Harry Greb #33 heavyweight of all time?

Back when there were only 8 weight classes and only ONE world eveyone pretty much knew who was who and what was what. Perhaps your observation is the key to bringing some order to the modern chaos. Reduce the factors involved by dividing how many of the ABC belts are lacking in the "title fight" for relative scoring purposes and again by 8/17th's or so to reflect the dilution of talent in the modern weight class mess. A further reduction for 3 day early weigh in's and so on would eventually place the ancients and moderns on even footing. I may have to look at this as a project toward the end of the year if my ongoing projects work out and allow time.

 

Currently I do think Wlad is 1.5 times Vitali.

Wlad has also fought the better/more men.

 

yes Vocker your points would even things up and the past fighters would get the scoring credit they deserve, and rightly _ucken so as MOST of them are far better than their modern counterparts.

I'll state my factors once again which I am sure will assist you in your ratings project.

Rating or Ranking fighters, first and MOST Important factors...

ERA's - from the greatest to the weakest general percieved ERA's, this places fighters in a Rank right off the hop.

Nation's - Boxing's Greatests Nation's generally speaking, seperating boxers in a regional type allocation, BUT not excluding any of them from their places as Champions or Contenders, However it will allow the absolute TOP men from the strongest nations likewise point placement with the others even though many of them didn't always get there for varying reasons.

Longievity - Longievity at the TOP and Among the TOP men.

Stepping UP - out of their own natuaral weight fighting biggermen, win or lose only the best did this really and it adds to their prowess and excellence at their own weight and rating there.

Number of fights - this should credit fighters with some recognition.

then you add in the remaining point systems for Championship battles and Contention fights and points for other noted fights, making sure theres not miles of pionts between them.


so for Example

Era's - 10 points down to 1 (or whatever number of Era's is your breakdown)...

Nations - !0 points down to 1 or maybe just 7 down to 1, if thats how many regions you breakdown the boxing globe.

Longievity - 5 points for 15 plus years, 3 for 10 plus years, 1 point for less than 10 years, and an additional 'bonus' point for the SRR's who exceeded 20 years.

Stepping UP - 3 points for every fight a fighter does this, and 5 IF he win's it.

Number of Fights - 10 points over 300, 8 points over 250, 6 over 150, 5 over 100, 4 over 75, 3 over 50, 2 over 30, 1 less than 30.

Scoring System - for Wins, Draws, Championship, Contention & Noted fights, again making sure the number marks aren't to wide.

Anyway you get the idea,

this would put things into perspective and a far more complimentary & accurate account of TRUE Greatness and also fighters more closely Ranked and not miles & miles between the TOP Men. the way it really is in real life H2H match ups.

You get the idea.

 

How about special points for Wlad for being the only hw with a southpaw resume?
(Unless you count 1 win over an ex lhw as a southpaw resume:Mildenberger, Moorer)

I know I talk about Wlad a lot but he deserves credit for it.

 

Spassky beat a bunch of cans and ducked the top black chess players of his day.

:hi:

 

it said ali's best win was vs spinks.

 

LOL - If my search is correct he ducked them ALL

I can see Boris Vs Maurice Ashley with Chef Emeril Lagasse doing the "move by move" commentary = "BAM!!!"

 

The worst thing about this list is seeing jersy Joe at number 10 wtf!

 

Actually big luf.. that is THE BEST PART of the list. JJW FTW!!!!

 

He got soundly outboxed in the first fight and git dominated and stopped in the second 110 is closer to his true ranking :good

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

I read that in Arnold's voice for some reason.

But yeah, crazy list.

 

Dempsey too high.

 

Audley Harrison is about 180 places higher than John L. Sullivan.

:rofl Even Hughroy Currie ranks above Sullivan !


(I'm not saying Hughroy was any worse than Audley though - but certainly less well-known).

The Great John L.
What an insult, would have been kinder to leave him out altogether.