Top 10 by Decade - Divisional Ranking Experiment

Fabulous work Rummy. I enjoyed that video and it underscores something I believe to be true that Wlad is tremendously underrated by most. Numbers wise the man is dominant as any champion in the rich history of the division.
I’ll have to pause the video and really comb over some other points that I dislike or like in more detail. I know the 30s were weak but I was shocked to see Galento at #7 tied with Braddock that’s pretty weak top 10 material imo. Tyson at 4 was a shock but upon inspection it fit the criteria he came along at the end of the decade and in truth did not have a long run getting upended both in the ring and out of it at the start of the next decade.
Holmes is the fighter shortchanged losing 3 good years on the back end of the 70s.
The final standing Talley of the video was interesting. It’s a quality top 10 list but one that very few people would come up with. Patterson is usually underrated but is too High here, the list did diminish great but short runs of Tyson and Liston. But if you want long dominant runs as the best in the division hard to argue with guys like Ali, Louis, Wlad and Holmes as your choices.

 

Nice analysis on Wlad and I look forward to your future videos on the other weight classes. Good point on Folley and Machen. I own a boxing magazine from 1955, it’s a boxing/wrestling hybrid publication and it touts machen as the hot prospect and heir apparent to Marciano. So he was highly regarded very early on which probably led to being rated quickly. I often view Machen and Folley together for some reason probably because they were both good but came up short in same era.
Also surprised that Michael Grant and Tim Witherspoon snuck into the top 10 for the 90s with low scores. Shows for as good as the 90s was- it as very volatile

 

10s -

1. wlad
2. joshua
3. fury
4. pov
5. haye
6. valuev
7. vitali
8. wilder
9. parker
10. ?

00s -

1. lewis
2. byrd
3. rahman
4. vitali
5. maskaev
6. ruiz
7. wlad
8. haye
9. valuev

 

I found the 10s amazing.

Povetkin is every chance of actually beating Wlad in this decade! he only needs 14 points in 2 decades. He is currently ranked 3rd on Boxrec. If he maintains that rank at the end of the year, he will be on track.

If he ends up emerging from the Current Wilder, Parker, Joshua, he could actually end up overtaking Lennox Lewis and Max Schmelling. As things stands, Povetkin is on track to be more dominant than 70s Foreman. And when you consider that he seems to have been robbed when he got zero points in 16 because he only had one fight (his only loss was still to Wlad).

His efforts will look astonishing, particularly if he wins the championship and somehow entices Wlad to come out of retirement and fight a rematch. If he pulls a Jack Johnson or Muhammed Ali style longevity next decate and stays in the until he is 40 or more, he could actually reach elite level status.

 

Rumfeld, totally enjoyed this. And I too am eager to see your breakdowns on all the weight classes. Great work.

 

A joke! Wald only 8th from 2000-2010? Um, you might want to check on that. He was champion for many of those years....

Vitali was a first ballot hall of fame guy, yet you rank him behind other guys who won't get in?

 

since when is 11 years a decade? u cant even count, u r the only joke here.

vitali is behind champs who beat his azz and lineal undisputeds, drop me a line when vits does that.

perhaps i should move wlad down seeing as he was beaten lots in his prime by much less

 

Fabulous post and research. And of course extremely interesting and provocative.

What I noticed on a quick rundown-

1--the volatility of the ratings decreases over the decades. Only Louis and Schmeling score over 50 in the whole 1930-1960 era. An increasing number achieve that in later decades. Why? It would be an interesting debate. Is it the weakness of the fighters? Or tougher competition which makes it harder to stay at the top?

2--Baer--It is surprising he was rated in only one year from 1935-1939, but looking at his record, his only major win during this time was over Farr, (and to a degree Foord).

3--Patterson--his longevity contrasts with his weak opposition. Of the fifties group, his best opposition would be the tied for 7th Machen and Johansson, but Johansson got into the top ten because he KO'd Patterson. (in fairness, Moore was rated only at light-heavy but was certainly a top ten heavy for this decade) In the sixties, his best victims were Chuvalo and Machen at #8 and #9. Manuel Ramos actually did better beating Machen and also Ernie Terrell.

4--I think it fun to compare who beat the guys on these lists. Of the other 9 rated men, Louis beat 8 in the 1930's. Ali beat 8 in both the 1960's and 1970's.

5--Just on Archie Moore, he was only rated a few years at heavy, but was rated the #1 lightheavy contender in 1950 and at #2 in 1951. He was champion from 1952 through 1959. I think that gives him 97 on your point-o-meter at light-heavyweight for the 1950's.

6--back to "trashing" Patterson, I think it will be interesting to compare how he did with guys who were never champions and sometimes didn't appear on these lists at all. Elmer Ray for example beat Walcott, Charles, and Savold. Rex Layne beat Walcott, Charles, and Turkey Thompson. How will their opposition point totals compare to Patterson's?

7--Turkey Thompson stands out to me as an underrated fighter.

8--Wlad Klitschko has tremendous longevity. He would be rated at the very top were it not for those bad KO losses when in his physical prime. How this will play out over the years concerning his ATG rating will be an interesting question.

I hope to have more comments and to elaborate after studying these lists. Thanks again for all the hard work.

 

Some really good work.

What if you just done absolute totals rather any seperation by decade?

 

Like I said, a joke.

Using Ring Magazine Annual ratings, Wlad was the following from 2000-2009.

6th, 1st, 1st, 8th, 1st, 1st, 1st, Ring Magazine champion.

You think he was 7th for that decade? 19 of 20 do not take your post seriously. I'll give you Dino.

 

Another point to note, it's year-end ratings, not year ratings.

 

Also in the early 40s you had the war. That taints the 40s rankings dramatically and it's the ring, which isn't really that reliable. Cool idea though, does a good job of highlighting longevity and too a lesser extent strength of era

 

This is very good work, and brings some interesting insights!

Contenders that do unexpectedly well are Tami Maurellio, Michael Dokes, Chris Byrd, and Alexander Povetkin.

Champions that do unexpectedly well are Primo Carnera, Floyd Patterson, and Michael Moorer.