Yes, he definitely warrants a higher place than all of them because he won the lineal title from Moorer (WBA/IBF official titles). That’s not a claim that any of those guys can remotely make.
1. Holyfield 2. Lewis 3. Tyson 4. Bowe 5. Mercer 6. Morrison 7. Moorer 8. Douglas 9. Ibeabuchi 10. Golota
My dude, I've had this discussion before with many people. Decades are based on the Gregorian Calendar which starts with 1 BC followed by 1 AD. There is no year 0. So the first ever decade recorded in history (officially, that is) was from 1 BC - 9 AD. -1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. That = 10 years = 1 complete decade. It gets complicated, I know. The whole millennium bit is based off numerology and the number system. The Kabbalah works in mysterious ways!
I understand. But it's based off of a calendar, which needs to start somewhere. The Gregorian calendar is the calendar most of us follow. It starts at 1 BC.
Ibeabuchi over Tyson and Moorer? That's objectively misguided, you're usually well reasoned if I disagree with your talking point. Tua doesn't really belong on that list. Mercer I could sort of live with, but it doesn't help that he lost to and old Holmes, Jessie Ferguson, Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis. If he belongs in the top 10 based on what he was to the division at the time without looking at his record in retrospect then surely Ruddock belongs as well; his 19 rounds with Mike Tyson were legendary and his early KO loss to Lewis made Lennox a serious force to reckon with. He was avoided by Holyfield and Bowe who chose to fight each other and left Lewis to "handle" Ruddock as best he could.
McCall won the WBC title off a prime Lennox, beat Holmes, Maskaev and Damiani, gave hell to Bruno and was never hurt or knocked down in his career. H2H and in terms of achievements (the two criteria under consideration here) he more than warrants a similar spot to Foreman. I don't see what the others do to be rated significantly lower either.
Who did Tyson beat that was better than an in shape Tua or a prime Chris Byrd in the 1990's? No one this good. Who did Ruddock really beat in the 1990’s? He’s best known for being knocked out by Tommy Morrison, Lennox Lewis, and Mike Tyson.
Ruddock was just as good as an in shape David Tua who's own career didn't pan out the way most of us expected, much like Ruddock. Tyson in the 90s Beat: Ruddock 2x, Bruno, Botha (WBC Champ), Seldon (WBA Champ), Stewart Ike's resume falls short, not to mention he never actually picked up a belt.
I agree with you there, but moving on, why do you think the 1990's wasn't a good decade for heavyweight boxing? ( January 1, 1990 to December 31, 1999. ). Using the hall of fame as benchmark, the following fighters were active: Lewis Bowe Holyfield Tyson V. Klitschko Holmes Foreman That is seven men. Wlad is a 100% lock, so that is eight men. Moorer is 50/50, so it could be as high as nine.
Technically "Super" Brian Nielsen was 49-0 at heavyweight during the 1990s with wins over former Champs Tim Witherspoon and Larry Holmes. Only problem is, he sucked. But, it goes to show how little the 49-0 thing can mean (even at heavyweight). Nielsen lost to club fighter, Dicky Ryan, in his very next fight, and never fooled the public again into thinking he was elite.
Good post. A few points: A lot of people think that Mercer beat Lennox. Did Bowe and Evander really avoid Ruddock?