Young was very green and nowhere near being a contender when Shavers beat him, and he beat Shavers in the second fight by nearly all accounts. Ellis and Norton were both on their way out when Shavers beat them, and Bugner was not all that good. Quarry annihilated Shavers in one round, Lyle knocked him out, and 21-24 Bob Stallings thrashed him over 10.
Shavers is easy to dismiss as being "one dimensional", true or not. Certainly easier to laud a fighter like Ali than him. His loss against Quarry in one cements that, but hey, when did a pure puncher ever beat Quarry? The Lyle fight, which easily could of gone either way, is seemingly held against him too.
I almost think that Shavers' legacy sits on the foundation of his losing efforts against Holmes and Ali more than anything else. I mean, don't get me wrong, he was a hell of a fighter, but for a man who had some 74 wins with 68 Ko's or something, his list of quality wins is very thin in my opinion. He also had quite a few losses to men who were less than stellar. He was a very dangerous puncher to be sure, but also a bit one dimensional with few other attributes to offer. A man of his great power could have had a puncher's chance against just about anyone, but truth be told, I would have picked a lot of fighters throughout history to beat him, and not all of them great either.
But Quarry had three draws with Doyle and Alongi in his home town. Did he really deserve a draw in all three of these fights? I never saw them, but I'll guess " NO ". Bugner was decent. He beat the same guys Ali, Faraier and Quarry did, and Bugner did better vs Ali and Frazier than Quarry did by a good margin. Quarry also lost to Ellis and Chavalo. A KO loss from Chavalo is far worse than a KO loss to Lyle. Quarry also he got spanked twice by Ali. I think Shavers did better vs the eliete fighters ( Ail, Holmes, and Norton ), and beat leading person in the poll ( Young ) by knock out. Quarry is a fine pick here, but I still think its close. A case can be made for Young or Shavers too.
Time to put the fox among the hares. I personaly rank Jimmy Young higher than Ken Norton. Your big four is now a big three.
You've might have a pretty solid case for doing so. That said Norton arguably beat Ali twice so it makes it a very close call. I think I'd still have Norton ahead. What are your concise reasons for putting Young higher?
My concise reasons? Nortons high ranking is based on the coincidence that he was a stylistic foil for Muhamad Ali and Larry Holmes. I feel that Young was more versatile. If you matched them both against your top 10 heavies then Young would give most of them serious problems and Norton would get destroyed by most of them.
I voted for Joe Bugner. Note that I was careful to say if Bugner fought his best. I'm talking about Bugner on his best night. Check out Bugner's fight against Joe Frazier on youtube.com. The way Bugner looked that night, he might easily have been better than anyone outside of Ali, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton.
Ill go for Quarry his 70s wins over Foster ,Bodell,Corletti,Middleton,Lyle,Shavers,and Zanon ,give him the edge for me.
Jimmy Young was a crafty evasive light hitting boxer ,I saw him make the British Champ John Gardner ,look a fool,but when he fought Ali he spent half the fight with his torso out through the ropes,he embarrassed Ali but imo didnt deserve the verdict,Ali at 230 lbs was way out of shape and looked terrible ,but Young didnt look any better to me,the first 4 rds were a bore,then Ali tried to pressure Young more,Young made him miss several times but was reluctant to follow up.Young didnt fight as though he beleived in himself and didnt open up till the 11th and twelth rounds. The fight was a unanimous decision for Ali so I dont know how people saw Young winning it.Ali made sure he was in better shape when he fought Norton 2 fights later ,he came in weighing 9lbs lighter.
That's true about Cus overprotecting him. But it may have been cause Cus knew Paterson's limitations. I wonder how he would have done if he fought better oppisition early in career.