List B is bert sugar's list I like list A D E. list D is very strong langford and walcott are two very good dark horse candinates for top 10, they have strong resumes and have beaten alot of big heavyweights.
Tough choice. List A has Rocky first so that is wrong. List C has Floyd Patterson so that is wrong. List D is pretty good although Walcott is too high. List E is ok too, although I would put Holyfield lower. List B is my favourite though, al old school view of the rankings.
Probably list D because at least it has Sam Langford, so does list C but having Patterson at #3 is a joke, personally wouldn't have Bivins near my top 10 either. No Lennox Lewis in any though is a bit worrying as someone said.
Going by Jimmy Bivins resume........you can make a small case for him to be rated top 20 but not top 10. On film Bivins is impressive with his octupus long 80" reach and his intellectual boxing brain to go along with his scientific boxing skills. I have Bivins right around my top 50, but I rate Lee Q murray and elmer ray higher than him.
List C is without doubt worst. Patterson at 3 is a joke, but then again, if someone with 3 fights against heavyweight contenders makes #5 and Bivins #9, anything is possible. List B is pretty awful too, again with Tunney at #5. Might as well put Ike Ibeabuchi #6 then. :nut List E has Holyfield way too high. Other than that it's good. List's A and D are both pretty good. I would say list D is slightly better; i think List A's #4-#10 are better than D's, but Marciano at #1 is a bit too much for me, so i'll go with D as the best list. So, in order from bad (in this case horrible) to pretty good: bad C B E A D good I think it's worth pointing out that not a single one of these lists has Wills in the top10. And these are probably lists from big name historians. I'm curious now. Jeffries is in none of them, either.