Top Ten Heavyweights

Whether he was blind or not, he was still competing well against fairly good opposition. Tiger Flowes, Harry Wills, Sam McVea, George Godfrey to name a few. It's also worth noting that the only time Dempsey and Meehan fought during Dempsey's prime (which I believe didn't really begin until 1918) Dempsey is said to have been robbed. Meehan basically crafted a certain way of fighting to survive 4 rounds with Dempsey and win points off flashy slaps and grazing blows. I'm pretty sure Meehan could have done the same to Rocky Marciano. He probably could have done it to Louis once or twice, but Louis was better at adapting on a fight by fight basis to certain opponents, I think Dempsey was better at adapting during the actual fight but was never given the chance to do so against Meehan. How many all time greats would have meaningless losses on their records if some of their fights were cut down to four rounds? How many all time greats have lost a few rounds to begin with and taken the fight down the stretch?

 

He also held the title more times than any other fighter in history. His short reigns can be attributed as much to the consistently high level of competition as much as inconsistent performance. There are few (if any) fighters in HW history who have as impressive quality of opposition as Holyfield.

 

In order to fairly rank fighters of different eras, we must look primarily at what each achieved IN HIS OWN ERA. (How would Marciano fare (at 180-185 lbs) against Lennox Lewis (at 240-250)?) Some are claiming that Jack Johnson has no place among the top 10, presumably because of the raw, grappling fighting style that was employed at the turn of the century. However, WITHIN HIS ERA, there is no fighter in history who accomplished more. So he certainly belongs. Dempsey, IMO, could have done more had he (or Tex Rickard) not drawn the color barrier and refused to defend against top contenders simply because they were black. That keeps him out of top 10 consideration, IMO. Tyson brought life to a watered down division in the 80s, but unifying against Berbick, Bonecrusher, and Tucker, KOing a 3 yrs retired Holmes and a petrified Spinks who was pissing himself, hardly warrants immortality. Tyson's mystique has more to do with his elevated standing as anything he achieved in the ring. Tyson doesn't make the cut either.
1)Jack Johnson
2)Joe Louis
3)Muhammad Ali
4)Evander Holyfield
5)Rocky Marciano
6)Larry Holmes
7)Lennox Lewis
8)Gene Tunney
9)George Foreman
10)Sonny Liston

 

great list except you completley went against your own logic with your pick at Tunney at # 8. you rank fighters on what they did for their heavyweight era, Tunney really didnt do squat!

 

Evander Holyfield was rated in the top ten for 14 years from 88 to 2002 ,only missing out in 94 that is pretty consistant to me! No one else comes close!

 

Dempsey Was Never Overrated After He Got Civilized He Wasnt The Same Dempsey In His Real(prime) He Had A Great Chance At Kon Any One On This List

 

A single uninterupted reign is much more impressive then several short reigns.

having multiple reigns also means that you LOST your belts multiple times.

 

Yeah, and they were also in the top 10 for a larger amount of fights I reckon. What distinguish these three from Holyfield is that he never was really dominant at HW, which they certainly were.

 

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Marciano
4. Foreman
5. Tyson
6. Frazier
7. Johnson
8. Liston
9. Tunney
10. Holyfield

 

What list - all of them?

I'm in suspense.

 

Ali
Liston
Tyson
Louis
Holmes
Johnson
Foreman
Frazier
Dempsey
Lewis

 

My bad, i confused the two. My amateur boxing days might be catching up with me.