I've got #5, now for #6

How come Johnson isn't considered mate?

 

He deserves a look at least. Why not start your list BC (before Corbett) as opposed to AD (after Dempsey) as he's not being considered anyway. :good

 

I've got Rocky at #5 as well:

Louis
Ali
Holmes
Lewis
Marciano
Frazier
Tyson
Liston
Johnson
Holyfield

My ranking of Rocky takes into account all factors. Legacy wise you could make an argument for Top 3- given that he went 49-0 which is no mean feat in whatever era. The one area in which I think he'd suffer is in head-to-head matchups again his fellow greats- especially the bigger, skilled and hard punching modern Heavyweights who came afterwards (Liston, Lewis and Foreman would ice him. He'd also be lose to Holmes, Ali and Johnson and be outgunned by Tyson and maybe Frazier). After it's all evened out #5 is a fair placing for Rocky IMO.

 

Frazier, Tyson and Liston are neck and neck for my #6, btw. It's very close.

 

I'd say Liston.

For years he looked superior to everyone - a good crop of heavyweights - apart from a young Muhammad Ali, and even the manner of those defeats can be put down to him lacking his earlier fire.

Liston was a proficient boxer and a remarkable puncher, and beat men of all styles with relative ease - Patterson, Machen, Folley, Williams. Only the phenomenal Cassius Clay was too much for him.

 

I would go with Frazier. A short run, but you can say the same about Liston, Foreman and Tyson. As you said, beating Ali may be the single most impressive win in the history of boxing and the way he dominated Quarry twice, pulled out the win against Bonavena when green and the rematch, beat up Chuvalo, Machen, Mathis, Bugner. It's all good. He gave a great account of himself against Ali: the rematch was close and the 3rd wasn't exactly an easy win for Ali either.

The way Foreman blasted him out hurts him for sure, but i think the way Liston quit after 6 light rounds while looking much more impressive in his previous fight than Frazier in his previous one (suggesting that Liston was at least very close to his prime) did hurt Liston's legacy more than Foreman does Frazier's, in my opinion. Read that sentence a few times because i don't really understand it myself either.


That said, i think the difference between the #6 and the #9 is pretty small.

 

I'm not convinced 1-5 is correct, but assuming it is, I place Foreman @ #6. He disqualifies Frazier based on what he did to him. Tyson's a huge disappointment and a bad matchup with George. Ancient George gave Holy a good run, I thought he was going to get him in round 2. Liston/Foreman would be a great fight, but I'd go with George based on the bigger heart and strong chin.

 

I think the ranking that you are doing here is one of the tightest possible in boxing history , after the top 2 , which most reserve for Louis and Ali (in any order i think is fair).

I think the next 4 or so positions can be given to Lewis, Tyson, Holmes, Johnson and Marciano. IMO Dempsey would be number 8. There are others like Frazier , Foreman, Holyfield , Liston etc. who in other posters' opinions are worthy of the top 6 , just not imo though. I have no problem with people putting them in the top 6 though , im not criticising. Just that i give the very best spots to those who dominated their eras (with some exceptions to the exceptional imo) , this might not be totaly fair as some boxers fought in tougher eras than others (maybe Foreman would have emerged as number 1 in a different era?) , but still, this is how i operate my rankings of ATGs BY DIVISION. I think that a fighter that shows that invaluable charecteristic to emerge as number 1 of his era deserves the most appraisal. My method may be flawed , but every1s will be slightly.

So - mine would probably be -

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

Also, to figure out who is above who between 3 and 7 i consider everything - legacy, resume, skill etc. The main criteria is achievement, but i give credit to fighters who looked amazing talent-wise aswell, usually for exceptoinal cases (hence my ranking of Tyson). But in honesty, my top 2 could be different and 3-7 could be in any order.

P.S. - if i were to break my criteria rules - the only below-8 fighter i would pt in would be Liston. But he was totaly exposed at the highest level, maybe not exposed, but heavily outclassed though

Good list so far , like i said, its one of the tightest and hardest lists

 

For the purpose of John Thomas's rankings, I'd' probably rate the remaining fighters as follows :

6. Liston
7. Foreman
8. Frazier
9. Holyfield
10. Tyson

Those aren't MY rankings though, just a stab at ordering the names JT has left available in the places left available. That's the order I think they should go in - until I change my mind again !