Top 10 HW of the 70s

I'm sorry to interrupt, but I don't accept this approach at all, in terms of statistics. This is all very implicit. George Foreman doesn't have good statistics with other players, but he is one of the best players ever, and neither does Larry Holmes. Ali showed that he was in the best shape of his career in a lost fight which theoretically lowers his statistics and it is no. 1 or no. 2. Joe Frazier has a worse record in fights with ATG than Michael Spinks, etc. etc. Sorry, but it's all very conventional, you shouldn't take this path when assessing the best.

 

Late 70s to 80s IMO but yeah essentially setting aside Ali who carried it… Frazier, Foreman, Norton… next to Holmes, Tyson and Holyfield? Doesn’t really compare with respect to the 70s IMO.

 

My criteria is rated opponents THAT'S why I'm "keeping all of Quarry's". Rankings are important for a reason. I'm not going to sit here and explain to you why a win over ranked 2 time champion Patterson is better than wins over the unranked Ledoux and Ramos.

I am not off base. Their is a reason the other guys Lyle beat fell out of the ratings. Because they were past their best by the time Lyle got to them and weren't recorded the results necessary to stay in the top ten.

Where do I even start with this? To win that oh so valuable "Superheavyweight title" he had to get through the monster Humphrey McBride. Mcbride was a morbidly obese clown fighter who feasted on tomato cans, and never beat anyone remotely close to the top 10..... or top 30 for that matter. He had TWO wins over opponents with winning records, both of whom from the Oklahoma circuit. He also lost to several men with losing records. He was Butterbean before Butterbean, except he wasn't even as good.

Mathis had actually retired after Quarry, and came back to fight Ali two years later. Their's a reason he was fighting guys like McBride. He simply wasn't very good at that point in his career.

Bugner was also coming out of retirement, and had seen better days. He'd also retire after this fight and embark on a return 3 years later.

1. Quarry was flat out shot against Norton.

2. Lyle looked good against Ali, because Ali came in at one of the worst shapes of his career, and was content to do nothing. Lyle was winning rounds by being the marginally busy fighter but he didn't have Ali in remote trouble at any point in their fight, and never once hurt him.

3. Lyle had success against Foreman because Foreman was coming off a year+ lay off, clearly still not right in the head stemming from his previous loss, switched his style, and body mechanics, reducing his power and making him an overall inferior fighter.

 

Foreman has the huge demolition over Frazier, and winning the title 20+ years later at 45 years old.

Frazier has THAT win, and oh yeah becoming undisputed champion by beating Ellis prior to that.

Lyle has???????

Also, Foreman and Frazier (and Holmes) each have more wins over rated opposition than Lyle, even excluding their title wins.

"Ali showed that he was in the best shape of his career in a lost fight"
Laughably untrue.

"Joe Frazier has a worse record in fights with ATG than Michael Spinks,"
Wrong. Holmes was no longer an ATG when Spinks beat him the first time, and got robbed the second.

 

Oh dear god... xDDDDD

 

Thought I was losing my mind.

 

Funniest sh*t I've read in a while.

 

Are you also going to explain to me how 2 wins over Brian London are more valuable than knocking out Mathis and beating Ellis?

1.Thats funny because the Norton fight was the one he won the most rounds in of those 5. Quarry was also 29. Aging is an arbitrary thing. Thats too much. If you have a losing streak to support that its one thing but he won 13 in a row against not Ali/Frazier.

2.Lyle was winning on the cards. Which is more impressive given Lyle was not a point fighter and was so resoundingly beaten by Young.

3.No he had success against Foreman because he could hit super hard. Also you can talk about how embarassing it was for Foreman to go down twice Lyle was still out of there by round 5.

Rankings are fun for trivia and maybe deciding who gets title shots. They don't strip the meaning from beating an accomplished fighter. Theres a finite number of ranking spots and not having one doesn't make a fighter washed especially in a competitive era.

 

H2H would it not be Foreman, Ali, Holmes, over all the others, after that it's always going to flip about...

I don't know, it's just my best guess, might even be Foreman, Holmes, Ali ???

where would Chuvalo fall in, top 15, 20, 25?

 

damn, he was younger than Usyk today and turned out to be the most long-lived champion in history. Until when was ATG and when did it stop being one? If he stopped being one, in what percentage? how much did he miss? is each ATG equal to another? Was Lewis ATG in the first fight with Rahman or only in the second? Was Douglas ATG in Tokyo or not? it's all very, very slippery

 

Yeah,,,I'll go with this list too....

 

Can't understand people having Foreman at number 1 ? he lost convincingly twice in the 70s to Young, Ali. It's clear as day Ali is number 1 in the 70s due to his vast resume and the fact he beat Foreman convincingly in a H2H match up.

Not having Holmes in the top 10 and Shavers as number 7 when Holmes beat Shavers twice convincingly in the 70s is crazy. Not to mention Holmes went 32-0 in the 70s with wins over Weaver, Shavers x2, Norton, Ocasio, and was a world champion who made 4 titles defences during 70s just baffling logic not to have Holmes in the top 10.

1. Ali
2. Foreman
3. Frazier
4. Holmes
5. Norton
6. Young
7. Quarry
8. Lyle
9. Shavers
10. Bugner

 

simple, Foreman had devastating victories over Frazier and Norton who turned out to be as good as Ali. He also won against Lyle in the legendary war. He lost to Young and Ali who were extremely uncomfortable for him in terms of style. Ali was beating Frazier and Nirton, but overall he didn't seem better than them and they weren't even close to Georg. He has at least two very controversial wins. He also lost to Norton, Frazier and Spinks, in my opinion he actually lost 5 times in the 70's plus he gave the championship belt to Norton which seems like an escape.

 

Ali's resume in the 70s

Foreman
Frazier x2
Norton x2
Young
Quarry x2
Lyle
Spinks
Shavers
Ellis
Mathis
M.Foster
B.Foster
Chuvalo
Patterson
Bugner x2
Bonavena

12 world title wins.

Foremans resume in the 70s

Lyle
Frazier
Norton
Peralta x2
Chuvalo

3 world title wins.

Yeah I think I'll stick to actual facts of Ali's resume being superior and the fact he actually beat Foreman there's no absolutely no case for Foreman being above Ali.