Top 100 Heavyweights

Where is Tony Tucker or Firpo? Also could be Peter Jackson and Choyinsky listed.
I don't agree with the order at all (you have some career light-heavyweights in it), but rather with the lower field (like Ruiz, Cooper and McCall are good ranked in my view) than with your upper half.

 

My first comment on this list


Where is John L Sullivan?

 

Nothing wrong with Holyfield but I agree at the Liston part

 

Tunney not, he is a Heavyweight world champion and so is Ezzard Charles, that a clear heavyweights. But Moore, Loughran, Harold Johnson, Joey Maxim had their best wins in Light-Heavyweight, Langford I rate in Heavyweight too (not that high) althouch he might be rather physical a middleweight.

Carpentier achieved more in Heavyweight than Harold Johnson, Maxim (his controversial disqualification over teenage Patterson was not in Heavyweight) , Pastrano, Tommy Loughran and arguable Jimmy Bivins. He hold a claim for the Heavyweight world championship.
Firpo destroyed Willard and had Dempsey on the verge of defeat, knocking him three times down in the first round. He is more impressive to me than Valdez.

Tunney and Bowe are far too low.

Though your list looks still a little bit better than the one of George here (but for this is no big effort needed, if we are honest).
But Barret in a top 100 is very odd and not logical to have him there but not Tucker (who would I rather list than Terrell, who is in your top 50, Tate or Weaver). Indeed he was clearly better tha Morrison.
I think even Kirk Johnson, Fres Oquendo, Larry Donald or Jameel McCline deserve it rather the Barrett. I also have seen you missed Golota, who was better than Williams, Thompson, Baker or Savold among others actual.

 

I know that, but both accomlished much more in Light-Heavyweight . Then you could also list Mickey Walker, who was at Heavyweight similar as Loughran (one got knocked out in the first round by Schmeling) and even Jones (who became at least world champion there). There were Stribling, Neusel, Hamas, Uzcudun, Charles and maybe Farr better, at the same era in time. Johansson was also better than Moore in the same time frame, Matthews was about the same and O'Brien was even more impressive in Heavyweight.

Carpentiers win over Smith alone was superior than anything what Harold Johnson did in Heavyweight. Tom Sharkey has better wins too, than all these.

Barrett could be in a top 200, but likely not in the first 150. I also think you have Tua too high (would place Ibeabuchi several rank over him).
I don't think anybody else would rank Monte Barrett ahead of Tony Tucker. And Turkey Thompson might not even the best Thompson in Heavyweight...(at least not the most well known).

 

That is the point, he was at his best in Light-heavyweight, in Heavyweight had he several chances to win the crown and never took it. Johansson did it in the first occasion in one of the most impressive ways against a dominant champion. He also knocked Machen out and only lost against one prize boxer, so he defeated very opponent he faced. Also was he several times European champion with a couple of defences over fringe-contenders (like Hein ten Hoff, Brian London among others). Clay had only like 5 fight when he fought Moore, so was hardly a contender.

It does matter at which points of their career did he accomplish these wins and just as how many defeats he received.
Therefore I would switch the Klitschkos places, but wouldn't have each of them in the top 10 (top 20 is realistical).

 

Holmes too low. Dempsey WAY too low. Ken Norton Way too high. Langford way too high. Lennox Lewis and Sonny Liston way too high.

 

Agree with Tucker in, Barrett out but most of your picks are solid-matter-of-opinion selections. I think is is impossibele to do ratings like 51,52,53,54, 55 etc over a 130 year span(but I've often tried it!). Tiers would be better, maybe 3-4 tiers of a top 100, stop us all bitching about number 24 been superior to 16. However, a clear criteria would help. Some of us favour 1890's fighters, some like the 50's, others more recent periods, that's why I rate by criteria of resume against contempories, not perfect but less subjective. I don't rate Firbo, I do agree on Loughran, Moore and Johnson. BTW Maxim did not beat Patterson by disqualification, it was a close decision. But I actually rate Ingo just ahead of Moore, it's all good fun and opinions. Good thread.

 

The OP’s list lost me when I saw #3.

 

Tucker could be even in the top 50, instead of Tua.

I suppose Oquendo or Mesi should be rather listed than Barrett.