Classic Forum Collective Top 10 All-Time Heavyweights--POLL CLOSED!

Le Doux wasn't mate but Peralta x2 and Kirkman and another people seem to forget was ranked is Chuvalo, who was the WBC #3 contender when he stepped in with Foreman. So, that makes a 'vs ranked opponents' record of 8-2 for career one. Not too shabby, really.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Well I am glad that tyson is beginning to get more respect as the years go by. From 2003-2007 he was bashed like crazy by boxing fans. People say he should be left out of the top 10 because he lost to Buster Douglas, well Jack Dempsey and Jack Johnson were ko'd by journeymen and super middleweights. People start to mention that whenever he was in the ring with an ATG he lost, that's bogus. Michael Spinks is an ATG and to me it doesn't really matter if he was a light-heavyweight, or if he was scared of tyson, etc. Michael Spinks would have a very live chance of beating Evander Holyfield, and he would probably be favoured over past lineal champs like Michael Moorer, Jersey Joe Walcott and Floyd Patterson.

Another thing, there are people out there that believe Joe Frazier lost to Oscar Bonavena. On top of that, he's 1-4 against Ali and Foreman. He also beat fewer contenders than Tyson did. Ranking Mike above Joe Frazier can be acceptable.

Rocky Marciano was undefeated but, 33 out of his 49 opponents were pretty much the type of guys Tyson was koing in 1985, tomato cans that are completely irrelevant. Then he has wins over 2 light heavyweights that Tyson would have beat, Jersey Joe Walcott and an Old Joe Louis. Rocky Marciano's resume really isn't better at all. There are people on this forum that will point to the fact that he has 4 NAMES on his resume and that all of a sudden makes him a better fighter than tyson, lol. The heavyweight contenders Tyson beat were a step above the contenders Marciano beat.

Jack Dempsey's resume isn't any better than Tyson's, actually its probably worse. I guarantee most people here haven't even seen Tucker, Tubbs, Pinklon Thomas, Berbick, Ruddock, or Bruno fight. They just say, oh rocky has a win over the 41 year old archie moore, he must be the better fighter,lol.

Ranking Tyson above Sonny Liston, Dempsey, Frazier is justifiable.

 

Ali fought 38 different opponents 49 times that were rated at one time or another in the top 10 in the World.

Louis fought 43 different Opponents 54 times that were rated at one time or another in the top 10 in the World.

Ali fought 38 opponents while they were rated in the top 10. He beat 33 of them.

Louis fought 35 opponents while they were rated in the top 10. He beat 32 of them.

Of Louis's 25 title fights defenses, 20 of them were rated and 5 were not.

"Do most of you boxing experts believe this method of determining the level of fighter is the best method?"

It's just one more thing to look at when your trying to rate them, that's all.

The annual ratings were from a web site that I gave out several times. The only thing is that most of Dempsey's opponents that were rated in the top 10 at one time or another, were not rated when he fought them.

The reason I rate Dempsey so high is that I have talked to a lot of all-time trainers, historians, and experts on boxing in the last 40+ years and up until the mid-1960's most of them had Dempsey as #1. In 1950 he was voted as the Greatest boxer of the 1st half century by the AP, and all the polls that were taken up until the mid-1960's had him as #1.

As far as Foreman goes, I give him credit for coming back and winning the title. He showed a lot of heart and a Great chin. He did beat Frazier twice, Norton, Cooney and I am pretty sure that if he could do that, he could also take Rocky and Dempsey as well. Boxers gave him some problems, such as Ali, Young and Peralta.

Jose Roman was also rated when Foreman fought him.

 

Of course. Damn, I forgot about 'King'. I'm not sure if Chris was referring to Ring rankings though. Good call anyway 'H'. So, 9-2. Not bad from The Big Fella. :yep

 

Ranking Heavyweights H2H is silly in my opinion. You should have two seperate rankings for ATG Top 10 and Top 10 H2H. H2H isn't very fair and will give far to much advantage to more recent champions that may have not had equal legacies or domination careers.

 

Henry ,you know your stuff, I might not agree with you ,but I respect your smarts!

 

Thanks, same here.

