Top Ten Heavyweights

all my top 10 names are on their, so that automatically gives it a high grade. I disagree with some of the placements but all the names are on their..........I give it a B +



who's list is this?

 

When doin' lists on the topic of greatest by division, i tend to give my top-spots to the guys that were the best of their eras. I understand this may be flawed in theory, as some fighters fought in tougher/better eras than others. But i do think that showing the character to emerge as number 1 of your time is a major thing greatness-wise. I do make exceptions for people i believe have earned it, so im a hypocrit aswell!!!!!

Anyway - my list-

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Johnson
4. Marciano
6. Holmes
7. Tyson (sorry , im a fan, im reasy to be slaughtered for this 1!!)
8. Lewis
9. Foreman (gets in on the strength of the comeback)
10. Liston (just edges Jeffries here)

In all honesty, im thinking of moving Ali to number 1, and in fairness Lewis is probably higher, maybe above Holmes? But i like Holmes, and Tyson as is obvious!!

 

I rate Tyson # 6 all time Teeto, don't be worried by the pick, Tysons 1980s title reign/dominance and h2h abilities defintley earns him a top 10 spot...

 

Thanks for that there Suzie! Needed the backup before i start gettin' abuse!! Ha, seriously though, it was a short-time period, but what dominance? And how good he looked was immense! One of my faves

 

I don't think Tunney belongs in the top 10. He had a handfull of fights at heavy and only 1 defense. He was a great, great fighter, but as a heavyweight, he doesn't make the top 10 in my opinion.

 

You're right

 

Good for your opinion..thats mine

 

I'd give it about a C grade,Marciano and Frazier make up my no 9 and 10 Tyson doesnt make the cut ,it's a respectable list but Rocky is way too high imo.I have Dempsey at no 3 on my list in front of Louis.

 

Dempsey at # 3 despite did not end up fighting his number 1 contender(who wiped out the era far more impressivley than dempsey did) for 7 years? Or the fact Dempsey lost to a fat 5'8 C level journeyman in his prime? or his inactivty as a champion partying rather than defending his title?

Dempsey rates extremley high h2h, but his accomplishments and competition for the most part are very **** poor.

 

:bart he wasnt bad. He beat Dillon and Langford

 

The Meehan fights have no bearing on Dempsey's legacy what so ever. Seriously. Not fighting Wills and sitting on the title are legitimate criticisms, but people need to stop bringing up the Meehan fights like they mean something.

 

But they like.............do. He lost to a fat 5'8 tomato can in his prime. He struggled with him 3 other times. Should we pretend that one doesnt even exist? like his one punch knockout loss to a 38 year old journeyman.


I love jacks style rate him extremley high h2h......but we cant ignore whats on his record in 1918

 

They were 4 rounders, from everything I've read he slapped, ran and stalled his way to those wins, and at least one was a robbery. Meehan was able to beat or draw with Sam Langford, Billy Miske and Jack Dillon in 4-6 round fights, does this harm their legacies as well?

 

Wasnt poor old sam blind by 1920?? isnt jack supposed to be a early starter? so does the 4 round help jack more than hurt him? also, Butterbean is an expert 4 round fighter, that doesnt mean **** cause if lennox lewis lost to butterbean in 4 rounds, he deserves to be laughed at and ridiculed. It also bugs me jack dempsey in 4 fights with meehan was unable to figure him out and adapt, joe louis by the 2nd fight would have had his style figured out and blasted him outta there in 1.