I find it hilarious how the unappreciated greatness of Sammy Agnott is brought up now and again because of the sole fact that we as modern day boxing fans didn't have to WATCH him clinch and maul fighters like Willie Pep. The mere fact that Ruiz is always in shape makes me respect him more then 90% of the current heavyweight crop.
I personally think he's done a lot of harm to the division and was stuck using his negative jab-and-grab style because that was about the only way he could win against the other contenders. I also take issue with him being humble, because while he can be a nice guy at times his complaints after every loss and the infamous 'Letters from Ruiz' were some of the worst whiny 10-year-old bitchfests I've ever seen, barely worthy of the playground let alone a HW title holder. I have no doubt in my mind that without Don King backing him, and basically as a stop-gap substitute for Akinwande no less, he would never have been considered worthy to fight for a belt let alone have 10 title fights. If Holyfield had been even 10% better for that 2000 fight, he beats Ruiz handily and that's the end of the Ruiz experiment before it even begins, as King moves on to a different shiny toy. On the other hand... I can think of several more talented HWs than Ruiz that never achieved their potential because they didn't have his determination, dedication and sheer bloody-mindedness. When he ditches the jab-and-grab, he's a capable boxer with an underrated sneaky right hand. While the Tua disaster must be held in account, despite getting knocked down in other fights Ruiz has never been stopped again and usually shows durability under fire. Speaking for myself, if John Ruiz never fought again I'd be a happy man. But I can't deny that he's made the most of what he had, and when you get right down to it, I'd point the finger at his opponents for failing to display the skill needed to overcome what he could do. Everyone knows what he does, how he fights, yet time and again they got suckered into it or weren't capable of doing what was needed to counter it. So I couldn't say the worst. In fact, and I can almost hear Zakman's head exploding as I type this, he's probably been one of the best of the 2000 champs for the people he's fought and the title runs he's had. He's put up a hell of a lot more fight to keep his title than others like Neon Leon and Seldon and so on. Still can't stand the little cockroach though
Lower rung on the ATG list. But definitely not the worst. You got to respect what he achieved with limited talent and after the Tua disaster.
I believe Ruiz was superior to Tommy Burns, Jess Willard, Jack Sharkey, Primo Carnera, James Braddock, Ingomar Johannson, and numerous other beltholders from the '80s, '80s, and '00s. Ruiz isn't pretty to look at -- and he has undermined the sport's popularity with fans -- but he's a effective in the ring. Ruiz is also a fairly large guy at 230 lbs., too, so he would have had a size advantage over various champions from the past.
Underrated and hated by the "masses" for his ugly style, but much to their chagrin, he is and has been an awkwardly effective and undaunted sort against mid level opposition, but a miserable failure against blown-up exmiddleweight champions, which is INEXCUSABLE for a top ten heavyweight. Oh, and don't even mention the Tua factor in the Ruiz equation.
The marked guy does not fit in this line. Witherspoon shouldn´t rank much higher than Ruiz, if he should at all.
Ruiz was KO'd in 18 seconds, and beaten by two blow up middles...juice or no juice, he got his but whipped. I think Johannson, and Willard were a bit better. Ruiz won a lot of close matches thanks to Don King picking the judges. While Ruiz was somewhat skilled, the reason he did well was he would jab, grab, clinch, and ***** his way to victory. While Ruiz wasn't the worst title holder, he was perhaps the worst one to watch.