Micheal Sprott vs Henry Cooper, who you got?

I suppose it common knowledge but to the mainstream they still think its like ****ing 10 hours . I just know cooper went on and on and on and on about it..when it was a load of bull.

 

Has anyone got any stats for how many heavyweight boxers there were in 1964?

 

Cooper would destroy Sprott? Why?

 

Ok fair enough. Quarry was more 70s in terms of prime.


This is the ranking for the end of 1964- Middle part of the 60s-

1. Muhammad Ali, Champion 6'3 210 pounds
2. Sonny Liston 6'1 218 pounds
3. Floyd Patterson 5'11 1/2 197pounds
4. Ernie Terrell 6'6 206 pounds
5. Cleveland Williams 217 pounds
6. George Chuvalo 209 pounds
7. Zora Folley 6'1 204 pounds
8. Karl Mildenberger 6'1 1/2 195pounds
9. Roger Rischer - 200lbs
10. Eddie Machen 6'0 194lbs
11. Doug Jones 6'0 184 pounds


2011-

1. Wladimir Klitshcko 6'6 242 pounds
2. Vitali Klitshcko 6'7 1/2 250 pounds
3. David Haye 6'3 210 pounds
4. Alex Povetkin 6'2 225 pounds
5. T. Adamek 6'2 215 pounds
6. E. Chambers 6'1 208 pounds
7. R. Chagaev 6'1 224 pounds
8. C. Arreola 6'4 245 pounds
9. D. Boystov 6'1 220 pounds
10. K. Pulev 6'4 1/2 250 pounds
11. O. Solis 6'1 270 pounds


Who if you had to name a champion and the top 10 would you choose?



1. Muhammad Ali, Champion 6'3 210 pounds
2. Sonny Liston 6'1 218 pounds
3. Wladimir Klitshcko 6'6 242 pounds
4. Vitali Klitshcko 6'7 1/2 250 pounds
5. David Haye 6'3 210 pounds
6. Alex Povetkin 6'2 225 pounds
7. Floyd Patterson 5'11 1/2 197pounds
8. Ernie Terrell 6'6 206 pounds
9. Cleveland Williams 217 pounds
10. E. Chambers 6'1 208 pounds
11. T. Adamek 6'2 215 pounds

 

So Haye couldnt beat Patterson not ever?

I did a ranking of what ring mag had for the year of 64- Compared it to what people describe as the poorest era ever that alot including yourself say is right now.

I just dont follow that hype that this era is so poor. For me personally there were only two outstanding heavies IN 1964 Ali and Liston, and Sonny best years were behind him. The otherS were good to decent, very much the same as what we have now.

From the beginning of the gloved era to the 30s boxing was mess in terms of organisation, you didnt have the structure you have now. From the 30s to the 60 we had a world war that change history, impacted on hundred of millions of lives, we had the greatest recession ever of 1929. J. Louis was allowed to fight for the tite when for so long a good black man wasnt allowed. Considering that boxing hotbeds like Europe, Soviet countries, Cuba basically had no real structure to develop talent we had a skewed graph of the best being from one country. Boxing was still finding itself, so to suggest this era is the worst is a fallacy.

Boxing really garnered huge attention in the 60s and this is why the WBA officially began there org in 61, millions across the world had TVs, more and more had the chance for professional sports. WBA and WBC were joint together until 78.

From 1920 to 1960 - The experts and fans alike generally say there were 3 all time great heavies Dempsey, Louis, Marciano. Id like to include Tunney but no one ever ranks him top 15 or talks about him as highly compared to others, as people believe he got Jack at the end of his reign and that he had a few heavies bouts as he was mainly a light-heavy.

From 1960 to 2000 - You had 8 - Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes,Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe.


Surely having seen two distinct periods and exact time 40 years each, you can see that when the world was a better, more ogranised place, better communications, and boxing had become a proper structured sport...alot more talent came out. It was easier to become a pro boxer.

The last decade has seen the rise of European, former Soviet and Cuban fighters....each had valid reasons for not bringing great heavies out...Cuba and the Soviet system would not allow the pro sportsmen and Western Europe structure for boxing wasnt the same as the USA as a lack of top coaches or information didnt not exist. B. London didnt have any sparring partners when he fought Ali, but now a guy A. Joshua can spar, Price, Fury, Chisora or several German based fighters.

The only problem that faces boxing as of now is the fact that the best dont fight the best often enough. It dosent help that a great american fighter hasnt made it which makes it more attractive commercially for what is essentially the biggest market America. One of the reasons is that the poor in America are comfortable compared to the poor of other countries and now that those other countries have the ability and facility to allow fighters to blossom, a lack top talent is thought to be the case. It dosent help that Boxing has veered of mainstream TV and that alot of gyms are closing down but again this era is not the worst ever.

Also the fact the all the orgs have run away with diluting the sport and that we have so many pointless weight divisions when 7 is what is really needed.

For the future wait until countries like India, China have proper structures..

 

Come on your do a top 10 with a champion from 64 ring mag top 10 to what we have now which is what you consider to be poor.

Ernie Terrell was 200 to 210...go and watch his fights...and hear his weight annouced.


I just honestly believe its a myth that 60s decade is far better than the 00s...and I took a really weak year of 2011 and most likely the hottest year for the 60s when Liston was still in full flight..and still its a 50-50 list.

Ive sat watching the 90s live and people telling me the 50s were better as all the old boys around the gym watching us train would keep yapping, i was surrounded by old boys and nerdy little geeks who had just recieved Bill Cayton libary of films on VHS as before there was no way to access all of the history only unreliable memory...they all of sudden became scholars cough.

Again today, people now big up the 1990s when i remember journalists, tv guys, fans saying it was a crap and weak.


The last decade we have had good fighters and for me alot stronger than many other decades bar the 70s and 90s.

Remember L. Lewis reigned and he is considered top 5, both Klitshckos have shown themselves to be top fighters, you cant argue with record or performance.


B. London didnt even have sparring parters, was by himself having to train hardly the best way to be ready for one of the greats.