I have struggled for a long time trying to rank the HW's especially from 14+, and am still not sold on my ranking from from there through 20...I would actually like to compile a top 25, 30 and someday 50 HW's??? So how is this list...who is missing....who is too high/low??? I like bodhi's idea of a tier system and left spaces to indicate where I would put them This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected
Langford should be in there, methinks. Dempsey might be a bit high, too. But it's not a bad list, all things considered/
Nice List. A few comments 1) I think Liston at # 12 is to low. I have him in my top 3 all time, but I generally overate him to objective viewers. I think anywhere from 5-10 for Liston is the consenus. The fact you only have Patterson and Liston 2 spots from eachother does not sit well in my stomach. 2) I think your giving Walcott the shaft by placing Patterson, Schmeling, Charles, and Tunney over him. I think Walcott rates higher than all of these men. I feel Walcott's style of being a "fast moving cutie with a terrific punch" makes him a difficult style for the great champions. I also feel Walcott defeated better opposition and more rated contenders than those 4. 3) I think Dempsey at # 7 and Wills left off the list, is a huge slap in the face to Harry. Harry beat better competition than Dempsey in the SAME era. Dempsey ducked Harry for 7 years, It's not Harry's fault he never got the opportunity. Also, Harry should not be penalized because of the lack of film. For all we know, he could have been better than Dempsey. He certainly matches Dempsey in accomplishments. 4) Where is Sam Langford? 5) I think a good case for Wladimir Klitschko in the top 20 can be made now.
This content is protected The red ones I think are too high, the blue ones too low. Wills and Langford must be on it. But pretty good overall.
The one's in red I think you have to high. I think you should have Tyson and Liston higher. No Wills? 21 is far to low for him. I have him at 10 or 11.
I am fine with Tyson where he is, in spite of his proponents! I used to rate Liston about 9-10, but am not as sold on his resume as I used to be although exclusively H2H I would move him up. My appologies on Wills (and Langford) who I am researching at the minute and find them to be currently 14-20 caliber but my ignorance of them made me leave them off for now...but thanks!!!
With the exception of Holyfield who I believe needs to retire, I try not to rank current fighters. Wlad probably would fall around 15-16, but I will feel more comfortable ranking him when he is retired. Again Langford and will's I remain slightly ignorant on and am researching them both (as well os Crobett) to see where they fit...I would probably say in the 14-20 range, but I don't have a feel for it yet! Thanks
Despite the omissions of Wills and Langford, it's an OK list. With them in there it'd be pretty good. I have Ali over Louis. Johnson is as good a pick for No. 3 as any. I rate Marciano lower and Liston higher. There's nothing mind bogglingly ******ed about it. Put Wills and Langford up there and you're doing alright.
1. I used to rate Liston around 9 or so, but as I replied to mcgrain I am not as sold on his resume as i used to be. H2H I think he is a monster and likely top 5 if I used that as my sole measuring stick. 2. I like Walcott alot, and I as I said I am not comfortable with 14-20 and this is my first stab at a top 20 list! 3. I like Dempsey where he is and fluctuate him with Frazier frequently. Dempsey probably remains my hypocritical ranking as his resume does not stack up to some, and I have not held it against him as much as some others. He is one of the first old timers I got into, and that could play into my bias! Right now as I have told a couple of others I am reserching Wills and a couple of others, but don't believ that he would crack the top based upon of my limited knowledge of him. I do believe that he warrents a top 20 spot, but didn't want to cast a token spot for a guy I am not that familiar with! 4. Langford same as Wills 5. with the exception of Holyfield who needs to retire I did not includ current fighters...probably around 15, but I will feel better waiting untill he is retired.
At this point I don't see Wills higher than Dempsey, but that could be a bias!!! I also have told a few others I believe Wills deserves to be inthere, but didn't want to cast a token vote or slot for I guy I am not as familiar with as I hope to be in the upcoming weeks...same for Langford, McVea, Janneatte & Corbett
Once again Langford is one I am researching, but not knowlegdeable enough about him to rank! I like Dempsey as top 10, although realize that his resume is lacking and he is much more highly questioned today than he was 50 years ago!!