Liston is a different case. Liston was the best heavyweight in the world as early as 1958. He was denied a title shot for 4 long years. Fury only became the best once he beat Wlad. And then he did litlle until he fought Wilder. He wasted years where he could have been active and beaten some quality fighters.
For me the clear top 4 are. Muhammad Ali Joe Louis Lennox Lewis Larry Holmes Then after that i struggle TBH i would say Holyfield, Tyson, Marciano, Foreman, are all in the top 10 definitely. The likes of Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey are far too long ago for me, and i don't know where to rate them honestly. Out of the newer Heavyweights i would say Wladimir Klitschko deserves to be in there just for longevity. Tyson Fury doesn't make my top 10 just yet i think he's just outside, but if he can beat Usyk and maybe add Joshua to that list aswell then he's easily in the top 10.
Top 3 is far too high for me aswell, Holyfield lost alot of his big fights vs Lewis 0-1-1 should of been 0-2, 1-1 vs Moorer, 1-2 vs Bowe. Yes Holyfield had the impressive win vs Tyson, and it's up to you how you rate his wins vs older Holmes, Foreman. But Holyfield was too up and down and his career for me to rate him that highly, but credit to him for not avoiding anyone.
That's a pretty sold list but i think Holyfield is too high, but overall very good effort and a better list than i could come up with.
Pretty much on board, my top 3 is same, and I share your views on Fury, concise and thought provoking post. stay safe buddy.
I used to think Louis and Marciano sucked…now I have Louis at 1 and Marciano in my top 10 currently Louis Ali Holmes Lewis Wlad Foreman Marciano Holyfield Frazier Tyson Johnson Liston Dempsey
My top ten heavyweights list from 2005 and, below, 2022. 1. Ali 2. Louis 3. Holmes 4. Tyson 5. Lewis 6. Johnson 7. Frazier 8. Marciano 9. Dempsey 10. Foreman 1. Ali 2. Louis 3. Holmes 4. Lewis 5. W. Klitschko 6. Johnson 7. Frazier 8. Tyson 9. Marciano 10. Holyfield Over the years I been able to better balance the quality of Tyson's prime with the quality of his career. I do believe championship reigns and quality wins are the major factors in these kinds of ratings. George Foreman, amazing as his comeback was, had very short, unimpressive title reigns and the few quality wins he has don't make up for it. I always struggle with where to rate Holyfield
Liston wasn't the best heavyweight in the world in 1958. He wasn't even ranked in 1958. He started 1959 rated #9. Liston was arguably the best heavyweight in the world from 1960 to 1963 and he made ONE defense in 1963. That puts him #5 on your all-time list? That's not a really tight window - 1960 to 1963. Wlad was ACTUALLY rated the #1 heavyweight (not unrated or rated #9 like Liston) from 2006 to 2015. And he made 18 successful defenses in that time frame. 18 successful defenses is more impressive than one, isn't it? I know you said you detested his holding. Did you also detest Sonny Liston quitting against Ali twice ... the second time faking a knockdown?
It has been a while since i looked at Liston's record. You are right. Liston was arguably the best heavy in the world starting 1960. So he missed 2 years where he theoritically could have made several defenses. Wlad has a terific record. I explained my reasoning for not having him in my top 10; IMO his grab and clinch style is something that he should not have been allowed to get away with. He would have far less succes in my view if the referee did their job and didn't allow him to excesively lean and clinch smaller opponents. I am not denying that accomplishments wise he is top 10. He just doesn't make it to my top 10 based on the reason's i listed above.
But Liston is number five all time for being the best from only 1960 to 1963 and then quitting against Ali TWICE ... the second in such a humliating fashion, there was a congressional inquiry and he had to look for fights outside the country for several years?
Its a combination of h2h and accomplishments. H2H i favour Liston over all of my 6-10 and have him 50-50 vs Foreman, Holmes and Louis. Only Ali's superman speed make him a huge favourite over Liston.
I think if people's heavyweight lists didn't change DRASTICALLY over the last 15 years or so, you guys just haven't been paying attention. I love the heavyweights. It's always been my favorite division. I've been following it since the 1970s. But there were at least four ... maybe five ... (depending how their careers wind up) Hall of Fame heavyweights who competed during this period. And, head-to-head, they could've run over practically everyone who came before them. How does that NOT impact an all-time heavyweight list? How are people still rating heavyweights from 100 years ago (OR MORE) in the top 10 and ignoring guys who had 23 successful heavyweight title defenses this century? In the nicest of terms ... Catch up already.
Other than Wlad, which guys since Lewis have a case for top 10 all time? Not Vitali. Too unaccomplished. Yes, h2h he would maul guys like Marciano and Frazier but these lists are a combination of accomplishments + head to head. And Vitali does not have the accomplishments for a top 10 all time list. Fury? Again Fury is terrific but its his own fault due to his inactivity. No one is denying he has all time top 10 talent. He could still make it if he wins a few more big fights. Usyk? I love Usyk but he has moved up LATE in his career. 2 wins over Joshua, impressive as they may be, are not enough. He needs to beat Fury + a couple of other serious contenders before we put him in the all time top 10. Vitali, Usyk and Fury simply haven't done enough to warrant an atg top 10 list. Yes, H2H they would do well but we are talking h2h + accomplishments. I am curious which 4-5 guys you are talking about.
