HW TOP 10 h2h and achievement

h2h

#1 Muhammad Ali
#2 Lennox Lewis
#3 Larry Holmes
#4 Joe Louis
#5 Joe Frazier - Frazier vs. Ali I - greatest performance by a heavyweight ever
#6 Sonny Liston
#7 Jack Johnson
#8 Mike Tyson
#9 Riddick Bowe
#10 Evander Holyfield

 

Im late on this thread, read it through the 3 pages prior to this one though. Im no major fan of Ali, some who know me well know (or have bothered to read my rants!) will know that i finally changed my 1 and 2 all time heavys from originally 1.-Louis 2.-Ali, to the other way around. There's no bias, that is just the way it is for me.

And i firly believe Ali is number 1 h2h. Think, yes it should be Holmes in a certain light, fast, durable, has the heart, boxing skills may be the best, but i feel the biggest element in h2h terms is effectiveness, and the bottom line is that man is Muhammad Ali.

I understand people can argue points that i cant fire back at, because how can i back up that Joe Louis wouldnt have caught him cold? I cannot, but this is my firmly established opinion. I am not saying noone beats him prime for prime, i am saying that in the grand scheme of analysis, this man has the better chance if all are pitted against one another.

 

I agree 100%

 

Didnt see that one coming!!

 

H2H definitely Ali imo. Achievement wise I like Louis but you can go either way.

 

:good

 

Here's my top ten, a combination of head to head and achievements,

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Lewis
4. Tyson
5. Holmes
6. Liston
7. Marciano
8. Foreman
9. Johnson
10. Frazier

1 and 2 are a cut above the rest overall, can't see Ali or Louis out of the top two. 3-5 is completely interchangable for me, I rank Tyson the highest head to head out of these three but Lewis and Holmes have him on overall resume a bit. Liston and Marciano are a slight step up from the others below them and I can see Foreman, Johnson, and Frazier in any order and wouldn't complain.

 

I'd pick a prime Holmes over Holyfield without hesitation. Stylewise Holyfield couldn't deal with Holmes movement and jab. I'd pick a prime Tyson over him but it would be a good fight.

Holmes is one of the tougher matchups for Ali stylewise, but Holmes himself struggled against guys who could match his jab, and Ali would be able to.

 

slightly disagree. Tysons body of work 1986-88 IMO is more accomplishing than anything those guys ever did. Tyson unified all 3 belts in a span of one year, something holmes could not do in 7 years. Tyson all faced many holmes opponents who gave larry problems, and tyson demolished these guys in devastating fashion when they have never been knocked down/out before. Not to mention he beat some of the most talented big men in history along the way like thomas, tubbs, tucker, williams, bruno, holmes, etc

I do really appreciate your list and opinion though, and I know your a big tyson fan

agreed, I defintley pick tyson over holmes. that right hand would always be a huge problem for holmes even on his best day, and tyson has the finishing abilities obviousely to keep even a younger holmes down for the count.

 

Holmes beat Spinks in the rematch and the first match was damned close. Holmes was at the end of a long career (phase one, as we found out later). Spinks was an exceptionally smart and talented big light heavyweight at the peak of his. Spinks would have been trouble for many fine heavyweights in that situation. Shaver's didn't really give Holmes that much trouble. They fought twice, once Holmes stopped him inside the distance. True, Shavers caught him with a big one, but that Holmes got up and went on to win is to Holmes' credit. For the rest of the rounds it was pretty much all Holmes. Neither Lewis or Louis would have likely survived the shot Shavers laid on Holmes. In his prime, Holmes had amazing recuperative powers and the defensive skill to survive. The fight with Norton wasn't close until Holmes got tired. It still wasn't as close at the scores indicate. Holmes is a lot more than you give him credit for.

Foreman was losing spirit by the point of the Young fight. He needed to get away and get his head together. The Young fight is significant for Foreman's career for this reason, but not a good indicator of how he would do against other boxers. And who in anybody's top ten had the defensive skill to pull an Ali on Foreman? Tyson? Lewis? Louis? Maybe Holmes. But Foreman is no Norton, Shavers, or Witherspoon.

What about Douglas? The losses to Douglas and Holyfield dramatically alter Tyson's reputation.

I disagree. Not about Ali. He's number one, for all the reasons you stated. Lewis, is a different story and not necessarily because of the knockout. (The McCall loss is not actually a knockout. Maybe Lewis could have continued. We don't know. We never will thanks to an over-eager referee. But he beat the count.) I say this because I don't believe Lewis could hang with Ali, Foreman, Liston, or Holmes. I say the same thing about Louis. If Lewis' chin is a problem, then Louis' is without question. In fact, Lewis took biggers shots from bigger fighters and didn't go down. Louis could never have stood up under the thunder that Lewis took in his career, and Louis would definitely been hit as often as Lewis. And, as you mention, Louis had a lot of trouble with boxers, even ones who were under the light heavyweight limit.

