GUILALAH: My Current AT Heavy Rankings

Is That Bert Sugars list or something?? Awful rankings. I dont care what way you spin it..

 

Hopkins, take notes. :yep

 

In regards to Wills. He should have goting his title shot way before 1926. I mean how many NUMBER 1 contenders seat at top of the number 1 rank for ten long years, being denie a shot???

Wills didnt need to face Tunney in 26 or some other bout to get a shot at Dempsey. Wills earn it long before Tunney went heavyweight.

 

Do anyone think a case can be made for having Holmes at the same level as Louis and Ali?

 

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Holmes
4. Marciano
5. Foreman-as much as im not a fan 2 times capturing the title that far apart means a ton.
6. Lewis
7. Holyfield
8. Tyson
9.Frazier
10. Liston
11. Johnson
12. Dempsey
13. Patterson
14. Walcott
15. Charles
16. Tunney
17. Norton
18.Jackson
19. Langford
20. Bowe

 

It looks good. I personally wouldn't have Foreman as high, though. He's probably not even in my top 10, but I'll admit that he's a hard one to place.

Much more serious is the fact that Wills isn't on this list. A man who was arguably the best in the world for some 10 years have a very good case for top 5 in my book. I think it's ironic how Dempsey's blatant ducking of him may well have hurt Wills's standing more than Dempsey's own.

 

Your right..Wills should be in there..I had thoughts of Jackson to..I need to sitdown one day n really put some thought into a top 20 list

 

So you're saying that Wills didn't do enough to earn a title shot because he kept beating the black dynamite crew that Dempsey was and had been ducking? :admin



By the way, i have an article that calls Dempsey "a relatively unknown fighter" in 1918. Goes to show you how local the information was back then, and maybe Fulton wasn't as widely recognized as the heir apparent as that article claims.

 

It is a prety ballanced list in terms of old dog and new dog.

I think two gentlemen who might deserve to be a bit higher are Peter Jackson and Sam Langford.