Top 50 Heavyweights 1930-1960

Matt, Mauriello badly staggered Louis with the first right hand he threw, but he didn't floor him.

This content is protected

 

"He's maybe at place 13, (arguable 11) of that decade."

Well, with three decades being considered, that puts Uzcudun logically in the 30's, not very far from where we have him.

"I wouldn't put Joey Maxim, John Henry Lewis, Maxie Rosenbloom, Gus Lesnevich, and hardly Jimmy Bivins in the list. But possible Tommy Loughran, while Billy Conn is questionable."

Lewis, Rosenbloom, and Lesnevich didn't make our list. Maxim and Bivins were rated for years at heavy and beat top heavyweights. Bivins was actually the interim heavyweight champion during WWII while Louis was in the army. Loughran is the only non-heavyweight champion with victories over three heavyweight champions. He abandoned the light-heavy title in 1929 to compete at heavy for years. Besides the champions, he beat all sorts of top men. Impossible for me to see leaving him off this list.

"Conn was mainly rated that high due to his first Louis bout"

That is true, but it not like he did nothing else at heavy. He also had wins over Pastor, Savold, Barlund, and Dorazio. He has a thin resume, but looked brilliant. I understand Conn will divide folks some.

"Neusel won the second fight with Schmeling."

Both men were in their 40's. It is interesting Neusel is getting so much support from multiple posters. I agree that he is certainly worthy of making this list and a candidate for an even higher rating.

 

You make a good point about the 1930's being a strong era for European boxing. Euro boxing was obviously badly hurt by WWII. There was a comeback in the 1950's, but it never seemed to reach the same level overall until the influx of eastern European talent in the 21st century.

Personally, I have no problem with moving Uzcudun and Neusel up a bit. Uzcudun beat one of the top three heavies of the 1920's (Wills) and of the 1930's (Baer), and held his own with everyone other than Louis when an old man.

Any changes in our ratings depend though on Suzie also going along. Perhaps he will comment on what he thinks of Neusel and Uzcudun and their ratings.

One thing about WWII. It coincided with the powerful impact of the fall of the color line in the USA. So for Americans, it is much more difficult to see the decline in talent which was obvious in Europe.

Maxim--he was erratic, but his strong showings against Walcott buoy him up. I think his rating is about right.

Conn--as I said before, he has more going for him than just the Louis fight, with impressive wins over Pastor, Savold, Barlund, and Dorazio.

 

Well, let's wait for Suzie to comment on the relative ratings of Uzcudun, Neusel, and Maxim.

 

A good list for the most part, but I think that a few fighters should be higher:

Jack Sharkey, Primo Carnera, Johny Risko, Tami Mauriello.

Mickey Walker should probably be in there somewhere!

Eddie Machen is perhaps a bit too high.

 

Thanks for the reply.

"Johnny Risko"

Well, we just decided to exclude him as peaking in the 1920's. I admit that was pretty arbitrary, although his best run was definitely in the 1927 to 1928 period when he beat Jack Sharkey and George Godfrey. So we decided he was a 1920's fighter. If we included him, he would definitely make the list, but would be very hard to place as he would have a good run and then a bad one. He beat a tremendous number of good men, but also lost to most of them. I think I would have placed somewhere in the twenties on our list. Where would you place him?

"Jack Sharkey"

I can see moving him up a few places. I can't see putting him ahead of Schmeling.

"Primo Carnera"

I expected Carnera to divide opinion more than anyone. I posted on why we placed him where we did. The wins over Stribling and Godfrey were on fouls. His others on the way up were good but not outstanding. Maloney, Campolo, Charles, McCorkindale, Lasky, Levinsky. And there were the losses to Maloney, Sharkey, and Gains. The win over Schaaf is under a cloud because of Schaaf's physical condition going in. Sharkey was the champion, but also on the cusp of a career collapse. Uzcudun and Loughran were aging. Neusel is a good win. And on the positive side, Carnera was very active beating trial horse, or worse, types. Could you elaborate on your case for putting him higher?

