Why is it everytime someone thinks an old time heavy was good they are accused of having "an agenda"

I would have Wlad in there somewhere and swap Johnson and Foreman as well as putting Tyson in, but a pretty solid list.

 

Why should he be higher than guys that stayed longer at the top and beat more ranked contenders? Yes, they lost, but you do that if you stick around at the top long enough.

Three years of reigning a weak era just isn't good enough for me for top 5.

 

The "good faith nostalgia" defense falls short when a) the majority of people who espouse these greats as capable of hanging with successive greats from the past century are not old enough to have been alive when they fought, even as infants and b) they're not also inflating the worth of, say, Langford and Jeannette.

 

I'd have Wlad in now, but not from 2005.

 

That's your opinion (which is one of the very few I respect) but I think it's debatable who's better between Marciano, Dempsey, and Holmes. I've always had Marciano the highest of the 3 (and thr worst H2H) but I feel the need to retract that statement now that I think about it. I'd rank Holmes higher as he was one away from matching Rocky's 49-0 and imo surpassed it (scored both Spinks fights for him) and still came back and was a force in the division 2 decades later! But I do think theirs a debate to have either 3 come out on top and I won't have a problem with it.

 

It may not be good enough for you (I'm actually inclined to agree with you) but you don't represent the majority. To say that people who rank Marciano high are only capable of bias is just wrong.

 

You're talking about two different things. Rocky's still rated that highly on ATG lists (so, weighted differently per era). I think @Bokaj is saying there's no real objective reason to rate him top 5 h2h, which a few maniacs do.

 

Answer to Post Question = Generation Social Manipulation Shaping...

you think a Household should have Traditional Roles = Misogynist
you don't support MILITANT Feminism = Misogynistic Bigoted Chauvinistic pig
you don't 'agree' with Homosexuality = Homophobic
you worry about Mass Migration = Xenophobia
you believe in God = your Stupid, Superstitious and Ignorant

you QUESTION Anything that is not in line with Anything Molded into the Minds of the last 4 Decades, you are not just Wrong, your Not PC and now your even at risk of being a criminal...

you think it doesn't apply to Sport or Leisure, just like Academia, Business or Politics???

Old timers more often than not DO Look Like S HI T on film,
BUT the Proven Poor Quality of the Film, the Production of it, or the degeneration of it doesn't count, even when the odd Good Quality Film occasionally shows up, showing Old Fighters looking Perfectly Normal... Oh that doesn't matter, look at this S hi tty Film here, that's what they are/were, their = S hi t!

my Point is THAT'S Discourse TODAY - RECORDED FACTS only count if their Current and InLine with the Current HIVE MIND!!!

 

It was a reflection of the ranking of those four in total.

 

No, it was more how highly all of Jeffries, Dempsey, Tunney and Rocky were ranked. And I was thinking resume.

 

My guess would be old timey bias.

 

This times ten!! It's why I hardly even post on the classic forum anymore. Most of these folks don't even watch boxing anymore. They just hang on to that 49-0.

 

I don't believe so because he was responding to a top ten ATG list posted back in '05. However If that's the case my apologies. I would agree he's massively overrated H2H.

 

When codgers grossly inflate the abilities of these old breadline champs and assign magical properties to their skills, rebranding obscene technical flaws as high level science that has been forgotten in the mists of time, they are only attempting to inflate the worth and relevance of their own arcane study into these subjects. It is as transparent a strategy as that of the tent revivalist.

They say that every great pool player signifies another wasted life. Well, perhaps that equation works in other situations.

 

He clarified that wasn't what he meant; my mistake.