My Method for Determining the Greatest Heavyweight Champions.

Welcome to the forum mate. There's probably a few glaring moments in your list but good to see something out of the norm.

 

in order to attest the overall ability of a fighter is to put them in hypothetical match up with fellow greats...but it is not the be all of greatness...there has to be a balance of overall ability and accomplishment..historical impact and timeliness must also be considered

 

Comparing heavyweights from completly difrent earas is a little tricky. You have the likes of Jack Johnson, Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey and Rocky Marciano listed at the bottem of your list, and in fact if you were to take a time mechine and put them in the ring with their more modern counterparts it is very likely they will strugle and even get beat. Give them more modern traning and stratgey and they would most likley do very well. I think Dempsey and Marciano would probbly be better served at crusierweight than at heavyweight.
I think your method would work very well for any other weight class but is very flawed at heavyeight.

 

No matter how you want to turn it, it's the level of competiton that determines, who is who. For example, Lewis beat two hall of fame fighters ( Hoyfield and Tyson ) compared to Ali who beat Patterson twice, Frazier twice, Liston twice, Norton twice, Foster, and Foreman. Facts are facts.

 

In the end, nearly everything is subjective. Who makes the Hall of Fame is subjective. These are not facts, even though I agree fervently with your overall point.

The search for who, at his peakest of peak, his highest high, that one split second flash it all came together, was the overall best of all-time is a fun but ultimately futile undertaking. We cannot put people of different eras together, and we can't say with any kind of certainty how good some people were who left question marks and didn't prove it completely. Debating is fun, though.

It is not about who was the best, imo, but who did the best. Who went out determined to prove it? What did he show us?

Some fighters can mesmerise you with flash and convince you they belong higher than they do. Fighters like Mike Tyson and Roy Jones capture the imagination, but at the end what you have is a lot of couldabeen and shouldadone. They're up there of course, but I'm talking top 3 at their best weight, top 10 pfp. Floyd Mayweather is another one headed down that path of the least resistance, not doing all he can do in the prime of his career.

You know why Duran's win over Iran Barkley was a monumental achievement? Because he went in there. Against a towering beast of a man. Could he have lost? Absolutely. Hell yeah. Even any conceivable win was going to be associated with grit, punishment and pain. But he took the match, and he fought for his life, and achieved a legendary win. Now that counts! That should count for something. And if you don't do that, but you still looked real good fighting someone who could never beat you, it doesn't count as hard.

Resume. Resume, resume, resume.

 

Interesting methodology. I would still rate Ali and Louis 1 and 2.

http://www.amazon.com/Joe-Gans-Biography-American-Champion/dp/0786439947/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b

 

These are the two I especially would like to see how they looked if they were at their peak today. A Louis born in the late 70's early 80's might very well have been 2 inches taller to begin with, and add modern training and nutrition to that and you have perhaps a 220-230 lbs punching machine. Truly frightening prospect.