New book - A Brief History of the Heavyweights 1881-2010

Judging by the film I am not sure Squires would be the champion of my neighborhood public house.

 

I'm just calling a spade a spade.

Squires was well regarded and burns destroyed him impressively. Make of it what you will but I'm just responding to a post about people looking non-abysmal on film :good

 

Marvin Hagler
Carlos Monzon
Harry Greb
Bernard Hopkins
Micky Walker
Stan Ketchel
Mike Gibbons
Fred Apostoli
Freddie Steele
Bob Fitzsimmons
Jake La Motta
Dick Tiger
Les Darcy
Jack Dillon
Michael Nunn
Sumbu Kalambay


Had Sumbu losing to the following: Apostoli, hagler, monzon, tiger, darcy, dillon, fitzsimmons, gibbons, greb, ketchel, steele, walker, hopkins and obviously nunn.

any of them picks you think are ridiculous (not allowed to mention fitzsimmons as i'm standing by it )

 

Michael Nunn, guy was a top talent imo.

 

Callis ratings are unique. His ratings ponder the question who is #1, #2, #3, and so on if you combined all of the rules! As such he factors in finish fights, 25 round matches, 15, round matches, London rules, and Queensberry rules.

Some fans think Louis and Ali are too low. I do to, however keep in mind these guys were not seen as top 3 all time heavies until the 1970's. Why is a good question. Perhaps those who saw heavies from 1890-1970 died out, and with a lack of film on many of them, their ratings fell.

 

No McCallum Jones Jr, Burley, Charles, Marshall, Holman Williams, Tiger Flowers, Griffith? I'd certainly have the first 2 on your list.

The unfilmed boxers, I think you're going to have a problem with H2H rankings.

Someone like Walker would get beat clearly imo, as he doesn't have the best track record against defensive agile boxers.

You seem to have marked Kalambay's chances against punchers and pressure guys generally, but he didn't have problems with Barkley, McCallum, Collins and Herol Graham had better digs than people realise.

Personally I think Kalmabay could outbox anyone on his day, but I rank him much higher than most.

 

Decided I'm only ranking guys in one division.

Jones and Charles are at lhw.
Williams, burley are at mw.
McCallum is at lmw.
Dunno what to make of flowers and marshall tbh they were wildly inconsistent.

I rate walker very highly because he had success at every weight he competed at. I'll watch some more of kalambay though, you have a point with Barkley and mike.

 

This is your list? I actually like this alot.

 

Yeah man. Might tinker a little bit with regards to sumbu, Darcy, Dillon and tiger but that's pretty much it.

I rank on h2h in the division I think they were best in.

 

Callis also said the thinks Liston belongs at #4. He changed his mind before he published the list because associates convinced him there were questions about Liston's endurance.

 

Delete

 

Am curious as to what they have to say about a couple of guys in particular, but I'm always disappointed when I sate said curiosity, and more than a little peeved.

I'll pass.

 

Louis was considered one of the greatest fighters ever DURING his reign. It didnt take another 30 years for him to get that kind of credit.

To say Ali wasnt appreciated as such until the 1970s is an odd comment considering he had half of his career in the 1970s, to some it was the half that solidified his greatness. Thats kind of like saying Ray Robinson wasnt considered one of the greatest in the early 1940s.

 

what info is there on Brit, Euro and other counties heavies?
I mean it was the preemo division and yes Amereica ruled it, but there has to be some foreigners included in it?

 

I wish to apologize for an error in my previous post. I stated that there was on odd silence on the black championship claimants when Johnson hit the scene, up till the retirement of Jeffries. I thought I had looked through those pages well enough to assertain, but reading more closely tonight I saw that Johnson's defeats of Childs and Martin were mentioned; Johnson-Hart was mentioned, also, albiet out of chronological sequence, when discussing the Hart-Gardner fight to determine the heavyweight champion.
I will also point out that the book only claims to be a brief history.
Aside from the chronology and articles on 15 boxers, there is also mention of Calli's picks for 15 greatest heavyweight bouts of that period, and also records of the title fights of various heavyweight title lineages.

My favorite picture -- I haven't browsed them all, though -- was Jack Dempsey with an old Peter Maher. Even granting Maher had gone bald, it was startling how much larger was Dempsey's head.

My apologies, again, for errors and misstatements.