Looking for a consensus HW top100!

Chris--I don't know how one would justify leaving Harold Johnson off. I think he should rank in the forties or fifties. Johnson owns victories over 8 of your ranked fighters--Charles, Moore, Machen, Godoy, Bivins, Satterfield, Henry, and Valdes.

 

I find it interesting that some you rate Harry Wills higher than Max Schmeling.

 

I think Wills was quite better than Schmeling.

Maybe not in an H2H sense, but certainly in a resume-for-the-era sense.

 

Not surprisingly, I find most of your choices near the top entirely reasonable, while I disagree more and more as we get lower on the list.

Some guys who I think shouldn't be on the list:
Larry Donald (what's the best win of the man's career? Bert Cooper??? Was he ever even in the top 10???)
Gerry Coetzee (or at least not two of him)
Mike DeJohn (shouldn't contemporaries who beat him and accomplished more, like, say, Chuvalo, deserve priority?)
Harry Matthews (very good fighter, but basically, he had one big heavyweight win against Layne, was blown out by Marciano and never did anything of serious note in the division again)
Abe Simon (not an elite, didn't really beat much of anyone aside from a then-stepping-stone Walcott)

Some guys who I think should or could be on the list:
Jim Braddock (Baer, Lewis, Farr, decked Louis and gave him a run for his money- not bad at all, surely better than Larry Donald)
Harold Johnson (should be a shoe-in; the man beat Charles, Machen, Valdes, Henry, Godoy, the works- he probably has a decisively-winning record against guys on the list)
Young Stribling (yeah)
Lou Nova (a good share of quality wins, including two over Baer, was viewed as having a serious shot at Joe Louis at one point)


Some guys whose inclusion I find dubious:
Bob Satterfield (a memorable fighter, and pulled of some impressive upsets, but not all that good a heavyweight on the whole)
Tony Tubbs (surely there are more worthy guys than him)


Some guys I think are substantially too low:

Jack Sharkey (I can see this one, but I think he deserves 15-20 spots higher with a resume like his- wins over Carnera, Schmeling, Wills, Loughran, Godfrey, Stribling, etc., several of whom are ranked well above him, and notably faced the best black fighters of his day)
Elmer Ray (easily top 50 in my estimation, arguably even top 30. 50-fight winning streak, beat two prime future champs who are in your top 20)
Ernie Terrell (what makes Folley, Machen and especially Williams so much better than him?
Jimmy Bivins (interim champ, extended run at #1, beat practically everyone in '41-45)
Jess Willard (beat a still-very-formidable Johnson for the title, had a few other solid wins, deserves at least top 60, I'd say)

Some guys who I think are substantially too high:
Gerry Cooney (weak resume, bit of a hype-job)
Cleveland Williams (")
John Ruiz (the guys on the "too-low" list above are probably turning over in their graves at the thought of being ranked below this man)
Bob Baker (I don't see where he was leagues ahead of guys like Valdes and Satterfield, who are way down in the nether reaches of the list)
Corrie Sanders (one-hit wonder)
Hasim Rahman (")
Oliver McCall (")
Buster Douglas ("- although he did beat Berbick and McCall)

 

Muhammad Ali
Larry Holmes
Evander Holyfield
Joe Louis
Joe Frazier
George Foreman
Lennox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Rocky Marciano
Jack Dempsey

11-20
Riddick Bowe
James Jeffries
Sonny Liston
Jack Johnson
Harry Wills
Ezzard Charles
Jersey Joe Walcott
Sam Langford
Bob Fitzsimmons
Gene Tunney
Ingemar Johansson

21-30
Ingemar Johansson
Floyd Patterson
Max Schmeling
Buster Douglas
Ken Norton
Michael Spinks
Jerry Quarry
Jess Willard
Max Baer
Joe Jeannette
David Tua

31-40
Chris Byrd
Oliver McCall
Sam Mcvey
Jimmy Ellis
Jimmy Young
Hasim Rahman
Archie Moore
Tom Sharkey
Primo Carnera
Ike Ibeabuchi

41-50
John Ruiz
Jack Sharkey
Tim Witherspoon
Jerry Quarry
Ron Lyle
Donovan Ruddock
Ray Mercer
Frank Bruno
Eddie Machen
Bob Baker


