Best five wins thread. Lineal / Ring Magazine heavyweight champions.

Just on the Jeffries comparison, I couldn't disagree more. Our views on this are in a different world.

Calling Sharkey and Griffin the equals of Moore and Louis, the longest reigning light-heavyweight and heavyweight champions of the 20th century is way, way over the top for me.

Louis and Griffin. Sure, Louis had gone back, but after all he only ever lost to the very best heavyweights in the world. He had eight straight wins, six over ranked contenders of the day. Griffin was just a pretty good contender who was KO'd by the likes of Bob Jones and Fred Russell (14-16-4 lifetime record). A young Jack Johnson, not yet a contender, seemed to have a world of trouble with Griffin, but others like Denver Ed Martin and Russell didn't. In no circumstances do I see him in the same league as even the 1951 Louis.

Moore and Sharkey. The Moore who fought Marciano was on the peak roll of his career with consecutive wins over Maxim, Baker, Johnson, Valdes, and Olson. But even the Moore who fought Ali in 1962 was I think better than Sharkey. That Moore was coming off a draw with Willie Pastrano and a KO of Alejandro Lavorante. Other than the smelly foul "wins" over Fitz and Corbett, Sharkey didn't do anything that many other ordinary contenders over the decades haven't done. He beat some good contenders and lost to the better men. Sharkey actually was lighter than Moore and I don't think brings anything to the table to worry Archie.

Fitz and Walcott. Might be closer, but Fitz was just as old and had laid off 2 years before each bout with Jeffries, quite a layoff time for such an old man. p4p Fitz is more impressive, but Walcott was a fairly big heavy who had a deep resume and hung tough against all the top men of his time.

Layne and Ruhlin. Layne has the better resume.

 

Fair enough, we may disagree sometimes!

I just want to reply to two things:

1. Sharkey did more than just a legit win over Corbett and robbery against Fitzsimmons:

- he dominated the series against Choynski (2-0-1),
- from what I know, he should have won the draw against Corbett,
- he beat past prime, but still very good Goddard,
- he drew with prime Maher,
- he beat prime Ruhlin (although he lost series),
- he stopped prime McCoy,
- he beat some big men like Fred Russell and Jim Jeffords when he was past his prime,
- he went the distance against Jeffries twice.

I view Sharkey as very strong contender. Moore was of course better than him, but we have to factor that Moore wasn't as good in 1955 as he was in 1951-53.

2. I don't agree thay Layne has better resume than Ruhlin. Both were good, but unspectacular contenders with some good wins but also weak losses.

 

I come down in the middle on this one.
1. Fitz>Walcott

This content is protected

2. Corbett<Charles Yeah,

This content is protected

3. Sharkey=Moore (Moore was better, but he was past prime)

This content is protected

4. Ruhlin>Layne Pretty even,

This content is protected

5. Griffin=Louis (Louis was washed up at this point).

This content is protected

 

Getting back onto Joe Frazier:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Jimmy Ellis
3. Jerry Quarry
4. Eddie Machen
5. Oscar Bonavena

 

The timing of the win was perfect on paper.

Note that Ali beat a lot of the same people, and Ellis was not as high on his lists.

 

Nothing much wrong with Moore's chin and Sharkey wasn't the biggest puncher anyway. There is no doubt Fitz could catch Walcott and knock him out, that's acceptable. Layne and Ruhlin both lost their big ones and had good victories and surprising defeats but Griffin as a top fighter, read up on the Jones, Martin and Russel fights, no way was he better than old Joe Louis.

 

Moore had excellent chin, if Sharkey won, it would be due to his constant pressure and physical strength, not because Moore wouldn't deal with his punching power.

 

Nothing very controversial about the fight between Moore and Valdez, AP and UP scored it for Moore, Braddock went 8-5-2, papers like the Chicago Tribune concurred, Moore having clinched a tough, competitive fight by finishing strong to record his second win over Valdez. As for Valdez manager "Shock news, beaten fighter's manager screams Robbery"! In fact, Moore's resumee against big fighters is phenomenal but hardly relevant as Sharkey was much smaller and about the same weight.

 

Valdez fights Moore won fair and square. Nino knew it to be true as well. Didn’t beat him once but twice and beat other men that whooped Valdez like Satterfield and Baker. I agree Moore’s chin wasn’t the best but it wasn’t atrocious. Was only stopped at Hw by three men. Ali Marciano and Patterson all over the age of 38. Was about 64-4-1 at Hw with plenty of knock outs. He is in my opinion the best ever at Hw to never win the title.
Could be 64-3-1 have to check that first Bivens fight think it was at LHW I’d also pick him handily over Sharkey and he beat a lot of good big men Valdez, Baker, Henry, Cestac, Lavorante and more

 

Foremans five
1) Frazier
2) Norton
3) Moorer
4) Lyle
5) Chuvalo