D or D- Oscar Bonavena--Folley, Martin, Chuvalo (Mildenberger)--Oscar was better than his best wins show. Folley was old. Zora Folley--Valdes, Cooper, Cleroux (Machen)--Folley had a lot of depth, but his best wins are nothing to write home about. Nino Valdes--Jackson, Don C-ckell, London (Charles)--3 & 4 are weakish after a good top two. Frank Bruno--Coetzee, Bugner, Carl Williams (McCall) Ernie Terrell--Machen, Cleveland Williams, Chuvalo (Folley)--Terrell only split with Williams. Machen was on the decline. I guess I am most at odds with the consensus here. I don't see anything at all to get excited about with Terrell. Folley and Machen were aging. He split with Williams. Chuvalo was never hard to outpoint. No champion or arguably even a prime top contender. Lou Nova--Farr, Barlund, Comiskey (Baer)--Farr ok, but 3 & 4 are weak. Buddy Baer--Savold, Mann, Simon (Galento) Billy Conn--Savold, McCoy, Barlund (Pastor)--I might be generous in not putting Conn in the F column for his 2 to 4 men. Gerry Cooney--Young, Lyle, Dennis (Norton)--Young having something left keeps this out of the F column. Lamon Brewster--Golota, Krasniqi, Meehan (Wlad)--terrific fall off after Wlad KO. Lee Savold--Baksi, Woodcock, Franklin (Nova)--lost series to Baksi. Barely escapes F list. Had depth, but didn't beat top men. Mike Weaver--Coetzee, Carl Williams, Tillis (Tate) Michael Dokes--Cobb, Young, Ocasio (Weaver) to be contineud
F Cleveland Williams--Miteff, Daniels, Richardson (Terrell) Tommy Morrison--Ruddock, Carl Williams, Hipp (Foreman)--perhaps too harsh here. Ruddock might pull him up to D column. Corrie Sanders--DeLeon, Puritty, Du Pooy (Wlad)--what a fall off after Wlad. Buster Mathis--Lincoln, Stallings, Wepner (Chuvalo) George Chuvalo--Jones, Cleroux, DeJohn (Quarry)--lost series to Cleroux. DeJohn at end of line. One could make the argument that the Jones victory should move him up to the D column. Young Stribling--Rosenbloom, Griffiths, Loughran (Carnera)--for me Loughran clearly, and Rosenbloom reasonably, were LH when Stribling beat them. He would rate higher as a LH. At heavy, his best win is really Griffiths. I want to point out that the fighters who got poor ratings like D or F is in comparison to these other contenders, not the general field.
as warned, here is my separate post on Langford, Wills, Jeannette, and McVea. They are nearly unique in fighting each other so many times and so have each other on their victory resumes (except Jeannette never beat Wills). I don't judge it fair to just fill up a top ten with these four, though. Langford and Wills I think deserve spots if they qualify. But McVea and Jeannette lost their series to the other two, so they don't make my final top ten. Neither Wills nor Langford were lineal champions, but were colored champions, yet were on par, and in fact better than most, of the recognized white champions. Langford's number one win--Wills (as good as it gets) Langford #2 to #4--Jeannette, McVea, Gunboat Smith (A) Wills number one win--Langford (as good as it gets) Wills #2 to #4--McVea, Firpo, Fulton (A-), I have some doubt about Firpo. Both look like locks for my final top ten.
