My ten greatest heavyweights

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by edward morbius, Sep 12, 2011.


Page 4 of 10
  1. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,408
    48,822
    Mar 21, 2007
    For goodness sake, Burt.
     
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    #46
  2. edward morbius

    edward morbius Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,986
    1,266
    Sep 5, 2011
    I don't disagree with anything you post.

    Except where did I say plural. I was only commenting that Dempsey would have been several notches higher if he had beaten Wills. Wills was, in my judgement, the next best heavyweight for most of Dempsey's reign.

    Langford, though, even in his mid-thirties, would have been a good test for Dempsey prior to his bout with Willard. Dempsey said that himself in his 1950's autobiography if I remember.

    I think the Wills fight fell through because of Rickard, Kearns, and the big-shot politicians who didn't want a mixed race match after the Johnson-Jeffries riots.

    Remember, my list is historical only--not head to head.

    *Besides Dempsey's #9 rating, it appears reading through the posts, that Liston not being on the list seems to arouse the most controversy.
     
    edward morbius, Sep 17, 2011
    edward morbius, Sep 17, 2011
    #47
  3. Ramon Rojo

    Ramon Rojo Active Member Full Member

    624
    22
    Dec 5, 2005
    Based on historical impact names Johnson, Dempsey, Schmeling, Louis and Ali comes to mind.


    You should all know why.
     
    Ramon Rojo, Sep 17, 2011
    Ramon Rojo, Sep 17, 2011
    #48
  4. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    403
    Jan 22, 2010
    Em ,not to split hairs,but U post" he did not meet the best of his time "I assumed that it was other fighters as viable as Harry Wills. Dempsey beat the best of his time,excepting Wills, and Ali truly met the best opposition of his times,and avoided no one...Cheers...
     
    burt bienstock, Sep 17, 2011
    burt bienstock, Sep 17, 2011
    #49
  5. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,408
    48,822
    Mar 21, 2007
    1 - Harry Wills was the best heavyweight of Dempsey's time.

    2 - Jack Dempsey did not fight Harry Wills.

    3 - Jack Dempsey did not meet the best of his time.

    [3 - Jack Dempsey did not meet [the] best [fighter] of his time.]


    Just to clear that one up.
     
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    #50
  6. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    403
    Jan 22, 2010
    Mc,to quote the virginal Mae West, "goodness had nothing to do with it ":hi:
     
    burt bienstock, Sep 17, 2011
    burt bienstock, Sep 17, 2011
    #51
  7. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,408
    48,822
    Mar 21, 2007
    You can say that again.

    Wills was 36 when he lost the fights you are trying to say make him a natural victim for Dempsey. He had been meeting top men for twelve years.

    When someone has the temerity to suggest that Dempsey's losing to Tunney in 26 means he might lose to Muhammad Ali, you can't wait to point out how past-prime he was...but Wills, who was the older man, losing to Sharkey that same year is a fair reflection of his chances with Dempsey in 1923?

    That's an outrageous claim.
     
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    #52
  8. Dempsey1238

    Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,734
    3,580
    Jul 10, 2005
    Wills was the number 1 guy all though Dempsey's title rein.

    7 years. 7 years is a long time, and they both lost in the same year. Wills got old. It happens to us all. That lost to Sharkey should NOT be the factor to determind how they match up in there primes. Yes Dempsey beat Sharkey, but that was a perfect shot to the balls, than up to the head combo that won the day. So I am not sure what to really think of that one.
     
    Dempsey1238, Sep 17, 2011
    Dempsey1238, Sep 17, 2011
    #53
  9. The_Rock

    The_Rock Member Full Member

    108
    1
    Sep 16, 2011
    Interesting List, hadn't seen too many like that.
     
    The_Rock, Sep 17, 2011
    The_Rock, Sep 17, 2011
    #54
  10. SenorRamirez

    SenorRamirez Active Member Full Member

    596
    1
    Jul 14, 2011
    u know **** about boxing...
     
    SenorRamirez, Sep 17, 2011
    SenorRamirez, Sep 17, 2011
    #55
  11. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    403
    Jan 22, 2010
    You are 100% correct in stating that the Harry Wills who lost to Jack Sharkey,and Uzcudun,was 36 years of age and PAST his prime. No doubt
    about that. But taking that in consideration, I believe because of styles,
    Dempsey would have been a favorite over Wills ,had they collided in 1918-23. But darn yes, Wills,a fine gentleman was over the hill by the time he fought Sharkey and Paolino. Peace...
     
    burt bienstock, Sep 17, 2011
    burt bienstock, Sep 17, 2011
    #56
  12. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,408
    48,822
    Mar 21, 2007
    Sorry Burt, it doesn't tie in. You're becoming harder and harder to take seriously over Dempsey, I'm afraid.

    What I like best in posters is consistency to match a keenness of mind. You can't fobb off anyone who looks at Dempsey as having certain weaknesses based on the filmed, readily available Tunney performances as irrelevant due to his being past prime - and then write Wills off based upon less film aged 36.
     
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    #57
  13. Joe E

    Joe E Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,361
    42
    May 12, 2007
    Welcome, Ed. Word of advise, stay out of the Lounge for awhile.
     
    Joe E, Sep 17, 2011
    Joe E, Sep 17, 2011
    #58
  14. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    403
    Jan 22, 2010
    Mc,read my above post,AGREEING with you wholeheartedly,that Harry Wills at 36 years of age was away over the hill in 1926-27 via Sharkey and
    Uzcudun. I would be a hypocrite not recognizing this glaring FACT. And so was the Dempsey of Tunney, The Joe Louis of Charles, Marciano, the Ali of Holmes, Spinks, Berbick. All of these great fighters should be evaluated H2H,in their PRIMES. One other point, if I constantly defend the ability of the Dempsey of Toledo,and after,it is because in my mind's eye, I see a unique combination of lithe speed, and power,and toughness ,making him a handful for anyone that followed him. Ditto, the favorite blaster of my time,[and all times],the young Joe Louis. If I'm wrong, I sure can live with my picks. Hope I explained myself, Mc ?
     
    burt bienstock, Sep 17, 2011
    burt bienstock, Sep 17, 2011
    #59
  15. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,408
    48,822
    Mar 21, 2007
    As you say.
     
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2011
    #60
Page 4 of 10