Thats a good way of doing it with Tiers, I would have Louis,Maricano,Ali in tier 1, my ratings below that always change because there are a lot of fighters that belong in the top 10 but no room
Why? Do you know what the McCalum survey was? In the late 1950's no less than a dozen of the best historians conducted a heavyweight poll, and Jeffries was rated #1, over Johnson, Louis and Dempsey. The poll was on a high level of people who have seen, read, and heard more than anyone here from 1890-1950's. Getting the #1 rank here means a lot. I myself have Jeffries at #3. Best combination of size, power, durability, and power in the history of the ring .Under rated in terms of speed, and defense.
A Grouping/tiering method is basically what I do as well. A lot of fighters tend to be interchangeable within 3 or 4 spots so grouping them works well.
Mendoza, that may be true from that one poll but there have been over fifty years of heavyweights since then ...
Agree man its more reasonable to have him at 1 than it is to have him in the bottom half of a list he could arguably be the Greatest alround athleat of any of the HW champs
This is true. 50 years has passed. However, the poll has names in is like Ali, Louis, Marciano, Johnson, and Dempsey in it. It appears 50 years has not diminished the above names much. I beleive Jeffries has the misfortunate of having limited film. In fact, the most film people have seen on him is the final round vs Johnson. To parallel, what if the only film on Ali was him getting peppered by Holmes? Or what if the only film on Louis was him getting knocked through the ropes by Marciano? TV is a power full medium. See my point. In closing, if you value the historians input who participated on the poll, Jeffries should ranks just ahead or just behind Louis, Dempsey, Marciano, and Johnson .yet in today, he does not. On quote, Dempsey, Johnson, Burns, Fitz, Corbett, Langford, and many other old timers said Jeffries was the best, and in the ring vs the best opposition, Jeffries ring record and results is better than the above names.
I dont have Jeffries at 1 but there is a long and honourable tradition. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtOjXb3EsW4&feature=related There is a lot of cr4p talked today about a new genaration of superheavyweights but Jeffries really was one when he came along.
What criteria leads you to place Dempsey in the top 5, nevermind ahead of Tyson? I can see the very bottom end of the top 10 as being more realistic, but I personally can't put him in mine.
Dempsey particularly scores in terms of dominance over his oponents. Two of the most highly regarded heavyweights of the day failed to last 30 seconds aginst him in a period when the reff wouldnt stop a fight unless you had one eye hanging out on the optic nerve. Fulton was the No1 contender in as much as there was one. I do think that Tyson has the edge in volume but Dempsey had a longer reign and did not come off the rails early like Tyson did............ He left that till later.
I agree with most but Jeffries i cant see the guy only had something like 18 fights and the rest were exhibitions......