 

Aaah, in a way that's why I love this site I suppose - I flung Holme's losses out there without much intent; it wasn't really the core of my argument.

So, for a final time: His losses aren't really bad at all - he showed his vulnerability to the right against Tyson, but that's perhaps all more or less. His showing against Holy was hugely impressive.

I do think his fight against Norton was close but clear, though.

Perhaps, but it's only speculation. What we know for sure is that Foreman met two world class skilled boxers in his first career and lost clearly to both. End of story.

Ha, ha. I usually argue this from the other side. Tyson's a hard one - he switched from being extremely dominant to looking like a punching bag. As enigmatic as Liston. But just like Liston, when he looked good he looked GOOD. But they both puzzle me.

Louis and Lewis both had weaknesses. For me they're very close. They were both awesome avenging defeats for one thing.

Would Louis done as well among the behemots in the 90's? Perhaps he would have been overpowered and outpunched several times, who knows. But just think how these pretty stationary men with their pretty open defenses would present a beautiful target for probably THE sharpest puncher in boxing history. Man, could he punch.

 

H2H (who would win prime vs prime)
1. Tyson
2. Lewis
3. Louis
4. Ali
5. Liston
6. Bowe
7. Holmes
8. Marciano
9. Johnson
10. Dempsey

achievement
1. Marciano 49-0
2. Louis longest regin as heavyweight champion
3. Lewis held tittle 3 times beat everyone he faced
4. Holmes only Louis held a heavyweight tittle for longer and only Marciano had a longer wining streek
5. Ali 3 time champion best of what many consedre the best eara in heavyweight history made comeback after 4 year layoff to regain tittles.
6. Tyson unified the tittles came back from 4 year lay off to win tittles again
7. Foreman 2 time champion proved age is just a number
8. Holyfield 4 time champion
9. Johnson first Black man to win heavyweight championship don't under estamate the importanace of this.
10. Patterson first 2 time champion

 

Doing h2h rankings is of course extremely speculative, but here's my take. I place them in tiers:

Tier 1
Ali is alone here. First of all because he showed he could beat just about every different type. He beat one of the best and most dangerous boxer punchers ever (Liston), the probably most powerful and dangerous slugger ever (Foreman), one of the best and most dangerous swarmers ever (Frazier) and one of the most skilled speedsters (Patterson). That he had tremendous physical and mental assets as well doesn't hurt

The cink in his armor here is his vulnerability against Norton. As showed against Bonavena as well, he definitely had trouble with awkward fighters, and that's why I think Marciano perhaps could prove to be his most dangerous opponent.


Tier 2 (in no particular order)
Louis: Very complete, but showed vulnerability against technical boxers/movers

Lewis: Also very complete. I don't think his losses makes as much difference here as for his legacy. The losses was probably mostly down to carelessnes and overconfidence, but in these scenarios everyone brings their A game and Lewis's A game was pretty damn good. The losses showed that his chin could be cracked, though, and that does count for something.

Liston: Was also vulnerable to technical movers. Showed a lack of heart in his fights against Ali. But otherwise he had pretty much everything.

Holmes: Been over this earlier.

Tyson: Formidable in many ways, but showed a lack of adabtibility and heart (not that he was weak, but compared to the likes of Holmes, Ali, Marciano, Holyfield and Frazier his intangibles fall well short)


Tier 3 (in no particular order)
Frazier, Marciano, Holyfield, Bowe and Foreman

Frazier and Marciano would too often fall short against the modern skilled giants I feel. Bowe and Foreman both had such clear flaws that I don't feel comfortable placing them in tier 2. I can see why some would want to see at least Bowe there, though. Perhaps Holy is too low as well, but he's 1-2 against Bowe arguably 0-2 against Lewis and had some trouble with ancient versions of Holmes and Foreman. I think he belongs in tier 3.


Ps. I suppose the absence of Dempsey and Johnson can seem strange. But I feel the modern era started in 1930-1940 and therefore haven't included earlier fighters. I feel a bit tempted to include Tunney, but he didn't have that many different HW opponents to really get a clear picture.

 

yes defintley. in terms of offense and boxing skill level, wladimir klitschko in his prime ranks up there with bowe and lennox as the greatest giants of all time. vitali klitschko does not belong on the list.