Taking the retired model. Lennox Lewis Bob Fitzsimmons Joe Bugner Frank Bruno David Haye Henry Cooper Tommy Farr Henry Akinwande Brian London John L Gardner
Lennox will remain #1 imo even once fury and aj retire. Unless they both have another 5/6 fights. they will probably be competing for 2nd and 3rd
Which raises one of the most difficult issues when ranking British heavyweights. A lot of their careers are defined as much by their losses as their wins. If you asked people for the career best performances for Cooper, Farr, Bugner and Bruno, chances are that they would name a loss rather than a win. There’s no easy answer to that. If a resume is based on giving top fighters a tough fight, someone like Darnell Boone would be in the Hall of Fame. On the other hand, giving a prime Joe Louis 15 hard rounds in a world title challenge surely has to count for more than beating up the Dave Allens of this world. I think as long as we set our criteria and apply it consistently, that’s as much as we can do.
I think whilst a deep analysis is important, once a well verses hardcore fan who has watched all the fighters enough times, sometimes occam razor can be applied with a simple instinctual answer being better than an overly detailed one. By instinct the likes of D. Haye and Bruno were better than Cooper or Farr from head to head and from resume. Cooper best claim was putting Ali on the floor and being robbed against Bugner when he was much older but Bruno and Haye were won world titles (of course when 4 existed rather than 1) and have better to the eye test.
Same problem occurs at Super Middle, alot of the time people have Calzaghe at the top but i honestly belive J.Toney and Roy Jones to be better but they did not fight much at that weight
Fair enough. I was looking at a whole career. As much as I admire Joshua I don't think he could have flattened a 1973 Joe Bugner.
The Bugner fight was no robbery. It was close either way. I think Bugner did enough and Henry too little but others will disagree.
I think purely on height/weight difference and sport science, any modern day heavyweight has a big advantage over the older generation of heavyweights.
I think when we do these comparisons we have to suspend a bit of our disbelief. If we can't imagine a level playing field it's really pointless doing it. Modern Fighter beats older generation regardless of talent or ability ?
I honestly think Joshua would have smashed Bugner within 3 rounds, what are Bugner best performances in your opnion?
Yes so many factors take place, like what if Jack Johnson had youtube, sound silly at first but imagine him being able to study P.Whitaker, Joe Louis, R. Duran, S.R.Robinson or S.R.Leonard, he never got the chance. Imagine Roberto Duran getting modern day nutrition science, he would be even better. So yeah you have to suspend your disbelief, as there is no right 100percent answer but i do feel you can get 75percent to 90 percent truth. We Know Muhammed Ali is better than Audely Harrison, yet if they inexplicably fought and Harrison won it would be unbelievable to us.... but then he did get floored by doug jones and henry cooper and neither were world class. Joe Louis is criticised heavily for opposition but take into account one title, and how dominant he was, if we had one title now, then D.Wilder would have not been a champion, tehcnically it was Wladimir, then Fury, the Josua who picked them up.
Obviously the 2 fights with Ali and the Frazier fight, he was heroic that night. Also wins against Mac Foster and Jimmy Ellis who were both still top 10 at the time and of course, although not everyone agreed with the verdict, Henry Cooper. Have a look at Joe's record.