Greatest heavyweight with weakest resume?

Johnson signed to defend against both Langford and McVey in Australia for H D McIntosh,when Johnson jumped bail and public opinion turned against him McIntosh cancelled the fights.
Johnson signed to defend against Jeannette in NY twice the NYAC vetoed the defences and threatened any promoter who put them on with withdrawal of their licence.
All this can be found in Pollack's 2nd Vol Jack Johnson The Reign,along with public statements verifying it by the promoters concerned [McIntosh and the McMahon Brothers].

 

then you should put Kevin McBride or Danny Williams instead of Tyson. They probably have a weaker CV, but they won it easily, so they fit into this thread. Maybe if Danny had been born in 1966, he would have been the youngest world champion? and Kevin McBride would have captured the minds of millions of fans with his spectacular knockouts if only he had fought in a weaker era and been managed like Tyson

 

That's a hard line to draw on greatness

This might seem really left field, but stick with me, it's relative.

There is a huge elephant in boxing history it seems like no one really wants to deal with or admit, but imo should be a subject that more prevalent in general topics.

You are all aware of how boxing came, at least in vague terms. If I said boxing used to be illegal or done in gambling halls by career criminals, quite a lot of which had criminal careers outside of boxing as well, I will have taught no one here anything new.

But, just in case, a brief review

Greeks, it's a religious ritual, more exactly a rite, to honor Apollo.

Romans, like the Greeks but with new names

Medieval, Christians decided boxing is heresy because it disfigures the image of God, boxing is made illegal across Christendom.

British, Puritanism was the rage in European culture, not every rich dude was into it. To combat the rise of Puritanism the aristocracy of England dug up a bunch of old Roman stuff to highlight positives of coming from a pagan culture. Boxing was one the 1640s re-enacted sports at the first English Olympics. Brought to England by Richard Dover.

A dueling master makes a traveling show out of the newish discipline and stages a bunches of matches no historians list as legitimate title fights.

A sport is forged out of the under class and almost immediately overtaken by the criminal elements they are forced to deal with due to the legal state of fist fighting going back to the 300sAD

The modern idea of publishing articles in newspapers to raise awareness of a fight was born along with the invention of selling tickets for a seat at an event.

The sport becomes so enveloped in criminality and gang activity the rich men of England are forced to foster an industry to rival the english boxing industry just to have some level on control in the sport. This is how and why American boxing took off despite not being a major world power or a colony of the BE at the time.

American boxing immediately succumbs to political pressure, the first US champ, Hyer, the "Young American" ... that's a political term, Young American. With waves of influence from immigrants and anti-immigration movements along with all the propaganda that continues to plague such topics in the US.

The widely known criminal politicians of America, gang leader-senators who were elected through vote for me or get shot campaigns, took control in American boxing withing the first generation of men who competed.

The world title is established between the Americans and English but only among the white men of those nations.

The American economy takes off and the modern idea of paying a journalist for a positive review is born.

The European economy crumbles causing a political shift across Europe that sees the rise and falls of Germany, Italy, and Spain, and during that rise while propaganda was at its peak fascists took control of the voting block in European boxing causing the only Spanish HW contender, Italian world HW champion, and German world HW champion.

A black man beats a german white for the HW crown while Hitler is in power and war is no longer just propaganda

America rises as the new super power, Italian American culture has a huge economic impact and just like the occidental 20s, 30s, and 40s, the 50s seems to continue with the fine level of coincidences.

It wouldn't be much longer until Don King came and did all the amazing DK moves such as inventing the PPV and all the sales ploys that go with.



Point is, at no point, I don't care who your favorite is, at no point in boxing history has it ever been anything but mired in propaganda.

If I tell you guys some story about an ancient and then say but it might be a myth ... no problem, everyone gets it.

If it's in the LPRR era I might have to bring some level of proof but it is largely pretty easy to get people to agree LPRR eras should be taken with a grain of salt.


But as soon as you guys feel like you know something well then that subject must be true. There's no way Dempsey was just a promotional machine. No way Marciano actually got favoritism because he's Italian-American. No way Primo was only champion because Il Duce decided it'd look good for Italy.

Usyk just happens to be champion during a time when his nation is embroiled in an international crisis with propaganda machines on both sides.

It never stops, it's always been there, and it's never a major part of any discussion. The sheer amount of coincidental history in boxing is staggering.





That finally expressed, it's really hard to gage both of what you asked. Greatness over time = minefield. Weakness of resume over time = minefield. Together = me dead.

