Looking for a consensus HW top100!

It's great to see Sam finally getting the credit he deserves.

 

What about fruity floyd? Tangerine tyson? Lemon liston?
Had a lot of a'peel' did banana man sammy....

 

Spinks is a hard one. I think his level is summed up by two moments after he beat Ali.


1. Ken Norton is asked by Boxing Illustrated to name the best 10 heavies in the world, he's said about 8 when the interviewer asks him "What about Spinks?", to which Kenny just laughs and says something like his "mother could beat Spinks".

2. The July 1978 issue of World Boxing's headline: "Is there anyone who cannot beat Leon Spinks?"


This is how highly he was rated back then- when he was world champ.

 

Sam would have knocked them into next sundae. :yep

 

Only if sammy had used his 'fruit punch' between rounds...

 

OK Chris--you're doing this by tens, not in order.

Top ten--all justifiable, but why exactly Dempsey over Johnson or Jeffries who fought the best of their time and thus dominated their era more than Dempsey. I would put Johnson in the top ten myself and would certain strongly consider Jeffries.

11-20--Johansson is a stretch this high. How exactly does he rate higher than Patterson considering he lost 2 of 3 to Patterson and Floyd certainly lasted longer and beat more top men.

21-30--I wouldn't put Byrd this high. Archie Moore would be a better choice.

31-40--I don't think Tom Sharkey meets your 20th century criteria-and I wouldn't put him this high anyway.

41-50--My judgement would be that Baker is way too high. He did defeat an impressive number of "names" but almost all of them were over the hill or second stringers--He lost badly in his prime to Henry, Moore, and Satterfield.

51-60--Loughran could move up quite a bit for beating all kinds of top men. He was erratic, though. Only non-champ to lick three lineal champs. Henry always ranks way up on these lists, but he never beat a champ or a really top contender. When he had his chance against Johnson and Moore, he lost.
I would drop him 30 places or so.

61-70--Ray should be much higher, probably at least in the thirties--How many had 72-1 streaks with wins over two prime champions. Layne slipped badly after a quick start, but he also beat two top 20 champions. I would move him up also. Bivins is hard to rate, as his best efforts were as a lightheavy.

71-80--Gibbons did very little at heavy. He was a great middle and lightheavy. If Gibbons is on this list, why not Greb and Walker, both of whom did much more at heavy.

81-90--Mike DeJohn-a decent fighter but one who never cracked the top five in his own day. I think someone like Lee Savold or Jack Renault should rate higher. They were actually considered top contenders at one time or another. And Tommy Farr, who beat Baer and Loughran, certainly was a better contender than DeJohn.

91-100--Okay. Satterfield could rate much higher, but he also blew all kinds of fights, so who can argue his placing.

Tommy Farr and Tami Mauriello probably should have made this list. It is easy to dismiss Tami, but he was considered the #1 contender at one time and had an impressive number of victories over second-stringers. He might fit into the nineties okay. And Melio Bettina, Billy Conn, and Harold Johnson all deserve a place unless you dismiss them as only lightheavies.

 

Dinner, do you have Tucker 10 - 20 or 20 - 30?

:hey

 

101...poor Tony just missed out. I wanted to include him, I really did. I just felt on head-to-head Banana Sam decisions him- a split of course.

 

Please consider:

Joe Chonyski (his knockout of Jack Johnson was 1901)

Fireman Jim Flynn (KO 1 Jack Dempsey)

Gunboat Smith (beat Sam Langford and Jess Willard)

Lou Nova (this one is iffy, but two wins over Max Baer and legendary fights with Galento)

James Braddock (didn't see him on there)

 

my coments are in .... format

 

Well he beat the GOAT, something Shavers couldnt do plus a win over Mercado is good and Evangalista is decent. Goto be top100

 

I missed that first time, I actually assumed you'd done that but was skim reading

 

Its a nice list pontius. ill post my thoughts later.


my only biggest disagreement is mike dejohn being rated over nino valdez. nino valdez in his 30s beat mike dejohn TWICE, and overall in there careers nino was the higher rated contender, had better wins on paper, and looks better on film in his respective prime. valdez was a potential world beater, dejohn was not.