Louis Era and later: 1-Ali 2-Louis 3-Marciano 4-Lewis 5-Holmes 6-The Hayematrix 7-Foreman 8-Frazier 9-Holyfield 10-Tyson
Lewis is grossly overrated by many boxing fans today. The ONLY top level HW champ taken out twice in the early rounds by second rate fighters really shouldn't be rated so high, particularly when he never faced the other great fighters of his era (Holyfield and Tyson) until they were past their best, and didn't fight Bowe at all. His supporters make all kinds of excuses for this - but, imo, if so many excuses have to be made, the ranking isn't deserved. Here's my list 1. Ali 2. Louis 3. Dempsey 4. Foreman 5. Holmes 6. Marciano 7. Holyfield 8. Johnson 9. Liston 10. Frazier
Nothing really wrong with that, although Tyson is to high at three in my opinion. Frazier should probably be higher too, based on the fact that he has the Ali win and would probably do better against the field. Mine: 1 - Muhammad Ali 2 - Joe Louis 3 - Sonny Liston 4 - Lennox Lewis 5 - Joe Frazier 6 - Jack Johnson 7 - Jim Jeffries 8 - Mike Tyson 9 - Larry Holmes 10-Rocky Marciano The next clutch is comprised of Hollyfield, Dempsey, Wills, Jackson, Foreman.
It's literally impossible to justify Dempsey at #3. His pre-title competition was soft and didn't see him tackle the best contenders, his title competition was very soft, and the most inactive reign in history, he ducked Wills, his #1 contender - or failed to fight him, if you prefer. He lost to the best he ever faced, struggled terribly with Firpo, who is limited, and failed to KO any uncknocoutable fighters, difficult guys took him the distance. There is literally no justification. You also seem to be ignoring Hollyfield's multiple losses as a HW whilst making Lewis's losses a reason for dropping him out of the ten. Hollyfield above Lewis is pretty pitiful.
Nice original list. I asume the Tyson rating is more on a head-to-head basis. Once again here's mine: 1. Louis 2. Ali 3. Holmes 4. Lewis 5. Marciano 6. Liston 7. Frazier 8. Tyson 9. Johnson 10. Holyfield
Foreman above Liston? Dempsey so high? Lewis not top 10 (though we knew that)? I also think Frazier deserves a bit higher.
So sage, which fights of Jack Johnson have you watched in full? And anyone who doesn't include Lewis in there top 10 but has Dempsey at 3 is a joke. Dempsey was also starched in one round, beaten by a light heavy, beaten more than he won by a total journeyman in Meehan and fought worse competition. Whenever I see someone with John Sullivan etc in their list I just laugh. And Jack Johnson is only a few levels about that for being included to look knowledgeable. Johnsons fights are barely on recording, and what there is shows a very primitive form of the sport with robotic opponents and despite this he lost by KO multiple times to far lower opposition than even the likes of Rahman or McCall. Guys with 33-50% losing ratios on their records and fighters who were basically part time athletes. It was a totally different sport, the number of no contests and draws of the era should show people that it is futile to go pre Dempsey era when talking about boxing as we know it.