. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,354
    Jun 29, 2007
    Jeffries fought a few black contenders on the way up, and they were all good ones. Brittish Emprie champion Peter Jackson, Battle royal champ Bob Armstrong, and Hank Griffin, a veteran who defeated Jack Johnson.

    Jeffries was the first champ to fight a black man as champion, giving Hand Griffin a shot in a four round re-match. He also returned past his prime to fight Jack Johnson, and many at the time still thought Jeffries was the champion in 1910.

    Jeffires beat Armstrong with a broken thumb, Shakrey with a bad elbow, and went out on his sheld vs Johnson. Your ratings are yours, but I really think Jeffries deserves a 9 or 10 for adversity.
     
    Mendoza, Jan 30, 2009
    Mendoza, Jan 30, 2009
    #70
  11. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    I have always been very impressed with his win over Jackson personally. I don't know if you noticed, but I have Jack Johnson a 5 for Adversity as well partly because he failed to accept black title challengers.

    And although the ratings are mine, I am open-minded to making changes. I did kind of rush through the ratings and I'm sure there are oversights.
     
    Stonehands89, Jan 30, 2009
    Stonehands89, Jan 30, 2009
    #71
  12. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    Hey, thanks for this! This is great for easy reference because I'm getting really tired of scrolling back to see the numbers.
     
    Stonehands89, Jan 30, 2009
    Stonehands89, Jan 30, 2009
    #72
  13. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    Lewis has formidable supporters...!

    Here's the retort. Was Lewis that much of a ring general in the classic sense, or was he just naturally able to keep smaller guys on the ends of his punches. It seems to me that his effectiveness was due to his size and strength more than his ring generalship. This is no knock on Lewis, but I wouldn't be very quick to call Primo or Jess or Valuev or even Harry Wills "Ring Generals" simply becuase their great size made them hard to fight.
     
    Stonehands89, Jan 30, 2009
    Stonehands89, Jan 30, 2009
    #73
  14. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,145
    13,104
    Jan 4, 2008
    I think he was able to use his size better than most, and that is ring generalship. One thing is to have the advantage, but by ring generalship you get the most out of it. If you lack ring generalship your size can be used against you by someone who has ring generalship, so it's a crucial factor here.

    For me ring generalship can be defined as "getting the most out of your natural advantages, and getting as little punished as possible by your natural disadvantages". Lewis scored pretty well here, I would say.

    In short, I think Lewis had really good ring generalship. And I'm not a particular fan.
     
    Bokaj, Jan 30, 2009
    Bokaj, Jan 30, 2009
    #74
  15. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    Good point. You've tempered my position to the following. Lewis' size and strength were great assets, he used them very well in two speeds --he could control the tempo and the range of a fight or overwhelm his opponents.

    Now, I have him at an 8... which is good. He's tied with guys like Holmes.
     
    Stonehands89, Jan 30, 2009
    Stonehands89, Jan 30, 2009
    #75
Page 5 of 7