this is s more than what was asked for and Mine changes all the time, but right this second I am going to go with the following (in groups) Group 1 - Fighters who pretty much proved they were the best of 2 eras - 1. Ali 2. Louis 3. Johnson Fighters who were untouchable in their own era in their prime and dominated for a lengthy period - 4. Marciano 5. Jeffries 6. Sullivan 7. Holmes Fighters who seemed invincible in their time, but either didnt maintain that form for as long as the above fighters, or were beaten close to (or what seems like close to) their prime. 8. Foreman 9. Tyson 10. Liston 11. Lewis 12. Fitzsimmons Fighters who rose to the top but did not really stick around long enough to prove whether or they can hang with the fighters above them and are given the benefit of the doubt on question marks. 13. Bowe 14. Tunney Fighters who were very, very good fighters and who were quite likely the best of their eras, but couldnt quite do enough to establish themselves as premier fighters of their era (often through no fault of their own). 15. Holyfield 16. Jackson 17. Baer 18. Langford 19. Wills 20. Corbett 21. Willard 22. T Sharkey Great fighters who couldnt quite top their era but were very close to the standards of others that did. 23. Charles 24. Walcott 25. Sharkey 26. McVey 27. Jeanette 28. Norton 29. Schmelling 30. Paterson 31. Johansen 32. Moore 33. Carnera 34. Burns Fighters who rose to the top but werent quite up there with the class of the very best fighters of their era even though they were capable of beating them. 35. M Spinks 36. Braddock 37. Sharkey 38. Moorer 39. Douglas 40. Hart 41. Choynski 42. Braddock It is amazing when comparing what fighters achieved across each era, just how similar most of the eras actually are.
Robinson Armstrong Louis Ali Pep Charles Duran Greb Moore Monzon Saddler Leonard Leonard Tunney Hagler Whitaker Johnson Langford Fitzsimmons Uh, top 19, there you go...
Pretty similar to mine w/ the order only varying slightly... 01 SRR 02 Greb 03 Armstrong 04 Langford 05 Fitz 06 Charles 07 B. Leonard 08 Pep 09 Louis 10 Ali 11 Moore 12 Duran
I don't think this was meant as a hw list? I love lists like this, though all (Including mine) have holes to poke in them... Poor unrecognized Smokin' Joe Does Tunney deserve to be 21 spots over Spinks...thier top wins are comprable but neither is seperated by much outside of that...surely a post prime KO loss to tyson (I know Tyson would beat a prime version as well but that is irrelevant) can't cause that much seperation.
Number 43? He was their, not sure what happened, must have got eliminated in the numbering somehow. I think i had him in the Foreman - Fitzsimmons group. In his prime he was never beaten (including a win over ali) but i think it fair to say that at his best Foreman and Ali were better figthers despite his win over a close to prime but not prime ali. I would think that this gives him the number 13 spot, very similar to Fitzsimmons. Fitz dominated his era and was unbeatable until he got old, including the win over corbett (a little like the Ali of his era) and Jeffries (a little like the Foreman of his era). But unlike Frazier, Fitz has to rate over Corbett and i think that he put up a much better fight against the Jeffries than Frazier did against Foreman. Also, the klitchskos were not ranked due to them being still active. But i suppose they are really starting to move somewhere near this same group. Not really proved to be in the class of Lennox, but are competely dominating the rest (other than their brother of course). I think we will be able to rank them much better in 10 years when we know how good some of their recent contenders really are.
1.) Robinson 2.) Greb 3.) Armstrong 4.) Charles 5.) Fitzsimmons 6.) Langford 7.) Burley 8.) Pep 9.) Benny Leonard 10.) Ross
1. Ray Robbo 2. Henry Greb 3. Sammy Davis Langford 4. Harry Legstrong 5. Buzzard Charles 6. William Papaleo 7. Duran Duran 8. Cassius Clayus 9. Bennie Leonard 10. Fitzie 11. Jungle Jess Willard