Lewis as 9th best HW ever?

Greb? Appreciate what a talent he was but not really a Heavyweight. He said himself he did OK in sparring for a few rounds, but Dempsey would catch up with him in a fight.

r.e. Johnson, it depends what you mean by look bad. Not eye pleasing I'd agree, and even negative, but all his opponents said how hard he was to hit, and if he was bad, he he wouldn't have been champion for so long. He had a lot to deal with outside the ring. Also, while it's hard to know exactly what to believe, he is said to have carried opponents either to increase film sales or other political reasons. Definitely regarding Ketchel, most accounts I've read suggest he was told to carry him, but Stanley double crossed him by knocking him down, and was promptly knocked out.

Also worth emphasising that filming technology wasn't as advanced so there was often a lot fewer frames per second. I try to as much as possible put their careers in context for their era rather than how I think they would match up now.

It's very subjective. Perhaps he's too high on my list but I'm able to support why I'd have him there and I could pick at any boxer in history. Past Ali and Louis, they all have glaring faults with their records, be it poor opposition, poor performances or whatever. Even Ali had a lot of 'close' decisions and struggled with opponents he shouldn't.

 

Of course he is in the top ten and I think it's funny as **** when Yanks try to say otherwise while also having Holyfield and Tyson ahead of him.

 

And yet Greb had beaten Gibbons? As well as Meehan, Brennan and Gunboat Smith, he also beat guys that would go on to have their own success at HW, in Loughran and Tunney. He gave Dempsey a shellacking in sparring and was sent home, Dempsey wanted nothing to do with him. Greb was a viable Heavyweight contender, and there were many calls for Dempsey to fight him, as much as Wills. Dempsey himself said 'I will surely take it. There is just a chance that Greb thinks he can beat me'.

I agree that Ali struggled with some opponents you wouldn't imagine him to (Jones, Norton especially) but he also fought a far better plethora of top notch Heavyweights. I am well versed in Johnsons era, and feel that the contenders below him did more for their resumes by fighting every available challenger as Johnson fought O'Brien, who I rate massively as a P4P fighter but not as a viable challenger to Johnson, and eventually Battling Jim Johnson, who Langford, Wills and McVea had conquered numerous times already.

I will say, Johnson beating Fitz so quickly is very impressive, as for a smaller HW of the time he was proven against far bigger guys, and IMO, from my own research into him, was more likely to be hurt and stunned by a lighter, faster fighter (such as Jim Hall for instance) than a bigger guy like Johnson, who obviously handled Fitz far better than Corbett or Jeffries did (Jeff had to come through Hell to beat Fitz both times despite having about 40lbs on him), and as you can see, I'm not trying to discount Johnson, he's in my top fifteen, I just think he gets overrated big time based on his life out of the ring. His title reign is one of the least impressive of all time.

Getting the better of Jeanette and McVea beforehand is impressive, but they were still to improve. As for Langford, he was fighting around Welter at the time, Johnson had 40lbs on him, and Langford was still raw, developing the traps and boxing ability he would later be able to implement as a fully-fledged Heavyweight. There were numerous calls for Johnson to fight Langford, and he flat out ducked him, and pulled out a planned defence with the old classic 'he's not on my level'.

This really goes against Johnson IMO.

EDIT: Johnson should be above Tunney in my list.

 

Sparring is sparring. Foster had the better of Ali in sparring I believe, completely different case in the ring. Like I said, Greb didn't believe that he could keep Demspey off him for a full fight. Greb would be #1 or #2 P4P for me so I'm not writing him off, but I wouldn't really go as far as calling him Johnson's biggest contender, IMO anyway. Either way, Johnson had it very hard with regard to who he could fight, couldn't just pick anyone to fight, as you know.

Your criticisms are understandable, I just think there are big question marks around most of the Heavyweight champions and there weren't many that seemed as dominant as him. Not trying to act like my list is final or I wouldn't even discuss it. Perhaps I have him too high, but I believe you have him too low, taking his record in context of the era and what it was possible for him to do.

