Heavyweight with the biggest built up records

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Bummy Davis, Jun 29, 2007.


  1. Vantage_West

    Vantage_West ヒップホップ·プロデューサー Full Member

    20,821
    592
    Jul 11, 2006
    i know....i was shaking my head in how bad a comment it was

    great jab decent power he was a decent fighter i would give him to beat most of the modern titleists also he gave tysons toughest fight at the time and showed a blueprint in how to beat tyson beat him with the jab and cover him up and counter when he comes in with a hook.
     
  2. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    50,943
    24,879
    Jan 3, 2007

    My answer to that question, is absolutely not. Contrary to what a lot of people believe, due to some of my criticisms, I actually hold Louis in very high regard, and have him rated highly. I fully respect the fact that he held the title for nearly 12 years, had 25 title defenses, and has unlimited social importance in our country's history.

    My biggest problem with Louis, is not so much Louis himself, but rather his fans. Some of them are not content at just rating him for his legacy, nor what he acheived in his day. Oh no!! They have to make these head to head fantasy matchups, laiming that he would defeat the likes of Tyson, Holmes, Holyfield, Lewis, Foreman, Liston, Frazier etc. That's fine I guess, however they base these claims on the fact that the above guys fought what they consider to be subpar competition, while steadfastly stating that Louis fought men who were infinately better.

    Louis was a great champion, but quite possibly faced some of the worst opposition of most linear title holders, and at times had extreme difficulty or even near losses.

    For this reason, I simply can't give him the benefit of the doubt against most of boxing's latter contemporary champions........
     
  3. joe33

    joe33 Guest

    I cant stand these fantasy match ups either,no way any one can prove **** either way,if he was about today,he would no doubt be bigger and stronger and may not even be a HW,so many different things to think about,but i love the guy myself,some of his KOs were brutal,..........but i tend to agree with you he did fight some ****.
     
  4. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    50,943
    24,879
    Jan 3, 2007

    Fair enough...
     
  5. Dempsey1238

    Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,706
    3,541
    Jul 10, 2005
    I belive a good number of thsos fighter's records are incomplete in regards to Louis.
     
  6. good right hand

    good right hand Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,876
    10
    Jul 26, 2004
    as much as a fan for saverese i am, i cant dismiss how tough holyfeild is even if he is about 50% of what he was before.

    savarese a great guy but really only a fringe contender at best, so he will have a pretty big monutain ahead.

    id bet on saverese but only cause im a fan. its a pickem fight
     
  7. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    50,943
    24,879
    Jan 3, 2007

    Probably true.

    I'm guessing that they could very conceivably had more losses and draws, some of which were omitted for the purpose of making them look more marketable.
     
  8. quintonjacksonfan

    quintonjacksonfan Active Member Full Member

    1,332
    1,106
    Jul 21, 2004
  9. Dempsey1238

    Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,706
    3,541
    Jul 10, 2005
    Or wins?? You dont think Simms could of had 40 wins or something?
     
  10. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    50,943
    24,879
    Jan 3, 2007
    Doubtful.

    For one thing, record keeping had improved tremendously by the 1930's and 40's. Although it was far from perfect, it had come a long way since the turn of the century. Even though there may have been some discrepencies, where some small numbers were concerned, occasional errors hardly came in the form of a 20 or 30 fight difference by that point. What's more, given that Louis was prized very early on as a people's fighter, and hence big bread winner, it's far more likely that his opposition would have had their records altered for the better, not the worse.

    In either case, these notions regarding inacurrate record keeping are inconclusive, and without solid evidence, making them virtually irrelevent.
     
  11. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,495
    2,148
    Oct 22, 2006
  12. My dinner with Conteh

    My dinner with Conteh Tending Bepi Ros' grave again Full Member

    12,059
    3,559
    Dec 18, 2004

    Good call. Tucker never convincingly beat anyone who was any good. The worst thing is, almost every time someone won the title this lummox was number one contender. :huh



    Of the better title holders: Tyson and Foreman's path to the crown was pretty poor. Foreman always seemingly gets stick for it, Tyson: never; and gay boy's was a bit easier.
     
  13. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,495
    2,148
    Oct 22, 2006
    I am no Tyson fan, but in his defence from his pro debut to beating Berbick 20 months went past.

    If you told me a heavyweight turning pro today will fight for a piece of alphabet crap in March 2009 and beat a fringe contender and few decent journeyman on the way, I would say that is quite impressive...
     
  14. My dinner with Conteh

    My dinner with Conteh Tending Bepi Ros' grave again Full Member

    12,059
    3,559
    Dec 18, 2004


    I know, but this thread is basically about who fought the most stiffs before his title chance. Tyson comes pretty high up. Tyson and Foreman's victories are all the more impressive in that they didn't really have ample experience to take on the champ.
     
  15. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,495
    2,148
    Oct 22, 2006
    Tyson beat Ribalta, Ratcliff, Tillis, Green, Ferguson. And it should also be noted that with the exception of his first few fights all these 'stiffs' had winning records...