It's hard to say isn't it. All we know is in them 3 years louis had one meaningless defence whilst bivins fought the best of the rest successfully. I did consider bettina but I reached the conclusion that bivins was better and I see no reason why bivins was unranked in 45. Jack was inactive for that one year but it was during his active reign. You'll notice he loses out from 24 onwards.
updated slightly: Johnson gets the nod from 05 once Jeffries retired based upon him being the top contender right up until his eventual title shot with noone being able to better him in the ring. He keeps this until 11 based upon the significance of his victory over Jeffries. During his inactive spell between 11-12 Langford rose to the fore beating everyone put infront of him losing only to jeanette (seems a legit loss, but soon to be avenged) and gunboat smith (seems much more controversial than I first thought).
After watching holyfield v moorer I've concluded that moorer was never the best HW in the world, although following Holy's retirement he would have had the best claim had foreman not sparked him. Also giving Mcvey credit for outpointing langford (who by this point was the best) so for 6 months or so I think Mcvey was the top dog. Unfortunately Jeannette's two best (imo) victories were both usurped by better victories in a close timescale: when he beat Mcvey over 49 rounds it was shortly followed by Johnson's domination over Jeffries; when he did beat Sam in 1915 it was shortly preceeded by Willard knocking out Johnson. So despite my very high estimation of Jeanette it seems he never quite made it to the top despite having a golden opportunity (against langford in 1913)
update to credit Lewis with a promotion after bowe ducks him in 92. parity restores when holyfield defeats bowe in 93.
Was Bivins really the best heavyweight during this stretch? Doesn't that mean Louis' reign/career isn't really as impressive as generally considered?
Ive changed this quite a bit now but undoubtedly in my eyes bivins was the best whilst Louis was at war - but I feel it's fair to give the war time champs benefit of the doubt considering
Very interesting project which I will study in greater length. I'm not sure of the idea of Wills beating Firpo causing Dempsey to loose his claim, when Dempsey had quite recently also beaten Firpo and by KO2 rather than decision; on the other hand, Wills didn't have an 'out of ring moment'. Maybe at a certain point you could revoke Dempsey's claim due to inactivity. Also, I don't feel Louis lost claim during WWII. I think thats special circumstances, much different than a boxer being inactive by choice.