Thoughts, if you will, 25 years apart... top 10 heavyweights 1977 CHAMP Ali Norton Young Holmes Lyle Bobick Shavers Knoetze Evangelista Leon Spinks Gerrie Coetzee top 10 heavyweights 2002 CHAMP Lewis Wlad Klitschko Byrd Tua Holyfield Ruiz Rahman Vit Klitschko Kirk Johnson Mike Tyson McCline Now, please comment on the fighters in context of around the year of the rating. And before I hear some bs about an agenda I picked these two specific years by random from the two decades. I definitely could have picked worse or better for both selections.
Let me clarify, these are Ring's Lists for the year's represented. I meant that I picked a year from the latter 70's and the early 00's at random.
If you are making the observation that the second half of the 70s was not an exceptionaly strong era then I would have to agree. I could pick a year from the mid 1930s where the top ten would beat most of their opposite numbers from this year.
I have to say that I find myself giving the 2002 gang the edge in most matches. 1. I don't think that the 1975 Ali would beat the 2002 Lewis. 2. If I was managing Norton I would want no part of Wlad. 3. I would expect Young to beat Byrd. 4. Might Tua be a bit much for Holmes at this stage? 5. Holyfield was on a loosing streak at this point so Lyle should take him. 6. Bobick is the kind of fighter that Ruiz tends to prevail against looking ugly. 7. Shavers Ramhan could basicaly go anywhere. 8. Vitally Klitschko would murder Knoetze 9. Not sure how Evangelista Johnson would go. 10. Even an empty shell of Mike Tyson ought to take Leon Spinks.
Norton v.s. Wlad is actually a very interesting fight as Wlad's china chin would be crushed if Norton , with his 80" reach, landed once. Norton's vulnerability to huge punchers may not be an issue with safety first Wlad and Kenny could easily bust him up with his own huge jab. I actually like Norton by KO.
Holmes had a classic performance against Shavers 3 months into 1978 so I'd have to say no. He represents everything that Tua struggles with.
That isn't really the way I look at it - what i'm interested in is how testing the list of fighters would be for any given top-line fighter, say Bowe, would have moving up through those rankings. I think they'd be equally difficult for any rising contender, I don't see any really disparity. Both have world class opponents scatered throughout the rankings, both present awkward customers in terms of stlye, both contain punchers, both contain competent jouneymen plus types capable of finding out a less than commited trainer or a fighter with faulty concentration...neither is terrifying but both are varied. The chances of a guy like Bowe coming unstuck are about the same with either list IMO. You could argue that 2002 would be better for a guy who was vulnerable to punchers and that 75 would represent a tougher assignment for fighters vulnerable to slicksters though.
