The best Hw's ever.

I'd agree, but then again we could lower it to 12 rounds and call johnson the best heavyweight from 1902-1922 because he likely beats everyone on points (would he have really faced a prime wills or dempsey and would either have secured a knockout over him?)

Jess did beat johnson and looked good against moran. During this time I have him top dog. After going inactive I like wills up until jack destroys jess.

 

Joe Louis
Ezzard Charles
Jersey Joe Walcott
Gene Tunney
Max Schmeling
Max Baer
Primo Carnea
Tommy Loughran
Jack Sharkey
James Braddock
Ernie Schaff
Buddy Baer
Hary Bobo
Lem Franklin
Joe Baksi

Out of the list of fighters I've evaluated I've came to this list, I'll come back to it later.

That was hard going and my brain is a bit frazzled with all the info going into it. :thumbsup

 

Matt here is my final 30 for 1922-1951



Gene Tunney
George Godfrey
Jack Sharkey
Larry Gains
Max Schmeling
James Braddock
Max Baer
Primo Carnera
Tommy Loughran
Maxie Rosenbloom
John Henry Lewis
Tiger Jack Fox
Jimmy Bivins
Melio Bettina
Joey Maxim
Bob Pastor
Buddy Baer
Arturo Godoy
Tommy Farr
Lee Q Murray
Jimmy Bivins
Elmer Ray
Jersey Joe Walcott
Ezzard Charles
Joe Louis
Clarence Henry
Rex Layne
Turkey Thompson
Roland Lastarza
Billy Conn

 

Great work suzie

 

I would consider Johny Risko and Lou Nova for a spot.

When I think about it, puting Mickey Walker on the list could be justified!

 

I will try to put a strong case for Farnan in the next couple of days, but time is a problem at the moment.

Also, one guy i forgot about, who doesnt seem to be on the lists, but probably deserves to be, is Battling Jim Johnson who I would like to get some opinions on as to whether or not he belongs, as i dont see him too far below Jeanette and co. Also, Sandy Ferguson is another case i would like to consider, but expect he will be culled.

 

I think that Schaff and Hamas narrowly miss the cut due to the abrupt truncation of their careers. The fact that it is still close, is a testament to how good they were.

Buddy Baer misses the cut for me, because despite some good wins, a lot of his legacy rests on giving Louis a hard fight in a loosing effort. Head to head he might rate higher.

Nova is a prety good shout. He has two wins over a still verry dangerous version of Max Baer. The Comiskey fight should tell us exactly how dangerous Baer still was. He also beat Tommy Farr more convincingly than Louis or Baer ever did. He was in the discussion about the best heavyweights never to win the title, after his peak run.

Risko should be strongly considered despite his spotty record. He was thought by many to be the best heavyweight in the world after Tunney retired. The question late in Tunneys title reign was "should he fight Sharkey or Risko?"

I think that when we come to splitting fighters like this, it should be a pointer in their favour that they either got to the top of the rankings, or beat one of the lineal champions.

This has caused me to come out fairly strongly in favour of Nova and Risko, and they meet both criteria.

 

I'm with Janitor here, if we're talking bottom end 30, risko and nova make the cut.

hamas, knocking on the door but I'd put buddy baer above him tbh.