Only one I can see him being ahead is Marciano since their heavyweight records are pretty similar in the fact they only beat a few very good fighters, but I put Usyk above Marciano since I think his wins are way better and more impressive then Marciano's
1. Ali 2. Louis 3. Holmes 4. Foreman 5. Wlad 6. Lewis 7. Fraizer 8. Holyfield 9. Tyson 10. Liston Marciano can be ranked as high as #4-5, Johnson at #5-6. I just don't know how properly rank old timers (Johnson) and not sure Marciano would have had any chances against guys like Wlad or Lewis. My rarking is based on achievements and H2H abilities combined I don't rank Usyk untill the end if his career
To be fair, Berbick came into the Holmes fight after his probably second best win of his career against John Tate. He was more experienced against Tyson, but he also lost to Snipes and Gordon along the way. But I get the point. And thanks for presenting solid arguments.
Charles, Moore, Louis, Walcott, are historically much greater than any of Usyk's opponents. Marciano has 10 wins against top 10 ranked opponents which is more than double Usyk has at Heavyweight. Marciano has 7 world title wins compared to 5 for Usyk.
Usyk becoming undisputed in 2 weight classes in just 23 fights (22 when he became undisputed) is a testament to his greatness not a negative. And the fact he did it all as the B-side winning and unifying all his world titles in his opponent's backyards (sans his last world title which was still on the road) on a deck stacked against him with 0 home refs and a combined 2 home judges in all of his fights at the world level males it even more so And then factor in he didn't even become HW champion until a few months before his 35th birthday and was 37 when he became undisputed and is already one of the oldest HW champions of all time at #8 In just under six weeks he will be the 7th oldest HW champion of all time In 2 months he will be the 6th And in 4-5 months he will be the 5th if he still holds the titles And everyone ranked above him are all either giants or career and natural HWs And he will be the 2nd oldest unified champ And if he beats Dubois he will be the oldest undisputed one Let's not forget he wasn't going to even win a belt at HW at all according to all but only a tiny handful of us on here and they were adamant he would fail, let alone become undisputed and the dominant HW of the era. Those giants were to big and powerful for him and he was getting KTFO by them so he didn't just prove all of them badly wrong, and even worse he was in his prime when they gave him no chance, he proved me and the other tiny handful of us believers even more right because he did it when he was essentially 35-38 and past his prime Also, let's not forget that technically whilst his CW fights are not considered HW fights all 23 of his fights were against HWs by the old standard and not only that the HWs fought by the modern standard are way bigger than the HWs many of the HWs back then fought and many of them fought SMWs and LHWs smaller or much smaller than them by the modern standard. Usyk is fighting giants by the new standard and freaks by the old one and they are athletic, skilled. coordinated and quick for their size freaks and giants not slow, unathletic Frankenstein's monster giants like from back in the good old days And over half of Usyk's 23 fights are title fights. The only non world level fighter he has fought since winning his 1st world title is late notice sub Witherspoon and there are plenty of names of his level or worse on the ledgers of the other HW greats and I mean ones their size, smaller or much smaller not way bigger Also, how many of the HWs mentioned in this thread have never been knocked down or badly hurt, let alone whilst fighting giants who hold huge/obscene physical advantages over them in their backyard or on the road on a deck stacked against them when in their mid to late 30s? You can, and I'm sure many will, perform all manner of mental gymnastics, as they do to try and discredit Usyk and help them cope and rationalize their bias to themselves, but no matter how you swing it that is seriously impressive. Especially given the huge/obscene physical advantages he is routinely giving away, the amount of savage punchers or legit bangers he's fought, up at HW in his mid to late 30s, and this isn't just as a pro when it comes to head shots it also extends to his 350 amateur fights and his fights in the WSB (against giants)
I don't rank active fighters in all time lists: 1. Louis 2. Ali 3. Holmes 4. Lewis 5. Marciano 6. Johnson 7. Wlad 8. Jeffries 9. Liston 10. Tyson 11. Foreman 12. Frazier 13. Wills 14. Dempsey 15. Holyfield 16. Charles 17. Langford 18. Bowe 19. Tunney 20. Vitali
Would I be right in assuming you are big on the fighters in the Jeffries era? I imagine for him to be 8th while having far less fights than most the list you must rate the quality of his wins.
