My top 50 heavyweights of all time

SuzieQ, if you consider title reign so important (hence the high ranking of Tyson in contrast to Holyfield's), then why is Liston on top of the mountain #2 with a grand total of one title defence against someone he already easily beat?

Wouldn't Holyfield's second victory over Tyson be rather similar to Liston's second win over Patterson more or less put them on par? Not to mention Holyfield's other title reigns.

 

I understand how you're approaching the thing, but h2h, a young , not yet fully prime Ali completele outboxed Sonny.

Even with liniment in his eyes, Sonny was unable to catch him.

I think that , prime for prime, Ali scores a virtual shutout just about every time.

 

If Tyson hadn't been DQ'd Holyfield would kicked the **** out of him, like he was always going to do.

Tyson would have bitten him about 10 more times, and cried some more. Holyfield would have knocked him out.

But, hey, biting chunks out of a man's ear warrants a DQ. Surely.

Holyfield was washed-up worse than Tyson was around this time. That's why he was like a 10-1 underdog or more first time round, and still underdog in the rematch.

I thought Holyfield basically brawled Tyson both fights, bullied the **** out of him. He boxed and countered to some extent, but it was pure rough, tough, strongman stuff, he just flat-out punked Tyson.

The only time Tyson thought he would give it a go was when he started punching out security guards, trying to get at Holyfield, safe in the knowledge than he'd been saved from the man-to-man combat of a fair boxing match, where he'd always be Holyfield's *****.

 

Not a bad list. I don't see any name that I would consider unjustified at any level. Lee Q Murray is the most idiosyncratic pick.
My own take would be that Liston is a few notches too high and Holmes and Lewis a few notches too low.

I would wonder what you think of these fighters and why they did not make your list?

1. Harold Johnson--defeated four men on your list--Charles, Moore, Machen, and Valdes, as well as your close misses Henry and Bivins, and respected contenders such as Satterfield, Godoy, and Jones. I would guess he holds more wins over top heavyweights than quite a number of men who did make your list. Did you consider him merely a lightheavy?

2. Tommy Loughran--defeated three champions, Sharkey, Baer, and Braddock, as well as around 20 rated contenders, a huge total, including top men like Stribling, Schaaf, Hamas, etc--Again a lightheavy champ, but fought a number of years at heavy. Erratic, but his resume is impressive.

3. Why did you rank Quarry over Machen? Just interested. Machen was more consistent over a longer period, and fought his best opponents tougher with the exception of Johansson. I judge him the better fighter on film. And when over the hill he beat a green Quarry badly. What is your take?

4. Rex Layne--I know, I know, he slumped into being a mere journeyman and he wasn't that old, but he won 4 of 6 from Walcott, Charles, Satterfield, and Thompson and I would be hard pressed to name another contender with four better wins. Even Ray falls a bit short.

5. Elmer Ray--I don't dispute his high rating. His record from 1940 to 1948 was 72-2 with one NC and 61 ko's, highlighted by wins over Walcott, Charles, and a blowout of Savold. That is certainly one of the best, if not the single best, run of such duration that any contender ever had. I might wonder why Turkey Thompson gets no position at all, though, considering he blew out Ray in 1 round in the middle of that run.

 

I don't care what the scorecards said. I saw the fight. Then, and quite a few times since. Liston won one round, the one where Clay was blinded by chemicals.

Clay/Ali's prime ran from then until the exile. But he continued improving over the next three years.

Watch the fight. Liston done everything he could to take Clay out.

The Liston of the second fight was old. (He aged suddenly during the first fight). But the Liston of the first fight was not old nor rusted, just over-confidant and dismayed and demoralized that he couldn't catch Clay. There was **** all wrong with his shoulder, he was just getting humiliated and quit on his stool. He was officially 31, but probably closer to 34 and just coming off a major defeat of Patterson a few months earlier.

BTW, I have Liston at #7 on my heavyweight alltime list (which only includes the last 75 years or so).

 

Thomas was in the 1940 yearly ratings. Peaks was rated as high as #6 in 1948. I assume Daniels was ranked at one point or another, but I do not have monthly ratings. All were worthy wins for certain when Ray beat them.

Peaks, interestingly, more or less ruined Murray. Murray was on a winning streak and had never been knocked out when Peaks knocked him down 12 times in route to a 3rd round TKO. Murray was never the same fighter after that.

I did not dispute your ranking of Ray of #22 on an all time list. As I said, winning 72 or 74 decisions over 8 years with 61 knockouts and victories over Walcott and Charles is a record that makes Ray a contender for even a higher rating. My point about Thompson is that his ko of Ray in the middle of this run plus a strong overall career warrents strong consideration for a top 50 position.

On Rex Layne, I recently rewatched the last two rounds of his 1953 fight with Ezzard Charles on youtube. Layne is not exactly Firpo. He was clumsy and often very awkward, but he had an excellent left jab and was surprisingly quick with his hands. On the other hand, I don't think he had Firpo's power. The question isn't whom Layne would have lost to but his actual victories over Walcott, Charles, and Satterfield. I have seen films of him against all these men, and he looks very good. He seems to have fought to the level of his competition in his early years before his porous defense and accumulated beatings began to undercut his performances.

 

Larry Gains should be in place of PRIMO imo.