Not saying this is precisely my AT Heavy List, but ............

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by guilalah, Oct 28, 2008.


  1. guilalah

    guilalah Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,355
    306
    Jul 30, 2004
    I recently did a points rating of five heavyweights. The primary factor was H2H on the basis of coming along in the same era; secondarily H2H if time machined out of their own era; I also considered height of established dominance of their division, longevity as an outstanding heavy, and consistency within that period.

    I'm curious as to what you think of the order I got.

    Highest to lowest:

    Ali
    Louis
    Holmes
    Marciano
    Dempsey
    Tyson
    Johnson
    Jeffries
    Sullivan
    Lewis
    Holyfield
    Tunney
    Frazier
    Foreman
    Liston

    This shouldn't be considered my AT Heavy rankings. I currently do not have a ranking I'd be willing to put my forum-user name on, other than Ali and Louis would be my top two, and these above heavyweights would be my top fifteen.

    I'm a bit suprised that Tyson finished so high. If I were making an official Guilalah ranking, my gut would incline to put Tyson in the #9-#13 area.
     
    guilalah, Oct 28, 2008
    guilalah, Oct 28, 2008
    #1
  2. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,047
    Oct 25, 2006
    I'll let other judge how your list looks. This is what I'm concerned about. This H2H thing needs to go, imo.

    Why?

    It's too unfair on old-timers, unless you believe Bob Fitzsimmons or Marvin Hart can compete with Lennox Lewis or Muhammad Ali.

    Applying H2H critera across generations is an extremely tricky excercise as there are dozens of variables to consider - ring size, canvas type, glove size and type, referee leniency (or lack of), fight duration, different training techniques, differing nutrition, differing styles, the 'fighting conditions' of each era etc.

    It's awfully hard (if not downright impossible) to come to a satisfactory conclusion, unless the eras are similar. (IE. 70's to 80's)

    That's my personal opinion. I like to participate in H2H threads but that's for fun. In drawing up a 'greatest of' list, I'd not bother with H2H unless the eras were very similar.

    Again, just my take...
     
    fists of fury, Oct 28, 2008
    fists of fury, Oct 28, 2008
    #2
  3. guilalah

    guilalah Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,355
    306
    Jul 30, 2004
    Hi, fists of fury

    I've been thinking about your reply, and I think I over-did the H2H scenarios. They accounted for about 5/8ths of the input. That's too much. I do favor some H2H, though, as a way of thinking through how boxers might have adapted (or not) against different situations and opponents that they didn't face in their own day.
     
    guilalah, Oct 31, 2008
    guilalah, Oct 31, 2008
    #3
  4. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,182
    48,451
    Mar 21, 2007
    Bob Fitzsimmons KO1 Sam Peter.
     
    McGrain, Oct 31, 2008
    McGrain, Oct 31, 2008
    #4