 

what you talking about, prime tyson would clearly destroy lewis, did you not see what he did to pinklon thomas :yep:yep:yep

 

Why the smiles? Prime Tyson would most likely chew-up Lewis.
They both tackled Bruno in their respective primes, lets compare:huh

 

Mosley>Mayorga>Forrest>Mosley.

Also, they both tackled Ruddock, how did they compare?

 

Flea we don't agree that often but I like your HW list are close, I have pretty much the same top3.

My only criticism is Foreman at no4, I think he only has wins over about 5-6 ring top 10 rated opponents. He has the prime loss to Young, prime life and death with Lyle and his comeback was a bit of a fluke against a weaker champ

 

Prime Tyson, prime Tyson........... hmmmmmmmmm, when was that again? Wasn't sometime around 1988 july 7th in between 17.45 and 21.31.

Prime Tyson indeed, I am sick of hearing this nonsense excuse. There is far more to boxing than just turning up into the ring. If he didn't put the hours in while at training then that's his fault.

Lewis KO Tyson 8th round, no excuses, it happened. Deal with it.

 

PP, I get that criticism with Foreman a lot. But he destroyed an undefeated Frazier, took out Norton as he should have, and I think he lost a bit of his allure post-Ali no doubt. He ran the gauntlet when he came back, winning some (Cooney, Qawi) and losing sine (Evander, Morrison) but well into his forties that can be expected. Scores kudos for being such an oddly destructive puncher as well.

But despite the circumstances of his win over Holyfield, Moorer was essentially the pineal champ, and despite some deficiencies, was expected to beat Foreman easily. But Foremans win, IMO due to his knowledge of power punching, saw him sneak in a big shot and get the job done.

It's a crazy achievement, and one which is out of the norm, and deservedly gives George a high ranking. As you can see though PP, all of these are bracketed. They are pretty much set in stone, the places in them can change depending on what mood I'm in/what I've learned that week :good

Would love to hear your opinions on Greb-Gibbons-Dempsey, I seem to remember you having the opposite view to mine Re: Dempsey avoiding Greb.

 

Epic ownage :deal

 

Ali-Frazier-Norton-Foreman.

 

Flea,

Not that I doubt you but have you got anymore sources/ info on the Dempsey-Greb thing?

I have to admit my usual stance on these typeof stories is one of scepticsm, these things tend to get blown up beyond what they were at the time from an almost romantic "what if..." perpsective like Burley-Robinson or more recently Pryor-Leonard.

 

Not particularly Gaz. Just going by all the discussions of it, the evidence, and the accounts of the time from Dempsey and people in both camps. It was a viable contest. Greb wanted it. Dempsey is on record as saying he would take it if the money was right (that old chestnut)

And there sparring was more meaningful than most. Dempsey couldn't figure Greb out at all, let's not forget how formidable a fighter he was. The weight wouldve meant little and Dempsey is unlikely to stop Greb. IMO, it seems unlikely that Dempsey wanted the fight, and as Greb beat Gibbons in what was a fight essentially securing a title shot, and Dempsey then went on to fight Gibbons the same year...well, it's hard not to think Dempsey wasn't keen.

And Wills as well, although of course there were circumstances there. For me, Dempsey just not belong in the top ten. By convincingly beating Greb, who was a viable HW fighter despite his weight, his record against common opposition to Dempsey shows this, would've been a massive scalp. I also think he more often looks the fighter that fought Carpentier, Gibbons and Tunney rather than the fighter who fought Willard and Firpo, if you get what I'm sayin'?

 

C'mon Flea, that shows a little bias. No?

Thats the sort of thing I'm after sources, quotes or even heresay at the time to support.

I don't have Dempsey top 10 either. I don't particuarly blame him for not fighting Wills, most states didn't want to know about it but the fact remains he didn't fight him and the rest of his reign is not that impressive either.