Who ranks the highest at Heavyweight - Charles, Tunney or Patterson?

This is bollocks.

 

good breakdown Choklab, never looked that closely at it...

however there is another factor, and that is Charles spell PASSING through MW, never a real MW, too big a man especially back then, the goal was always the heavier divisions.

so I would guess most of these fights were at catch weights i.e. MWs cum L-HWs and likewise for a while anyway, Charles being a more natural L-HW those early HW battles were also catch weights, L-HW cum HW, before Charles became a full blown HW.

I still think he is more a L-HW, but you point out a very good breakdown of the fights!

 

Ezzard Charles - no competition.

Ezzard beat Joey Maxim. Floyd lost to Maxim. But Charles just has the better wins, as listed in above posts. I think he's one of the best 5 HW fighters of all time. Marciano, Tyson, Ali, Louis, Charles. Not sure about that order, though.

Tunney merits no place in any top 20 list, because he ducked black fighters.

 

charles's career before the war ended with him as a 21 year old kid with a 28-3-1 record. ezz had turned pro whilst still in high school. In his first year as an 18year old fighter ezz was around 160lb but still growing, about as heavy as evander holyfeild was at that age in the amatuers. Back then young charles was a big midleweight but a teenager.

I believe charles had a size advantage over the likes of charlie burley even if he had not filled out yet. Then still under 169lb he quit boxing for 3 years.

CHARLES never made 176lb until after the 3 years he spent away from boxing in 1946 but he was as high as 180 for clarence jones a 198 pounder in october 1947 just 20 months after his comeback as a 24 year old.

Charles was a light heavy for a few months.

 

:huh How was Ray any "better" than other some-time leading HW contenders like Gibbons, Heeney, or Risko?

 

Because Ray was a terrific fighter, a dangerous 6'2 long armed puncher-swarmer who posed a threat for any champion. Ray is one of the best heavyweight contenders in history never to win a title, and was avoided like the plague in his prime. Even while avoided, he still managed to work his way up to the # 1 contender status and defeat two prime top 20 heavyweight ATGs. He also defeated a handful of other contenders. You can make a case for Gibbons, but no way was Risko and especially Heeney in Elmer Ray's class. It's pathetic Tunney fought Heeney instead of two hall of fame heavyweights George Godfrey and Jack Sharkey licking their chops at a shot at tunney. Heeney didn't even beat either of them to win the "elimination" tournament (which was corrupt because it banned black fighters from being able to enter) Heeney looks terrible on film too. I think Elmer Ray has a case for top 30 heavyweight of all time. Heeney is nowhere near that territory.

 

You are aware that Risko BEAT both of the HOFers you just touted, right? And that Heeney was generally rated OVER those HOFers at the time he signed for a title shot.

 

15. Patterson
17. Charles

Tunney is somewhere outside the top 20. It's funny, because most recently I had myself flipping Patterson and Charles on rankings. They're very close. Patterson's past prime resume/performances get overlooked. The fact that he was the first HW to regain the title, and the second youngest HW of all time (Youngest in some people's eyes still) puts him barely above Charles in my eyes.

 

Mongo is making a hell of a case for Charles, though.

So you seriously think Patterson was faded by the Liston fights? That's got to be some of the weakest **** I've ever heard... if that's honestly what you believe.

 

On a serious list, I'd have Tunney somewhere between 6 and 12 on an all-time HW list.
Charles would be somewhere between 9 and 15.
Patterson might get into the top 20.

Those are just pure "guesstimates" though.

 

I have patterson #15, Charles#16 and tunney#22.

simply put floyd won the biggest fights of his career by KO. Archie Moore in 56' was the man to beat to be called a champion and floyd knocked him out, same with Ingo. There was nothing more he could have done to establish supremacy with those wins.

The biggest fights for Charles were walcott and joe louis - but he only outpointed wallcott and Louis. Same with Tunney when he came up against greb and dempsey in his key fights.

You could argue gus lesnevich was a landmark stopage win for charles as he had been the LH champion but this loses its flavour by the time they met.

 

Yeah. Really. I said their resumes are close, they are. I give Patterson the edge. He beat bigger man on average, the slightly better quality overall and the his post-prime wins. I stand by that. You like to move in a vicious circle? Continue then.

Wlad Klitschko. But yea to the rest.

No, he isn´t. Youngest paper beltholder. Youngest champ is Patterson.

:think based on?

:rofl

Oh, Charles has a case. A very good one. But I pick Patterson due to his better accomplishments - youngest champ, first to regain the crown, and the comeback after Liston - past-prime run, beating the bigger and slightly better fighters.

 

The International Boxing Research Organization polled their members in 2005, and came up with this heavyweight list :

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

 

I think Patterson should have at least got a mention.

I do believe the correct order is 1.Tunney, 2.Charles, 3.Patterson though !