You know what I mean: - Who did not avoid opponents in their prime? - Who did the judges give the least gifts to? - Whose career is the least "well managed"? itd. itd. P.S. Maybe I didn't formulate what I wanted to say in the best way, so I trust in your understanding.
The man who fought more quality heavyweights than anyone else. Foreman x 1, Frazier x 3, Liston x 2. That is 5-1 vs 3 guys almost unanimously regarded as top 15 all time heavyweights. The rest? Ken Norton x 3, Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, Joe Bugner x 2, Jerry Quarry x 2, Floyd Patterson x 2, Jimmy Ellis, Ernie Terrell, Henry Cooper x 2, Doug Jones, George Chuvalo and Mac Foster. Shavers, Lyle and Quarry are all amongst the best heavyweights to never win a title and the 2 former guys are also all time punchers. Seriously his resume is off the charts. From beating perhaps the hardest hitting two fisted slugger in heavyweight history in Foreman to one of the greatest body punchers ever in Frazier, from beating tall fighters like Terrell and Bugner, to being the first heavyweight champion to defend vs a southpaw, to beating arguably the best technical puncher ever in Liston, to all time great punchers like Shavers, terrific counter punchers like Quarry, lighting quick handed fighters like Patterson etc. Need i go on? I would rank him as the #1 heavyweight if he had lost 10 times instead of 5.
This is going to be an odd pick on my part but I’m going to say that Jimmy Ellis is the least overrated. In fact he seldom gets rated or even mentioned at all. The only check mark against him as that many feel he was gifted against an aging Patterson but I still don’t even know if that fight was truly an outright robbery or simply just too close to call. To be certain, Jimmy was NOT a linear champion. He won the title by elimination. But even this has its merits. He was a former middleweight who rose to heavy at the dawn of a golden era and beat not one but several contenders to earn the title as champion. I think Ellis is probably one of the most forgotten heavyweight champs.
Out of the greats, think I'll go with Frazier. Not only does he have the single greatest win in HW history over the HW GOAT, but aside from Ali, I think he did the best job of beating up that mid 60s/early 70s era's list of contenders than anyone else from the era. Quarry, Ellis, Bonavena, Chuvalo, Mathis, Machen, Jones, Bugner, Ramos, they all fell to him. Frankly if it wasn't for how badly Foreman beat him (and he's like, probably the single worst opponent for Frazier at HW), I'd clearly have him higher than him. Heck, I probably do rank him higher anyway, I dunno. It's what keeps him from being a top 5 lock imo. Shut-out to Jack Johnson too, for having the hardest path to the top and beating literally everyone available (Hart roberry notwithstanding), even if his reign was pretty terrible. Out of the non greats, aka outside the top consensus top 15, it's gotta be between Wills and Langford. I think Wills is a great though. I'd have him higher than Usyk, Liston and Dempsey. Just too much depth, and the early losses being too men he'd come to dominate.
Probably James J Braddock. He's seen as one of the weaker ones, and he is, he generally doesn't get the credit he deserves, "Max wasn't taking it seriously" and all that there, then the inactivity, then the brave but doomed effort against Joe. He's not overrated. You never see him on lists or anything like that, and if someone rates every lineal champ he's usually down the very bottom.
Langford, Max Baer, Braddock, Louis, Ellis and Wlad are the ones that check your boxes. Ali aces 1 but 2? Norton 3 and Jimmy Young extended his career a total of 8 title fights.
I agree he’s the goat and shouldn’t be seen as “overrated.” But the question is who’s the “ least “ overrated. Muhammad Ali gets plenty of praise
