Top 10 ATG White Heavyweights

1. James J Jeffries
2. Jack Dempsey
3. Rocky Marciano (prety much interchangable with 2)
4. Bob Fitzsimmons
5. Max Schmeling
6. James J Corbett
7. Gene Tunney
8. Max Baer
9. Jack Sharkey
10. Primo Carnera
11. Ingemar Johansen
12. Tommy Burns

Joh L Sullivan is left off because he fought under a hybrid ruleset but if he were included he would be in the top 4 somwhere.

Wladamir Klitschko is left off because he is still active.

Apart from that it is the least unsatisfactory list I can make.

 

Excuse me whilst I vomit!!!

 

JAckson was not in great shape, noone disputes this. Fitz had some sort of arm injury against JOhnson, supposedly. However, if we assume that he didnt, then Johnson certainly does deserve credit for beating Fitz. It is interesting that when Fitz lost to Johnson, he had come off a 4 rnd KO victory just over a year earlier. Then after the Johnson fight, he went on to take future world title challenger Bill Lang 12 rounds and he also kod Jean Paul in 1 round. He wasnt near what he was but he was no pushover. Champions never are.

He was the accepted coloured champion! Does that make him a champion or not?

Simple, when Jeffries beat Jackson, Jackson was accepted as the best coloured fighter in the world. Later on, Johnson became the best. But, clearly this was not the case back when Jackson lost to Jeffries. On the one hand, you say that Jeffries was no champ because he didnt face the best coloured fighters, yet the point is, when he fought Jackson, Jackson was the best. You say that it isnt the case because he was so old, but who was then. I make the point that it wasnt johnson or others who later would become the best, for understandable reasons. So, who is it that you say was the best, and Jeffries needed to defeat (instead of Jackson) to prove he was the best in the world.

YOu trumpet ages, but the reality is that those guys were the best challengers available in terms of opinion and ability. It would almost be like someone winning the title in the 90s, Defeating an old holyfield twice, Tyson twice, Going the distance twice with David Tua, defeating Chris byrd, KO ing Clifford Ettiene and Lance whittaker in 55 seconds (quickest KO ever) but being criticised because he didnt stick around to fight the klitchsko brothers.

Exactly, he was so desperate to hype opponents he had to rely on a total fabrication to hype up a world championship.

And when should this have happened? Directly after his loss to Hart? That would have earned some credibility!

You say these things like they are a bad thing? He also never lost a fight or got knocked down in his prime. A pretty good effort in any era. Where have i said that Jeffries was some sort of Super man?

When Jeffries retired the first time, he had beaten the three most successful boxers in the history of the Marquess of Queensbury rules. (Jackson, Fitz and Corbett). That is also a fact.

WEll it is true that Jeffords was usually KOd when he stepped up. But he did have a few decent no decisions, and he was certainly good enough to fight an awful lot of top names. I would say that he was definitely Journeyman status, maybe an olden day version of say Jose Ribalta or someone similar. Not a great but definitely above local level. This was only one fight. Jackson went TWo draws with jeffords before losing, and also you conveniently forgot his final match which was a 25 rnd draw with Billy Warren, in Australia, almost 2 years after the Jeffries loss. He was a shell of himself admittedly (like Tyson against McBride) but not every man and his dog would ahve beaten Jackson.

 

Exactly which rankings do you take issue with?

 

It is by no means clear cut but I am inclined to say so.

Jeffries was never beaten or knocked off his feet untill his ill fated comeback. He beat the top contenders and other champions of his era and fought the best practicaly from the opening gate.

That makes him prety damn dominant.

I would say that he was more consistant than Dempsey and thrown to the wolves earlier than Marciano. He probably had more fights against the elite of his era than either of them.

Under the ruleset of his era Jeffries was almost unbeatable and could be seen as being an aproximation of the perfect fighter.

 

Not bad. I would move Tunney up a bit and Fitz down a bit. I tend to think Quarry was a bit btter than Carnera or Burns.

As soon as the k-bros retire, they should be no lower than 6.

 

You are full of ****, I'm calling it. In a previous thread you derided John L. as a coward for not taking on Peter Jackson, when Jackson was in his prime days and Sullivan was an old man, yet it's not fair when an old Jackson fights Jeffries? What the ****? As an Australian you have little moral high ground against the United States, lest I remind you of the horrible crimes and wicked past your nation conceals.

That was a great post.

You're clearly insane. This is a boxing forum, not a "hate America" forum. Sod off.

 

[WEll it is true that Jeffords was usually KOd when he stepped up. But he did have a few decent no decisions, and he was certainly good enough to fight an awful lot of top names. I would say that he was definitely Journeyman status, maybe an olden day version of say Jose Ribalta or someone similar. Not a great but definitely above local level. This was only one fight. Jackson went TWo draws with jeffords before losing, and also you conveniently forgot his final match which was a 25 rnd draw with Billy Warren, in Australia, almost 2 years after the Jeffries loss. He was a shell of himself admittedly (like Tyson against McBride) but not every man and his dog would ahve beaten Jackson.[/quote]
The dog would have beaten Jackson, He didn't have two draws with Jeffords, he never fought Warren and indeed he had no real fight since the Slavin affair in 1892.

 

WLad yes. vitali no. vitali is vastly overrated and does not have the resume of other men in the top 5. wlads resume is much better, especially if he beats haye and potvekin. wlad is also by far the more talented and tougher of the two

 

Agreed. its VERY thin

 

Is Cyberboxingzone wrong? Or are you going off boxrec, which is very good but not that reliable?

Any further info/new reports on this portion of Jackson's career by any of the knowlegeable posters would be appreciated, as it is a very interesting time.

 

Give it a rest. Vitali is not vastly over rated.

He has the all time KO % record among the history of boxing champions.

He has the best rounds won to rounds lost ( An indication of ability and dominance in the ring ) among heavyweight champions. In fact No man has taken more than two consensus rounds vs Vitali in the eyes of all three judges.

Vitali has never been floored by a punch.

Vitlai has an all time come back with nearly 4 years off of the ring, zero warm up fights, and a TKO over the #2 man who was an alphabet champion.

The fact that he is still the best or 2nd best heavyweight around and will be 38 soon says a lot. Its a pity Vitali lost some of his best years due to injury and outside the ring interests.

I have little doubt Vitali would beat a lot of guys on this list.

You'd better hope Wlad dusts Haye. If Haye wins, he will fight Vitali next with the IBF, WBO, IBO and WBC belts on the line, as well as the Ring magazine title. A winner in this case would have enhanced his legacy.

I'd bet a large amount that Vitali would blow Haye away...especially if Haye lands his punchers chance on his brother.