B.N.'s top 10 unsuccessful world title challengers.

Juarez above Graham - no f*cking way

 

I don't think 'the BN ten' is in a specific order.

 

Golota should be there, he was robbed against Byrd and Ruiz

 

rudkin's omission surprised me

 

Off the top of my head I could also add in Jose Medel, Bernardo Carraballo, Kenny Lane Leo Espinosa and Hector Thompson. Another hour and I'll probably come up with 5-10 more. Oops, Clyde Gray and Billy Graham too.

Scartissue

 

Eijiro Murata

 

Hedgman Lewis

 

Freddie Dawson could be one.

 

Ken Norton could be a contender. The only heavyweight champion never to have won a heavyweight title fight. Regardless of how people view the results of the third Ali and Holmes fights.

 

Great call. He went tooth and nail with two very good, if not great, champions (Chandler, Pintor).

Another vote for Alan Rudkin here.

Also, Ruben Castillo.

 

Shavers qualifies, but Lyle doesn't? Ron beat Rondon, LeDoux, Bugner, Bonavena, Mathis, Ramos and Peralta, HW and LHW title challengers all. He beat former WBA HW titleholder Ellis. He defeated Middleton 2X, and Garcia. He outpointed clever cuties Caldwell, Stallings and Ward. He was ahead when his challenge of Ali was stopped, and he came off the deck to knock out Shavers himself.

Earnie beat Norton, Sims, Bugner, Caldwell, an embryonic Young, Ellis, Henry Clark 2X, Tiger Williams and Rondon. Shavers has a good record of wins, but is it really better than Lyle's?

Until getting stunned by Lynn Ball, Ron was only beaten by prime upper crust opponents. Earnie's upset decision losses to Stallings and Santemore (both with losing records, unlike Ball) are a greater deficit in my estimation. Despite turning professional when he was already 30 years old, Ron was only beaten seven times, getting stopped four of those, three by a prime Ali, Foreman and Cooney. Shavers sustained 14 defeats, getting stopped in half of those events.

As much as I admire Shavers, I'm not at all convinced he's a more suitable representative for that B.N. list than Lyle. More memorable perhaps, but better?

 

Ridiculous.

 

They clearly need to delineate time frames, to force themselves to work harder at compiling lists like this. Putting Herol Graham in without the inclusion of Billy Graham is bizarre, and smacks of jingoism. (As soon as that last name occurred to them, the proper choice should have been self evident.) Why not specify post 1960, instead of simply being lazy about it? (Are they actually getting paid for this negligent selection process?)