What is ur HW top 10?

Absolutely,

Some how Marciano's victory over Don Cockell will become more meaningful than Foreman's wins over Norton, Frazier and Moorer combined... When that happens, I'll let you do the honors of arguing with him for pages and pages..... I certainly won't....

 

Yeah, that was one spectacular waste of time.

 

That's between me and my right hand. A gentleman doesn't kiss and tell.

 

Sometimes, I think some of these guys are more interested in impressing themselves that they can create an argument where one shouldn't exist, rather than getting down to the ACTUAL TRUTH of the matter.. There is one poster on here in particular who's name I won't mention, that will argue until he's blue in the face, that some unknown fighter with an unverified record from 1900, would beat the **** out of say, Larry Holmes... I have learned to detect these arguments within the first few sentences, and stear clear of them...

 

Yeah, that's a good way to not wear yourself out. It's ultimately as fulfilling as arguing with One Punch about evolution many times.

 

McGrain, you seem to be placing an unusual amount (for you) of emphasis on Foreman's ability compared to his achievements as a criterion of evaluation.

 

Of course you are free to form and hold your own opinions and If I didn't value a great many of them I wouldn't bother with this reply - but I believe that you, sir, are the revisionist here.

In the 1950 AP poll Dempsey was voted as the greatest fighter in ring history.

Now it is true Ali hadn't come along yet but Dempsey was placed ahead of Louis by the experts of the time (and by a substantial margin) who were active professional boxing writers with access to the fighters and their trainers and covered most of their fights.

That is, sir, not 'craziness' but established fact.

You can Google it if you like :yep

 

You said you rated him outside the top 10 purely because you thought he was limited.

 

:good

 

Why do you rate Liston over him?