Top 25 ATG Heavyweight List

Valiant effort!

For me, two things are most important when compiling longer lists.

1) being confident in your criteria.
2) allowing for flexible tiers rather than specific number orders.

I respect anyone who puts time and effort into something like this. I'm working on my top 50 or so bantamweights atm.

 

This content is protected

 

I don't like to make lists, because I don't know how much importance I should give to H2H potential, and I don't want to make a list based on resume alone.

:roll:

 

Bruce lee.

Edit- Wrong thread.

 

I base h2h potential on :
1) resume
2) obvious attributes such as size

So my lists r based primarily on resume against opponents that would have mattered .

meaning if 1 destroyed Ezzard Charles in d most convincing manner that is possible , it means absolute bug's crap on how that 1 would have done against a true heavyweight .

Ezzard Charles was a gr8er fighter than Tye Fields , but a stoppage over Tye Fields means more than a stoppage over Ezzard Charles in HW h2h terms or even in p4p terms if a much smaller/older man stopped Fields in comparison 2 a much bigger/younger man whom stopped Charles .

4 Lloyd Marshall , his stoppage of Charles means a lot , 4 Charles , his stoppage of Marshall counts only a little . 4 Marchegiano , his wins over Charles counts about as much as Charles' over Marshall .

This is how resume should b treated .

 

I break it down this way: Top four all time, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Tyson

After them Ali, Holmes, Walcott, Tunney, Charles, and now, I have to add Vitali, he is 41 and still winning.

Old timers deserve mention, like Jeffires, and Sullivan (for bridging gap to gloved era.
I won't put up 25, that is like just including everyone. Foreman winning in two eras is great feat, so he deserves to be in top 10 for that, although head to head in prime he can be defeated by quite a few. Holyfield lasting so long moves him up too. His losing 2 of 3 to Bowe, and splitting fights with Michael Moorer show he is not great, but has great longevity.

 

Mitch Green :rofl

Your list provides much lolz

 

I might have over8ed him and a few others in this list , he is not a lock 4 my top 25 .
As usual with lists , d lower parts r usually not locks .

My problem is not with u discrediting Mitch Green as much as with u discrediting my list , let alone without posting your own which is many depths worse .

 

I m not even sure at how my top 10 @ 118 should b .

I assume Jofre and Lujan r locks 4 top 10 there .

And while Olivares was really good , he can not b taken in without Herera and Castillo immediately preceding or at least following him , which raises a doubt on whether that era was that good ? because both Herera and Castillo were stopped more than 1ce by unranked opponents @ d weight .

So including Olivares means that every1's list must contain himself , Castillo , Herera and most probably Jofre as well .

I assume that this will b close 2d generic list :
Jofre
Alfonso Brown
Castillo
Herera
Olivares
Harada
..
..

However , my top 10 OAT there starts with Jofre and Lujan , followed by


Castillo , Herera and Olivares has 2 settle 4 a top 20 outside a top 10 ranking . They r locks 4 top 20 as far as i m still concerned .

D late 1910s until about 1940 were strong era as well on paper but i believe that just like d usual with d lacking in videos era that many fights were fixed or just cheats so i do not like 2 include them in my lists .


I also believe that ppl under8 how much fighting in 1's own country helps him in cheating his own way .

4man vs Ali is a gr8 example 2 what can b done in order 2 decide d winner b4 d fight even started , despite not being fought in Ali's country/hometown .

And while I m uncertain whether 4man was drugged in it or not , i believe that some fighters were drugged / poisoned pre (or even during) fight and it was usually happened when they fought in d "superstar's" turf .

D robbery decisions actually matter less 2 me , but still .

Anyway if Castillo , Herera and Olivares will make my top 10 which is still nonexistent as far as 118 is concerned , then it will only b due 2 d division's rel8ive weakness .

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Charles was a "true heavyweight" back in his day, and I would favor him to beat a lot of the larger title holders since. I believe Charles would only struggle with the giants such as Lewis and Wlad. He could take on the likes of Norton, Holmes, Holyfield etc no problem.

Instead of using a size criteria alongside a resume criteria, I think I would rather use a skills criteria.

 

:admin:admin

this is weird

you sound like you're not joking, but if you're not joking, you're a joke

I'm confused :think

 

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Lewis
4. Holmes
5. Sullivan
6. Foreman
7. Tyson
8. Marciano
9. Johnson
10. Dempsey
11. Holyfield
12. Frazier
13. Wlad
14. Liston
15. Vitali
16. Jeffries
17. Wills
18. Charles
19. Bowe
20. Byrd
21. Patterson
22. Schmeling
23. Tunney
24. Baer
25. Norton

 

Lol, he's not joking! :yep

 

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammed Ali
3. Lennox Lewis
4. Larry Holmes
5. Jack Johnson
6. Tyson
7. Wladimir Klitschko (i give a ****, he would beat everyone besides Tyson and lewis)
8. Holyfield
9. Foreman
10. Marciano
11. Jeffries
12. Sullivan
13. Dempsey
14. Liston
15. Vitali Klitschko