My best pick of Top-20 "Heavy" champs from 1887-2011. WORD!

You talk so much pish.
Here's another then - Lewis UD12 Tua

 

#1. Muhammad Ali
#2. Joe Louis
#3. Larry Holmes
#4. Lennox Lewis
#5. Sonny Liston
#6. Jack Johnson
#7. Evander Holyfield
#8. George Foreman
#9. Joe Frazier
#10. Mike Tyson
#11. Jersey Joe Walcott
#12. Jack Dempsey
#13. Max Baer
#14. Floyd Patterson
#15. Max Smexling
#16. Gene Tunney
#17. Ezzard Charles
#18. John L Sullivan
#19. Wladimir Klitschko
#20. Jerry Quarry

 

Buddy Baer at 20? He wasn't even top 10 in the 1940s!


Of the 1940s heavyweights I would rank Joe Louis, Jersey Joe Walcott, Ezzard Charles, Elmer Ray, Jimmy Bivins, Lee Q Murray, Bob Pastor, Lou Nova, Lem Franklin, Harry Bobo over him.

Max Baer would have killed Buddy!

 

grrr, I forgot charles, I knew I was missing somebody so I just put in Buddy,
I'll swap Buddy with ezzard.

 

Buddy would have gotten smoked by Elmer Ray, Jimmy Bivins, and Lee Q Murray!

 

Possibly but it isnt guaranteed.

Buddy was a lot bigger than these guys. He has the one KO to Gunner Barlund, (the louis fights dont really count do they? The three guys you mentioned would also be KOd by Louis and Ray actually was!). AbeSimon apparently caught Buddy but was KOd in 3. I think that the 3 guys you mentioned would probably be a 50-50 fight with Buddy Baer, to be honest, although i do not necessarilly think i would pick against any of them.

 

Gunnar was a gooftrooper. Certainly nowhere near the level of a Elmer Ray, Jimmy Bivins, and Lee Q Murray. Buddy Baer lost a decision to Eddie Blunt, who wasn't even a top 5 Black Murders row heavyweight of the era.

Bigger does not = better. especially back in the 1940s. Buddy Baer was bigger than Eddie Blunt and Gunnar Barland, did that help him?

Exhibitions don't count. Louis management avoided these 3 guys for a reason..I think Louis would knock all 3 of them out, but they presented a much stiffer challenge for him than Buddy Baer.

I disagree. Buddy was not that good. He is not a top 75 heavyweight of all time. A decent superheavyweight with a hard punch, a average jab, and that's it. He had hardly any skill, he was slow, he had a weak chin, and didn't use his size well(too much infighting).

Ray was just as strong and powerful a puncher as Buddy, except had far more skill/better inside fighting ability.

Bivins would box circles around Buddy Baer.

Lee Q Murray was a complete boxer-puncher. Buddy was not complete. He was one dimensional and predictable. Murray would beat Buddy at every faucet of the game.

 

Sorry, I missed 33 to 43 place. What would Liston have to do now to crack the top 35, if heisnt already there?

I am guessing from your tone that Fitz isnt number 44. Does that position go to the bonafide 200lb plus John L Sullivan? WithFitzy maybe at 45?

 

Is this list based on legacy, or your perception of their head to head abilities?

 

So Was Larry Lovett and Frank Lumpkin. Tony Musto and Leonard Morrow, or Jim Johnson, and Al Hart

So, let me get this straight, Size didnt matter in the 40s but it matters a lot more now?atsch

I dont know so much about that. They certainly seem to suggest that if you are knocked out, you are in pretty big trouble in a real fight, and certainly dont have any right to claim you were ducked. Louis/Ray was a legitimate exhibition (more appropriately deemed a ND fight in older days) and certainly much more than a sparring session.

Maybe, but that is all subjective. His actually record is not that bad. Probably as good as most of the top 10 of the time possibly including some of those you posted, depending on how it is viewed subjectively. (Actually i think Bivins clearly has the better recordof all of those posted). And i think you underestimate just how good a top 75 of all time heavyweight really is. By definition, such a position would almost guarantee that you are top 10 in your era. I seriously doubt that all 4 fighters could fairly be placed in any top 75 where each era is given equal consideration.

Maybe, but that is all very subjective, and you could just as easily argue that Buddy is bigger and stronger than all 3 and he catches them and knocks them out.

 

Heavyweight Division in the 1940s was ruled by men from 185-210lb. That is a fact. There were plenty of superheavyweights around and none of them came close to winning a title.

Then Perhaps you should cut some slack for Ray when you realize he was 39 years old when Louis knocked him out! Ray was a late bloomer, but still a good 3 years past his best.

 

Just like he did to Gunnar Barlund right? LOL. Barlund beat the **** out of Buddy. Barlund was a gooftrooper. Buddy had a very padded record. He did not prove himself vs the best of the era. The only top man he fought, Joe Louis, he was destroyed by(twice). Murray, Ray, Bivins proved themselves vs the best of the era. Elmer Ray beat prime versions of Ezzard Charles and Jersey Joe Walcott. Who did Buddy beat that comes close to toppling this?

 

This always has been the case though hasnt it?

But the fact is that while a good big man is usually beaten by a better little man, there are always times when a not so good big man beats a better smaller man. It is a fact of life. It happens regularly in any era.

I should, but why does Ray get cut slack when a poor effort from Buddy Baer turns him into a goof trooper?

 

I will concede that if Buddy has an off night against the three guys you mentioned, he is well beaten. But do you concede if the three guys you mentioned turn up the same losing performances against the guys i listed earlier against Buddy that they too would be looking at defeat?

 

So ? I usually put Lewis above Tua (although not always , and maybe I should change it) in my list.
Lewis was just 2 tall 4 Tua , so was Savon and so are the Klitschkos .