Third greatest heavyweight of all time?

You can count me in Jack Johnson's camp, too! :bbb

 

Well, damn, call 6 friends to join Jack Johnson's camp along with you.

The credibility of Classic may soon be compromised! Slight exaggeration there. Slight.

 

"For a ten year period, Johnson beat what there was to beat"

No he didn't. He never fought experienced versions of Mcvey and Jeannette, Langford when he was a no longer a super welterweight, or Gun Boat Smith, who was one of the better white contenders.

Holmes left more question marks perhaps, but the difference here is that Mcvey, Jeannette and Langford were so far above the rest that they basically only lost to each other, for a long, long time during his entire reign.

Holmes, on the other hand, has more matches missing (Norton rematch, Weaver rematch, Williams rematch, Witherspoon rematch, Thomas, Dokes, Page, Coetzee)... however, while all of them were highly ranked at one point or another, nearly alll failed to retain their status as top contender for more than a few years. Not that this justifies avoiding them, but it is important to take note of. Also, no champion would've given ALL those rematches (perhaps only Joe Louis); it would be unrealistic for him to have fought ALL of them, but he still should've taken a good few of those.

Maybe so, but Holmes didn't lose to a supermiddleweight or to Hart. He was undefeated and sometimes fought down to the level of his opposition, but always came out on top.

Second, i'm not all that impressed by Johnson's opponents. To add to it, half of them barely scale over the lightheavyweight limit.

Well, Holmes doesn't have a knockout loss to Choynski nor lost to an opponent the level of Hart. Like Johnson they didn't fight the best of their day when they were at their best. Unlike Johnson, Holmes launched a succesful comeback and beat Mercer at age 44. Plus, most people felt he beat Spinks during the rematch. Those are extraordinairy accomplishments. Jack did have an impressive win over Floyd Johnson, but let's be honest... who will be remembered as the better boxer, Mercer or Floyd? Plus, he took quite a few losses as well, while Holmes only lost to the absolute top.

Add to that that Holmes was fighting much bigger opponents, and for me it's clear.

 

Johnson did beat McVey, Jeanette (several times) and Langford. Perhaps not when they were at their peak, but it's still better than not beating them at all.

Two of Holmes best scalps was also pre or post peak (Witherspoon and Norton).

That Johnson beat many small opponents is just because that's how the division looked at the time. One can only beat what's there. Louis' opponents were smaller than Ali's, Ali's were smaller than Tyson's and so on.

Sure, there are some bad results on Johnson's record, but you'll find that on every record from the time. If Holmes had fought under the conditions that Johnson often did, there'd be bound to be some losses for him as well.

 

My Heavyweight list looks like:-

1] Ali
2] Louis
3] Jack Johnson
4] Marciano
5] Jack Demsey
6] Holmes
7] Lewis
8] Jeffries

So I have to say Jack Johnson.

 

I know I'm going to get some flack for this but as much as I like Johnson, and bought the DVD of his bio, I simply think the fighters he fought were either too small, or were of all things, too white. While he was coming up, I agree he fought all the best black fighters, but it can't be said that he did once he became champ.

He himself would likely tell us that he didn't give a damn about his legacy, he just wanted the best paying fights out there.

 

I love Ol' Jack Johnson, however, I gotta agree that he never fought big guys who were extremely gifted or athletic........ Johnson never fought dudes like an "Ali, Holmes, Holy or Lewis" in his day........ I wonder how well Johnson would've held up when faced upon a man who could stick, move and punch with grace, and was 210+ pounds of muscle.......

MR.BILL

 

People say Johnson fought a lot of boxers smaller than himself, that was because he was a 'big' heavyweight in his day.
In 1900 the average American male stood 5' 6'' tall and weighed 150lbs, Johnson was a huge 6′ 1½″ tall and weighed roughly between 200lbs and 230lbs, he was not called the ''Galveston Giant'' for nothing.

PS Johnson was big, Willard was a monster.

 

There was something about Tyson. HIs bobbing,and weaving. Just Incredible specimen. He gets my choice. Tough poll though.

 

Marciano's best years:
1952-1955, Walcott to Moore.
36 months.
Seven fights.

Tyson's best years:
1986-1989, Berbick to The Truth.
33 months.
Nine fights.

Holmes' best years:
1978-1982, Norton to Cooney.
48 months.
Thirteen fights.

Sonny Liston's best years:
1959-1963, Big Cat I to Patterson II.
51 months.
Twelve fights.

Lennox Lewis' best years:
1997-2000, McCall II to Tua.
46 months.
Ten fights.

The second biggest knock on Tyson is longevity. (The first is the falsehood of his folding upon meeting opposition.) But, even in this department, he is in the pack with those champions considered the greatest of all time.

Not at all. Just sayin' that in fantasy tournaments, accolades must go out the window. It is one man against another. And here is where Spinks' and Holmes' records of accomplishments receded into total irrelevancy once they were across the ring from a salivating Tyson. And, again, they were crushed as never before or again.

This is the thing. The same could be said of Dempsey's opposition, and Louis', and Marciano's. Tyson's competition seems, historically, quite on par to me.

 

Tyson fought some good guys from '86 to 1990.................. His first reign was NOT marred with pussies who couldn't fight for ****........... Its just that Tyson was so young and dedicated and powerful, he'd go through his victims like a hot knife through butter......
:yep

MR.BILL

 

Tyson fought some very big, tough , talented guys who were in their prime when he fought them...

Berbick was a very tough, strong, well conditioned fighter who had KO'ed Big John Tate, went a very tough 15 w a prime Holmes, defeated a undefeated Greg Page and upset a prime Thomas ... Tyson crushed him ..

Bonecrusher was huge, extremely strong, had a iron chim and terrific power. He ko'ed Bruno, fought a tough bout against an aging but still tough Holmes, ko'ed Weaver and Witherspoon ... Tyson basically shut him out ...

Tucker was huge, extremely strong, had very good skills and a terrific amateur background. He was coming off his title winning stoppage of Buster Douglas ... Tyson beat him by a wide margin.

Thomas was a very talented boxer with a killer jab, decent speed and power, a terrific chin and a huge heart. He may have been slightly past his best but was still young and Tyson crushed him ...

Tubbs was a very talented fighter who came into the ring ready but got crushed. He went on to almost upset Riddick Bowe.

Tyrelll Briggs had an amazing amateur background, was a huge heavyweight, had speed, movement, terrific speed and a great jab. He was an undefeated Olympic champ and Tyson crushed him.

Let's leave Holmes aside ...

Spinks was another teriffic win ...

There is every reason in the world to dislike Tyson ... however I strongly feel his opposition was very strong, among the best ever sum total, and he was amazing in his prime.

 

I wish Hollywood would remake "The Great White Hope" with a better script and higher budget than the marginal effort that was produced back in '70 with James Earl Jones......... I still like the film from 1970, but it could've been a lot better and more so accurate..........

MR.BILL