1 Ali 2 Holmes 3 louis 4 Foreman 5 Dempsey 6 Frazier 7 liston 8 Marciano 9 Holy 10 Tyson Adleast for now.
Great list, I'm just not sure about Dempsey being above Wlad and Mike. Great call on Holy over Lewis imo, completely agree.
1 Louis 2 Ali 3 Marciano 4 Holmes 5 Dempsey 6 Johnson 7 Lewis 8 Frazier (Before the Ali fight) 9 Jeffries 10 Tyson 11 Wlad klitschko 12 Foreman 13 Schmeling 14 Charles 15 Liston 16 Patterson 17 Walcott 18 Holyfield 19 Tunney 20 Baer 21 Johanssson 22 Bowe 23 Sharkey 24 Carnera 25 Douglas 26 Willard 26 Burns 27 Micheal Spinks 28 Braddock 29 Moorer 30 Leon Spinks 31 Briggs
Putting Dempsey above Wlad, Lennox or Tyson is intellectually indefensible. In terms of quality of opponents, depth of top level performing victims... not even in the same ballpark.
Intellectually indefensible to put Dempsey ahead of champions knocked out for the title? Not one bit. Dempsey was unanimously regarded the best heavyweight in the world for a longer period than Tyson, Wlad or Lewis and all of those were knocked out in their prime. Dempsey was never knocked out in a key fight. You can dismiss what went for a top level opponent in those days but contenders all fought each other back then and that goes a lot further than an era of preserving unwarranted rankings and unbeaten records. Much of the title opponents Tyson fought were inactive and had not fought top opposition for years. Then he was knocked flat as a pancake by an in-form journeyman. Klitschko was defending against a lot of older inexperienced challengers and he still managed to get himself knocked out twice in his prime. Then he benefited from the ridiculous “grab and jab” format enforced by the “house referee scenario” where open fighting and exchanges were not allowed against him. Lewis did not dominate an era. He shared equal billing with Bowe and Holyfield. He just outlasted them after getting knocked out twice.
This is an idea I'm surprised hasn't come up before (and I'm a fan of Lewis, btw). I tend to think Holy had a longer time as great though, since Lewis kind of sucked (imo) before Steward. Not to mention Lewis took on a WAY-past-prime-Holy and let's face it, didn't exactly look stunning beating him either time (while others had knocked the hell out of him, including fighters who weren't as great as LL).
I enjoyed all of them at the time but now after they all retired we can put things into perspective. Holyfield was great for how long? He struggled badly with Holmes and Foreman who were at the same point as a comeback Joe Louis. He should have creamed them. Then after losing and beating the first real challenger he lost to Moorer a very weak, vulnerable champion. He beat Tyson when nobody expected him to ..but maybe Tyson was flattered by the meek display of Seldon and a Bruno he already knew he could beat? Lewis put that version of Tyson into perspective...but he was using a whopping size advantage. I’m still looking for a run of serious dominance from Holyfield...and there really wasn’t one. He was out of his natural division and was a win some lose some guy at elite level.
1. Joe Louis 2. Muhammad Ali 3. Larry Holmes 4. George Foreman 5. Sonny Liston 6. Lennox Lewis 7. Wlad Klitschko 8. Rocky Marciano 9. Joe Frazier 10. Mike Tyson
These are all valid points, however I'm not sure Holyfield should have completely creamed Holmes (who just beat a top contender in the division and looked pretty damn good doing it) and Foreman (didn't have the star power of a Mercer as a notch on his belt but was still beating contenders...just far lesser, especially on the whole). Holmes had revamped himself and ended up fitting pretty good (even forgetting his age and diminished skills). Foreman wasn't as proven overall but I seriously doubt Bowe or (especially) Lewis would have stood up to the punches Foreman landed on Holy that night (I still think Bowe would have won, of course). To win against those two over forty-ers, most especially in light of their recent performances, was no joke even then. I wasn't surprised at all that Larry did so well (again, given the Mercer fight, where I thought the former looked like a champ), nor that he got the shot (he deserved it imo). Foreman I was surprised at (given who he'd beat in his comeback), but both were still very tough opponents. I think Holmes would have lasted with Bowe and MORE than lasted against a one-armed pre-Steward Lewis at the time too, btw (might have suffered knockdowns at the hands of both, since they each had that krypto-nitic overhand for Larry). It's just with Bowe Larry would have looked worse than against Holy...not so sure on the early Lewis. Tyson wasn't around (not sure on that one) and I kind of doubt Larry or George would have quite made it with him (especially in light of Foreman-Qawi). As far as George...at that time I thought it exceedingly odd he got a shot (didn't deserve it imo). But he conducted himself quite well.... I know you don't like things to be overly hypothetical, but look at how much trouble Holy gave Bowe in I, despite losing. This (to me at least) more than proves Holy was top of the class at the time, against young and excellent heavyweights. It's way more a credit to Larry and Big George that they did as well as they did as opposed to Holy's not being a great champ. Even more significant to me is how Foreman ended up beating Moorer, who slapped the crap out of Holy (again, I know you don't like this kind of reasoning and don't entirely blame you for it). All imo.
Caplan putting Norton ahead of Tyson, Vitali and Wlad should have seen him get sentenced to a 10 year stretch in jail and double that for ranking Ellis above Wlad.
