Best heavyweight from each decade not to win a title

Just opinions

1890's---Peter Jackson
1900's---Sam McVey
1910's---Sam Langford
1920's---Harry Wills
1930's---Tommy Loughran
1940's---Jimmy Bivins (honorable mention Elmer Ray for beating two future champions)
1950's---Archie Moore (honorable mention Rex Layne for beating two champions)
1960's---Zora Folley (no one stands out. Several have cases. Terrell and Ellis were paper champions)
1970's---Jimmy Young

1980's and on--I don't know that much about who had paper championships and general records, so will pass on these decades and defer to those with more knowledge

 

He was indeed a 2 time champion not 3 Witherspoon won the title off Page then lost it to Thomas then won it again from Tubbs then lost it to Bonecrusher.

 

Peter Jackson and Langford both won belts and were considered to be THE champ by many people especially Peter.

Bivins was also duration champ and Moore was recognized as the champ by Nevada at a time when it looked Marciano was going to retire.

 

Okay. I thought Jackson was only the British Empire champion. No one, including Sullivan, had a good claim as "world" champion as I understand the era, but okay. Langford was definitely the "colored" champion, as was Wills. Does that eliminate them?

If Langford and Wills are out because they held titles, I would go with Fulton in the teens, and probably Firpo in the 1920's. Critiques of these choices are welcome.

If Moore is considered a paper champ, Rex Layne gets the spot for the 1950's because of wins over both Walcott and Charles. Ditto Ray in the 1940's if Bivins is out.

Curiously, whom do you select for the 1960's? I picked Folley but am very open to other suggestions.

 

Yes initially misread post

 

Jackson had several arguments to the lineage and I think he got the Police Gazette when he beat Slavin. Also in the 1880s the Commonwealth belt was the biggest belt there was to win. Remember this is a British world not an American one not yet anyway.

Langford was the IBU champ. He also won another disputed belt in the 1900s.

Willis probably isn't eliminated even though he was kinda of a early "mandatory" for 3 years and had some purgatorial status between champ and number 1 contender. I'd still go with Willis.

I agree with your replacement choices.

For 60s Folley I guess cause he beat Machen and he was the guy Liston took his status as number 1 contender from? Maybe Quarry cause he was the runner up in the tourney?

 

Good list. Technically Norton never won a title, so him for the 70's? Otherwise Young. He beat Lyle who beat Bugner.

And not Williams for the 50's. He didn't beat anyone then. Folley, Machen or Moore.

Povetkin for the '10s.

 

You have a fun post here.

"this is a British world not an American one"

I wonder if the rest of the world is cool with the thought that the world has been British and American. I find this conception revealing.

"purgatorial status"

Could I ask you to clarify? What exactly do you mean? I am familiar with Catholic beliefs but don't quite understand the application to Wills.

 

The answer for the 2010's is Pulev

And as far as the 2020's: It's 2024, it's far too early to mention anyone let along Zhang. We still have 6 years left.

 

In the 1880s and as late as the 1910s the British Empire was very much the cultural center of the world. We kind of gloss over that when discussing the perod and put the American perspective front and center.

Willis was more than a contender but not a champion and stayed in that status for several years. Purgatory is the state of being in limbo between two statuses.

 

"state of being in limbo between two statuses"

Thanks for the clarification.

 

You predicted Ed Sanders would beat Bert Whitehurst, I take it?

 

1910's: Sam Langford
1920's: Harry Wills
1930's: Johnny Risko
1940's: Billy Conn
1950's: Archie Moore
1960's: Jerry Quarry
1970's: Jimmy Young
1980's: Donovan Ruddock
1990's: Ike Ibeabuchi
2000's: James Toney
2010's: Alexander Povetkin
2020s: Too early to say