The 5th position defines real depth. I won't print up everyone, just those in the hunt for top ten placement A Archie Moore--Bob Satterfield (great fifth win shows off Archie's depth and wins him a place) Harold Johnson--Nino Valdes (ditto as above) Jimmy Bivins--Joey Maxim, Lee Savold (depth showing for Bivins, giving him a shot) Bob Satterfield--Cleveland Williams (ditto as above. Holman could be subbed here and still A) B Bob Pastor--Gus Lesnevich David Tua--Michael Moorer C Jimmy Ellis--George Chuvalo (good enough 5th scalp to keep him in the hunt) Rex Layne--Cesar Brion (ditto as above) Alexander Povetkin--Hasim Rahman Tommy Loughran--Steve Hamas (problem is Loughran only split even with him) Ernie Schaaf--Johnny Risko (ditto as above) Sam Langford--George Godfrey (really an F for green, but so many C's can be subbed, like Norfolk) Harry Wills--Joe Jeannette (in 40's but still could fight, and like Langford, C's can be subbed, like Norfolk or Weinert) Oliver McCall--Oleg Maskaev D Chris Byrd--Fres Oquendo (weak #5 hurts Byrd's chances) Ken Norton--Ron Stander, Henry Clark (ditto as above) Elmer Ray--Sid Peaks, Leroy Haynes (ditto as above)
So my top ten after this analysis 1----Harry Wills 2----Archie Moore 3----Sam Langford (can't argue with anyone who puts him first, but he lost his series to Wills and split with Gunboat) 4----Oliver McCall (the big win over Lewis and a solid enough top five gets him in) 5----Harold Johnson (lost 4 of 5 to Moore, but has so much depth a Clarence Henry could be subbed w/o weakening his top five much) 6----Chris Byrd (I credit the win over Vitali, and he has some other big wins) 7----Rex Layne (his top four is among best. An ordinary 5th win still leaves him in top ten) 8----Jimmy Ellis (solid top five. I think he edged Patterson, myself and so give him full credit) 9----Gunboat Smith (fair enough bottom three to back up among best top two) 10---Tommy Loughran (depth overcomes a lot of split series and other losses) Honorable mentions and why they didn't make list: Elmer Ray--weak 4th and 5th pull him down. Generally rated better than Layne, but was KO'd by all three of their common opponents, Charles, Walcott, and Thompson, while Layne did not lose to Walcott or Thompson, and Layne's 3rd to 5th are better. Jimmy Bivins--lost series badly to Moore, plus a cloud for me over the Charles victory (and then being swept after the war) and lots of losses left him just a bit short. Bob Pastor--didn't have that one big win. Ernie Schaaf--too many split series to quite make the final top ten. Alexander Povetkin--I am just not quite impressed enough. Ken Norton & Jimmy Young--just not enough depth despite great top wins. Peter Jackson--just don't know enough about his opponents and his era.
Really nice break down. Wanted to add McCall to my list or Bruno as I felt I had no one from the late 80s/90s on my list and it’s a deserving era to have a representative.
Of ur top ten only Wills Stribling Jackson and Langford are eligible. The rest either had to poor of resumes or were champions and were disqualified. If you’d like I can just take ur next six that are eligible. It’s crazy how different everyone’s lists are.
Although good fighters I wouldn’t put O’Brien or Choyinsky in the top 50 contenders let alone 10. But to each their own. Lineal champs don’t count. Wlad was lineal in just about everyone’s book. As was Sharkey and Schmeling. ABC belt holders don’t count imo. I understand your argument though. Maybe Choyinsky deserves a slot idk if he wad screwed out of top 50 but no one recommended him in the top five wins for challengers so maybe he got left out.
I know I want at least ten votes. Can’t believe we can’t get it lol. Already laid out for some good debate and resumes just need five more participants
1) Harry Wills 2) Archie Moore 3) Tommy Loughran 4) Sam Langford 5) Jimmy Ellis 6) Alexander Povetkin 7) Ernie Terrell 8) Harold Johnson 9) Jimmy Bivins 10) Chris Byrd after thinking about it for the hundredth time I’m changing it again a third time. Initially was gonna fault Byrd for his Oquendo win. Although a robbery his career shouldn’t be judged by one bout. The rest are all solid wins especially the Vitali win. He goes into my ten spot
I’m gonna bump it. Some people need to see some context as to why certain people are considered good contenders and it’s mainly to do with ones top wins.
Well- Curtis Shepperd needs a mention at the very least, whilst he may not be in contention for the top he has a few very good wins and a lot of quality littered about his list of victims I think he could fit in the top ten based on pedigree though I will need to know the era a touch better before I state it as fact for myself.
I actually had made a whole other thread where everyone voted on each guys top five wins (that’s how we got these names w these wins). Curtis would have been a good mention. But top contender? Idk maybe his top five would surprise me.