Like I stated many times, I don't know any 2 top boxing historians that will agree on a top 10, BUT that's what makes it fun.

 

Thanks, I have STATS like that on almost every World contender & HOF'er there is.

 

Where did you get the 15 top ten fighters that Dempsey beat?

The way you word it makes it seem better for guys like Liston and Foreman too. "At one time or another" means that Foremans loss to Tommy Morrison counts the same as Tyson's over Spinks, Tubbs, etc. The post proved my point emphatically with Frazier, Liston, Marciano not having the depth of Tyson's resume.

Just curious, do you have the number of wins these guys have over fighters ranked in the top ten at the time they fought? I think Sonny's might be higher than people think and Foreman would be lower.

 

The annual ratings were from a web site that I gave out several times. The only thing is that most of Dempsey's opponents that were rated in the top 10 at one time or another, were not rated when he fought them.

Actually Tyson fought 23 different boxers 26 times, that were rated in the Top 10 at one time or another in 58 bouts. Two of those were against Cruiserweights, so you can say he fought 21 different heavyweight boxers 24 times.

I only have these facts on the HOF boxers BUT it looks like Tyson was 17-4, or 15-4, if you don't count the Cruiserweights, with 2 NC, against boxers that were rated in the top 10 when he fought them,

Foreman was 10-4
Liston was 9-3, and 2 of those wins was against Lightheavyweight Marshall.
Frazier was 10-4 and 1 of them was against Lightheavyweight Bob Foster.
Marciano was 11-0, with 9 KO's not 10. Charles & LaStarza went the distance.
Ali was 33-5 counting Lightheavyweight Bob Foster
Louis was 32-3 counting Lewis and Conn

Like I stated before, this is just one more thing to look at when your trying to rate them. You also IMO have to watch films, look at who they beat and when and also what the top historians and experts rate them as well.

 

Lightheavyweights? really? I am pretty sure the 6'0 197lb Jersey Joe Walcott weighed nowhere near the lightheavyweight Limit. In fact, walcott was Heavyweight Champion. Even more sure, I am gauranteed that a man(Joe Louis) who is 6'2 214lb at the weigh in is not a lightheavyweight.

Maybe not, but I think Tysons resume is one of the best, and I think Marcianos is one of the best. Why critisize one to pump up the other?

This is highly question.

Lets take the Contenders that Marciano beat

# 1 rated Archie Moore
# 1 Rated Jersey Joe Walcott
# 1 rated Ezzard Charles 2x
# 1 rated Roland Lastarza 2x
# 6 rated Rex Layne
# 2 rated Joe Louis
# 5 rated Harry Kid Matthews
# 2 rated Don Cockell


vs the contenders Tyson beat during the 1980s


# 6 rated Trevor Berbick
# 2 rated Bonecrusher Smith
# 3 rated Pinklon Thomas
# 3 rated Tony Tucker
# 10 rated Tyrell Biggs
# 2 rated Carl Truth Williams
# 3 Razor Ruddock 2x


Now Tyson beat some talented and powerful contenders, who were all big men. Marciano only beat one poweful big man(Louis), but he did beat better boxers than Tyson did. I think 1951 Joe Louis though at 215lb, can be very competitive with the 215lb men of the late 1980s and was as good as most of the top 215lb men of that era. Charles and Walcott were crafty boxers like Thomas and Tubbs who had seen better days but still were forces in the division..I would say the June 1954 version of Charles was the best of the 4. Archie Moore might be the single best win of the two, as Moore was the # 1 contender who had cleaned out all the top contenders and won 21 in a row to setup a huge mega fight....Althought Tyson did have Tony Tucker which was a very good win. Lastarza and Layne were world class talents Layne(Slugger) Lastarza(Counterpuncher) who were very capable these men compared to Bonecrusher Smith and Carl Truth Williams.

Tyson defintley beat the better depth than Marciano, and Tyson beat better depth than most HW champions in my opinion, but Marciano beat equal or better Quality in my judgement.

 

[ooi

 

I think you misinterpreted what i meant. The 2 light heavyweights i was referring to were ezzard and archie, the comma after that was meant to indicate walcott and louis as two seperate fighters. Mike Tyson would easily beat archie and ezzard, theres no doubt about it.