Who has the second greatest quality of wins in heavyweight history?

For Lewis I agree it wasn't a peak Holyfield but he was still in good form IMO.

 

In terms of names Lewis, in terms of quality of wins Usyk, in terms of styles beat Wlad.

 

Ali and Louis are one and two A. There depth is ridiculous.

Add Charles to the mix for the depth.
Maxim x4
Bivins x4
Jersey Joe x2
Elmer Ray
Rex Layne x2
Bob Satterfield
Archie Moore x3 (deserves a nod even though at LHW)
Joe Louis
Baksi
Lee Oma

 

Second best? I don't know who to assume number 1 is.

On this list I'd go with Holy and cite timing and defense. Simple enough. Touch-a-title champions are a dime a dozen. Defenses speak volumes.

But I would say people have been trained by the media to think of boxers in the wrong terms. rankings, all time rankings, are really a stupid thing. It's fun, I do it too, but it's dumb. Or rather, because some can back theirs with hella intellectual debate I guess dumb is ther wrong term; pointless is more correct.

A better. or more serious, way of managing greatness through time is by caliber, tier, category, whatever term floats your boat.

Under that banner I would call both Foreman, Lewis, and Holyfield all GOAT, S, Top, whatever means best. Ali level. Louis level. I dare say ... Usyk level.

Rankings, for those who don't know, were born out of the lists of men worth watching kept by aristocrats. It was not popular to rank the men until around the 1870s, I believe. I am unsure if Richard Fox invented the idea or simply popularized it, but, by the time the Police Gazette was publishing ratings it was to control the way fans think about fighters. Fox was not simply a publisher, author, etc. he also was the man who started handing out titles and such. It was promotional, not that different than Ring ratings.

Anyway, Holyfield is the greatest among them but allowing for my own mistaking I would rather call them all greatest. They are all The Real Deal

 

Fury, dubois and joshua aren't that good bro, stop it. You cant even make a case of quality over quantity when Lewis has both

 

They're very solid wins especially considering he was the smaller man in all three taking on very good SHWs. You can also count his CW wins since all of them would be HWs in the past if you want to be technical.

 

If only they moved up like Michael Hunter and Haye

Wladimir has a better resume than Usyk

 

In terms of depth yes in terms of quality probably not.

 

Usyk has no greats on his resume so the "quality" wins can't outweigh the quantity here

Klitschko has Byrd, McCline, Povetkin, Peter, Ibragimov, Chambers, Haye, Thompson, Pulev and a bunch of other guys who are better than Chisora like Rahman and Jennings

Past it Fury, Joshua, and Dubois are not as good as you believe them to be.

 

Tyson’s win list wasn’t bad:

- Spinks
- Holmes ( past it )
- Tucker
- Thomas
- Berbick
- Bruno X 2
- Ruddock x2
- Golata
- Tubbs
- Botha
- Bonecrusher

 

Fury and Joshua are better then anyone Wlad beat add in Gassiev and Briedis thats a very quality resume. Idk why you downplay them so much lol

 

Joshua never would've had a reign if he were in the Klitschko era so I disagree. He'd just be another contender. Prime Povetkin would knock joshua out when he struggled with the old lethargic version and got wobbled. Haye knocks aj out. Even Peter knocks aj out. Aj is overrated.

Fury was past his prime and scraped by an mma fighter on his debut, getting floored twice. All of it matters

 

Lennox Lewis ... and it's not even that close.

 

67 Ali schools all three on the same night