 

Why do people call Douglas a journeyman ? i'm tired of hearing this narrative it's absolute nonsense i had to call another member out on this a few weeks ago aswell.

Do you know the difference between a contender and a journeyman ? i truly believe most people don't have a clue about Douglas's career.

Douglas between 1986-1990 went 9-1 leading up to the Tyson fight with the only loss coming against Tony Tucker who he was beating clearly on points for 10 rounds until being stopped late. That loss aside Douglas during this time beat Greg Page, Trevor Berbick, Oliver McCall, that's 3 wins against fighters who were former/future champions. You also had the win against Mike Williams who was quite highly rated at the time and was considered to be a future Tyson opponent, Williams only loss at the time was a competitive close decision loss to Witherspoon. Douglas destroyed Williams knocking him down 3 times with a jab which is unheard of.

Does any of the above sound like a journeyman to you ? and i'll tell you something else Frazier would be in the fight of his life against a peak Douglas who was 6'3 with an 83 inch reach.

 

Another thing to factor into Tyson beat dangerous KO artists like Bruno, Ruddock, did Frazier ever beat a KO artist ? he didn't fight any of the notable KO artists of his era like Shavers, Lyle, and the only one he did fight was Foreman who absolutely dismantled him. So there is a bit of question mark how Frazier would fare against bigger fighters who carried a real wallop.

Frazier clearly had the best single win over Ali but i don't think there's a whole lot of difference between their resumes.

Frazier's best wins are...

Muhammad Ali
Doug Jones
Eddie Machen
Oscar Bonavena x2
George Chuvalo
Buster Mathis
Jerry Quarry x2
Bob Foster
Jimmy Ellis x2
Joe Bugner

Tyson's best wins are...

Trevor Berbick
Pinklon Thomas
Michael Spinks
Larry Holmes
Tony Tucker
Razor Ruddock x2
Frank Bruno x2
Tyrell Biggs
Carl Williams
Tony Tubbs
Bonecrusher Smith
Andrew Golota

Alot of their opponents would trade wins Tyson beat the far better ATG Light Heavyweight who moved up to Heavyweight in Spinks. Both beat alot of solid contenders but i think the glaring differences is Frazier has the best single win over Ali and Tyson beat KO artists and is more proven in that regard.

 

Jim lost three times to Jeanette in the year and a half before fighting Jack and the fight was only ten rounds. It's almost as bad as Fury's defenses of the invisible belt against Schwarz and Seferi.

 

Mike had a better career than Larry, let alone Frazier.

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/mike-tyson-had-a-better-career-than-larry-holmes.669560/

 

Rademacher and Lomachenko.

 

I rate Tyson over Holmes in the 80s as the number 1 Heavyweight.

 

I don't think you're clued up enough on that era no offence intended you're looking at boxrec and not actually getting the full information or the background.

Mike Williams was quite highly regarded at the time and was considered to be a future opponent for Mike Tyson. So it was a very notable performance from Douglas at that time to destroy Williams with the ease in which he did it. Williams had gave Witherspoon a very competitive fight in a close loss so for Douglas to drop him 3 times with a jab and not lose a single round was impressive.

Your last comment you said "Frazier did not lose to anybody of Douglas's level" but i'm quite baffled by that comment quite honestly. Because Douglas would be stylistically Frazier's 3rd toughest opponent of his career outside of Ali, Foreman. Douglas was a big talented Heavyweight with an 83 inch reach and H2H wise at his peak he would be a very troubling opponent for Frazier.

 

1. You didn't say heavyweights.
2. It's a false narrative to say that winning gold affords you special privileges in the pros.

Tyson had a harder path to a title shot than many heavyweights since the 80s. Do you really think guys like Wilder, Joshua, and Martin had an tougher road than beating Marvis, Ribalta, Green, and Tillis?

Or did you forget about Owen Beck, Okello, Botha (for Moorer), Schultz, etc.?

 

It's actually crazy how similar the reigns of Frazier and Tyson were:

-Started the reign with 1 belt: Frazier beat Buster Mathis for the NYSAC belt, Tyson beat Berbick for the WBC strap
-Unified the titles along the way: Frazier in his 5th defence against Ellis, Tyson in his 3rd defence against Tucker
-They both beat the lineal champions in their 7th defence
-They both had 2 defences of the actual undisputed title
-Both lost the title by knockout, being completely outclassed

Tyson beat more top guys, Frazier has the best win out of them.