51-60
Michael Moorer
Michael Dokes
Corrie Sanders
Jerry Cooney
Cleveland Williams
Tony Tucker
Tommy Loughran
George Godfrey
Arthuro Godoy
Clarence Henry

61-70
Tommy Morrison
Zora Folley
Billy Miske
Lee Murray
Bob Pastor
Oleg Maskaev
Elmer Ray
Marvin Hart
Jimmy Bivins
Rex Layne

71-80
Tony Tubbs
Trevor Berbick
Tommy Gibbons
Ernie Shavers
Larry Gains
Mike Weaver
Fred Fulton
Jess Willard
Leroy Spinks
Ernie Terrel


81-89
Larry Donald
Greg Page
Gerrie Coetzee
Luis Firpo
Shannon Briggs
Buddy Baer
Paulino Uzcudun
Harry Matthews
Roland LaStarza
Mike DeJohn

90-99
James Smith
Bob Satterfield
Gus Ruhlin
Leroy Haynes
Nino Valdes
Joe Bugner
Abe Simon
Tommy Burns
Henry Akinwande
Gerrie Coetzee



I have really just adjusted your list mr Pontious, I have moved Douglas and Spinks up as well as a couple of others

 

Arguably Wills was no1 HW on the planet from 1914-1926

 

IMO ray, tua, bruno, satterfield, henry , sanders way too high. layne, baker, murray, carnera too high also. tunney too low.godfrey and terrel as well. A lot of critism? Not at all. I like your list, the IMO is the important bit. I have a list somewhere and if i can find it, I'll post it. Consensus? I doubt it but great fun!

 

:huh

 

1 m ali
2 j louis
3 l holmes
4 l lewis
5 r marciano
6 g foreman
7 j johnson
8 j dempsey
9 j frazier
10 m tyson

11 e holyfield
12 s liston
13 j jeffries
14 g tunney
15 r bowe
16 k norton
17 v klitscho
18 b fitz
19 s langford
20 m schmeling

21 e charles
22 j walcott
23 j corbett
24 j sharkey
25 p jackson
26 h wills
27 j young
28 j jeanette
29 s mcvey
30 g godfrey

31 t witherspoon
32 m baer
33 f patterson
34 g quarry
35 a moore
36 i johansson
37 j ellis
38 m spinks
39 r lyle
40 j l sullivan

41 j willard
42 t burns
43 w klitscho
44 j doughlas
45 p maher
46 t sharkey
47 t gibbons
48 e terrell
49 e martin
50 m hart


51 j bivins
52 k norfolk
53 h greb
54 t tubbs
55 p carnera
56 t tucker
57 k mccoy
58 j clarke
59 j goddard
60 l mccarty

61 f slavin
62 e shaver
63 i ikebuchi
64 d tua
65 m moorer
66 g ruhlin
67 j choynski
68 j braddock
69 b conn
70 t loughran

71 r mercer
72 c byrd
73 g smith
74 e machen
75 z folley
76 g cooney
77 e ray
78 o mccall
79 m dokes
80 o bonavena

81 b miske
82 b pastor
83 p j o'brien
84 h johnson
85 j dillon
86 t farr
87 l firpo
88 f childs
89 g coetzee
90 p thomas

91 m weaver
92 t berbick
93 j tate
94 j bugner
95 h cooper
96 g chuvalo
97 j root
98 l gains
99 j smith
100 f bruno

Using the called for criteria Klitschos(2), Goddard, Slavin, Childs, Jackson, Sullivan have to go. Maybe Maher and Corbett also.And just looking at my own list Harold Johnson is too low and where is Gunboat Smith on your list? Damn hard too do when everytime you look at your own list you revise it!
My nine subs to suit the criteria are;

cl williams
g carpentier
b levinsky
e schaaf
a godoy
s ferguson
g gardner
d jones
D ruddock

Ps I think Povetkin will crack this list big time-think solid skills and great work-rate.

 

I agree with most of the link, but McCall is wayyyyyy too high. Top 50 at best.

 

Actually a consensus top 100 is possible if we take all the top 100 you get and allocate points from 100 to 1(from the top, ie no 1=100) and total them up. however the lists need to be in full order, ie not 0-10, 11-20 etc.