"Eddie Machen"

I can see the case for moving him down. Machen was very consistent at beating everyone who wasn't a top man for years. He looked great early in his career slicing through the usual fading types--Maxim, Baker, Jackson. His most impressive win was the KO of Valdes. He looked a coming champion in that fight. But he never got over the hump and doesn't have a win over a real first tier guy. Hard to rate, but very strong on consistency and longevity. All of his losses or draws until well into his thirties (and after a mental collapse) were to top men. Where would you place him?

"Mickey Walker"

I don't think he did enough. He was only fighting at heavy for a couple of years. He got the draw with Sharkey, but a lot of contenders actually beat Sharkey. Remarkable performance for a man who was never actually a heavyweight, and had been welter champion as late as his mid-twenties, but on balance, no.

 

Fair enough.

I would probably have put him just inside the top 20, though perhaps factoring in a bit of his pre 1930 work.

Neither could I, but he certainly did enough to be ahead of Johansen say!

Carnera was the lineal champion, and he had a very deep body of work, with a high level of consistency against all but the top men of the division. I don't think that I could justify ranking anybody lower than your #9 over him, with the sole exception of Sharkey, who I also think you have too low.

I guess that my proposed changes of moving up Sharkey and Carnera, would bring Machen to his natural resting point.

Mickey Walker actually has quite a good resume against the name heavyweights of the day. He beat Risko twice, Levinsky, Uzcdun, and drew Sharkey. It took Schmeling to finally see off his bid for the heavyweight crown. I think he makes top 50.

 

I can't agree at all with this. Fights with Archie Moore were at light-heavy, but beat Arturo Godoy, Jimmy Bivins, Clarence Henry, Bob Satterfield, Nino Valdes, Jimmy Slade, Ezzard Charles, Wayne Bethea, and Eddie Machen at heavyweight. Johnson beat 4 of our top 20 and I don't think any other non-heavyweight champion would come close to that. He defeated 7 of our top 50. And he had an excellent won-lost record against them, especially if the Moore fights aren't counted as both men were under 175.

With most top heavyweights under 200, and almost all under 215, there wasn't that much of a line between the heavyweight and light-heavyweight divisions. Lots of smaller guys were fighting in both, and moving back and forth between the weight classes.

 

Well I don't know about rating Carnera ahead of Johansson. Yes, Carnera beat a lot more second-tier guys, but Ingo's KO's of prime Patterson and Machen rank ahead of any two of Carnera's wins. I rate beating a young Patterson over beating an old Sharkey. Considering that Machen was still undefeated, I also rate blowing him out in one above the Sharkey KO by Carnera, but certainly above Carnera's second most impressive win. And Johansson lost only to Patterson while Carnera lost to a lot of second-tier guys.

I'll let Suzie decide on the moving Sharkey and Carnera up. Sharkey though is already rated ahead of Machen, so if Carnera is put ahead of Machen, it will only drop Eddie one place.

Walker--"Risko, Levinsky, Uzcudun"--they were all losing to quite a few guys about the time Walker beat them. I don't think any of them would have been top five heavyweights at the time they fought Walker. For me, just not enough for Walker to compete with many men who campaigned at heavy for several years or even more than a decade. Just one name taken out of a hat--Stanley Poreda. Beat Carnera, Loughran, and Schaaf. I think those names trump the heavies on Walker's resume.

Mauriello--an impressive stat record, but he lost to all the best men he fought, plus his success was mainly during the WWII era. I would have liked him to do more after the war, but he basically just fell apart. We didn't feel he did enough to rate higher.

 

I will just address this one it being late.

I always saw Johansen as a man with two exceptional wins, and not much else that would stack up against other mid table champions.

If we combine their resumes and rank their combined opponents what would we get?

1. Patterson (given Sharkey,s decline)
2. Sharkey (he was the champion)
3. Machen (we can even put him at #2 for the sake of argument)

After that, Carnera is going to totally sweep the board!