I don't tend to be any bigger on one era than another. Boxing changes over time, my rankings reflect my understanding of what each fighter achieved in their own time and completely exclude predicted outcomes in cross era fantasy fights. I have Jeffries higher than most and tbf can see him anywhere from 8 to 12. He was unbeaten when he retired and losing in a comeback after 6-years retired has no impact on how I rank him. In some ways I see Jeffries as similar to Marciano. Both had relatively short careers, became champion, beat their best contenders and retired unbeaten. The reason I have Rocky at #5 and can see Jeffries anywhere from #8-12 is that Marciano regularly defended against his number 1 contender right up until retirement and never ducked anyone, whereas for the last year or two of Jeffries reign, Johnson was the top contender.
I meant bigger in sense of how great they were not in terms of favoritism to the era. I asked because I don't know much about Jeffries career (at least in terms of a deep discussion) I completely I think H2H matches are something different to how you rank fighters for what they did in there time. Of course some people as group them more as one and others don't.
In terms of the general standard of contenders I don't think there's much difference from one era to another, relative to the evolution (or devolution, if that's your view) of boxing. I think it's possible one era will have no, or one, ATG at HW, whilst another may have 3, e.g. 1970's with Ali, Foreman and Frazier (arguably 4 if you include Holmes at the back end of the decade, though I consider him a different era), but in general I work on the basis that on the whole, one field of world class contenders is as strong as another. Dominance factors highly in my rankings, which is why I'm in a minority who rank Wlad and Jeffries above Foreman, Frazier and Holyfield. So, no, I don't think Jeffries era was any greater, or for that matter, less great, than other eras. I think he was, broadly, around the 8th most removed from the field as any HW in history, based on who he fought and the outcomes of those contests. I completely agree with you with respect to predicted outcomes in fantasy "H2H" fights and greatness based on outcomes in fights that actually happened, are two different things.
You do realize that as the Archbishop of The Holy Church of Usyk it would be an egregious and unforgivable dereliction of my duty if I didn't vote Usyk #1, right?
Joe Louis Ali Lennox Lewis Larry Holmes Oleksander Usyk Vitali Klitschko George Foreman Jack Johnson Wladamir Klitschko Gene Tunney Holyfield, Marciano, and Dempsey next three Louis was dominant for a decade, and his only loses were to Schmeling (avenged), Ezzard Charles (one of the greatest light heavyweights ever), and Marciano when he was old. Ali got gifted a lot of decisions, but he won the lineal 3 times. Can't take that away from him. The wins over Liston, Foreman and Frazier (although Frazier is overrated historically) is his legacy. Lennox cleaned house in one of the best eras in heavyweight history and avenged both fluke losses. Dominated the other two best heavyweights of his era. Larry Holmes owned the heavyweight division for 7 years. It wasn't the strongest era but Holmes fought all comers and won them all until Spinks, another of the light heavyweight ATGs. Usyk has beaten the next three best heavyweights and did it decisively, all while giving up several inches and lots of pounds. Head to head, he's one of the greatest of all time. His motor, defensive skills, footwork, and handspeed are all at a level most heavyweights haven't seen and has enough power at 6'3" 220 lbs to be a champion in any era. Like Lennox, his greatness won't be appreciated until he's gone. Vitali was untouchable after Lewis retired. Boring af to watch, but untouchable. Foreman regaining the title in 1994 cemented his legacy. Before his comeback, he was like Tyson "he could have been so great if only he had a brain". The comeback showed he was a lot more than a puncher. Jack Johnson revolutionized the sport. The color barrier is one thing, but Johnson's defensive prowess at the time was second to none. He started a new era when he beat Jeffries. Wlad dominated the division for a decade. The era may not have been the greatest, but he beat all comers and wasn't really challenged. Gene Tunney finished his career 65-1-1. He had a loss and a draw with Harry Greb, who is in his own rights an ATG. He beat Greb 3 times, by the way. He beat Dempsey twice when nobody thought anyone could do it.
I'll defend it all the live long day. Here is Holmes' consensus top ten victories....not the stuff of legends in my book Norton Witherspoon Shavers 2 Cooney Berbick Leon Spinks Bonecrusher Mercer Shavers 1 Weaver I already like undisputed, undefeated Usyk's consensus top ten better, and that is with a few cruisers on there: Fury 1 Joshua 1 Dubois Briedis Fury II Joshua II Gassiev Chisora Bellew Hunter/Glowacki