 

my major disagreements


- Harry Kid Mathews over nino valdez? is that a joke? mathews was a well managed protected overhyped white heavyweight who accomplished close to nothing at heavyweight....at 179lb he stood little to no chance against a 6'3 210lb boxer puncher like nino valdez...cockell beat mathews 3 times, who valdez wiped the floor with. i know u don think highly of nino valdez, but he was a # 1 rated contender, and viewed as a threat to marciano. Cus Damato refused to give a title shot to the # 2 rated 33 year old valdez in 1957-58 out of fear. would he have beaten rocky? no way, but he was a threat..and certainly a major threat to patterson. valdez holds numerous wins over good heavyweight contenders throughout the 1950s and one great dominating win over ezzard charles in 1953. He also gave archie moore a very close fight in 1955 after moore had wiped the floor with henry and baker. On Film, Valdez had a powerful long sharp left jab, two fisted knockout power, and good skills for a big man. he defintley deserves to rate higher than 92, and certainly higher than kid mathews!



Clarence Henry 89? O dear god, what happened? Henry is in the international boxing hall of fame, and was viewed by the papers as the absolute best next to walcott, charles, marciano during the era. You have bob satterfield and bob baker both ranked well ahead of him, and henry went 3-0 with 2 BRUTAL knockouts against both of them!!! On film Henry is a gifted superb boxer puncher with electrifying handspeed, and lightning like power. he would have made a very formidable challenger for charles in his title reign, and would have been a very tough opponent for joe louis and rocky marciano in 1951(fights that almost came off)....... henry went blind after the beating he got from archie moore, and thats why he lost to hurricane jackson and slade...the man was blind! but in his prime he is one of the most underated fighters. I believe he rates well within the top 60


I would replace lee savold with Harry Bobo, a much better bigger fighter


like the Lee Q Murray pick One of the best heavyweight contenders of louis era. Ray Arcel called him the divisons best puncher next to louis. Murray was a 6'3 210lb Puncher and he was a consistent top 5 rated ring magazine contender throughout the 40s. He held claim to Interim heavyweight champion recognized by Ohio and Maryland Commissions courtesty of a big 8 round TKO of top contender 6'4 220lb harry bobo. the papers viewed murray as a huge threat to louis, and an elite level fighter. Murray beat jimmy bivins twice, and according to the papers should have gone 3-2 against bivins if not for a big robbery in the 2nd fight. You have Bivins in your top 60, and I believe Murray accomplished just as much, but is the better more dangerous heavyweight h2h against the rest of the field with his size and power and toughness. murray belongs in the top 60

I dont believe lastarza rates over henry and valdez. He in fact DUCKED both of them according to an article I have, and he accomplished far less for the era than they did. henry and valdez beat much better opposition, were much more proven against the era, and they have alot more to offer than lastarza does h2h

C williams should be much higher. he has a rare combination of handspeed mobility and knockout power that few big men in history had. he was also tough as nails and extremley feared. he beat better competition than you think too.......for a man who was so avoided.

Larry Donald in the top 100? o dear god, Donald has NEVER EVER been rated in the top 10 by ring magazine , never EVER beat a ring magazine top 10 contender and u have him in the top 100 and not a consistent ring magazine elite fighter like lee q murray?


Replace Donald with bonavena or chuvalo

 

reading over these posts--Harry Matthews--good fighter but basically a lightheavy like Gibbons--I think he should be dropped from the list.

Lee Savold--Well, Savold was rated 7 times between 1939 and 1950. He defeated his first ranked fighter in 1936 and defeated his last ranked fighter in 1950. He defeated, by my count, 14 fighters who appeared in the Ring yearly rankings. Savold was certainly an in and outer but he fought more good men and defeated more good men over a longer period than most on this list. I think he deserves a spot in the 90's.

Melio Bettina--Bettina was actually the #1 contender in 1944. Defeated Tiger Jack Fox, Gunnar Barlund, Red Burman, Pat Valentino, Jimmy Bivins, Harry Bobo (2), Gus Dorazio, Lou Brooks, Buddy Walker, Curtis Sheppard, and Eddie Blunt. I think he should be in the top 100.

I also think Chuvalo and Bonavena should be on this list somewhere.

I would take Matthews, Donald, and Briggs off.

 

I don´t understand why people rank Bowe that highly, the only thing of note was edging the smaller Holyfield two times. That´s not enough to be an atg :bart