Top 10 Heavies from best to worst

[LondonRingRules]

It seems to me you base your opinions on what all the old time historians say about these fighters, and you criticize others because they have never seen the old timers and they only rate the modern day fighters because that's all they have seen.

Try looking at the fighters themselves and the quality of opposition they fought and beat that was available at the time.

** I drew a line in the sand, true enough.

If you look strictly at the fighters, the opposition, it becomes subjective. Liston was a HOF fighter, but really, does anyone really objective regard Ali's two wins over him greater than Jeff's wins over Fitz or Corbett, or Johnson's wins over Fireman Flynn? The integrity of the fight and the judging should mean something. Ever really looked at those Norton fights? Norton was the Sam Langford of his era, frozen out of the boxing orgs and ruling politics. The only break he ever got was more like awarding him a bauble so they could strip him. How can he even begin to compete in achievements with the deck stacked like that?

If ranking fighters was objective, how could Ali go from unranked to head of the class in many polls in the worst period of his life based on his performances?

7 of your picks are from the 60s up. How can that be balanced? It seems an excessive rush to modern fighters to me.

Can you find me a list by a scribe in the day that ranks Ali anywhere in the top 10 in his prime after, what, 10 consecutive title fights? That's a pretty long history right there to make a dent one would think. Seems to me like maybe the Liston wins weren't widely regarded as legit and his defenses featured more than a few weak opponents, but I'm only giving my interpretation, Typically only Nat Fleischer ever bothered to give detailed explanations, but there may be a few other updated lists say by Charley Rose listing details.

[Colin McMillan]

** I drew a line in the sand, true enough.

If you look strictly at the fighters, the opposition, it becomes subjective. Liston was a HOF fighter, but really, does anyone really objective regard Ali's two wins over him greater than Jeff's wins over Fitz or Corbett, or Johnson's wins over Fireman Flynn? The integrity of the fight and the judging should mean something. Ever really looked at those Norton fights? Norton was the Sam Langford of his era, frozen out of the boxing orgs and ruling politics. The only break he ever got was more like awarding him a bauble so they could strip him. How can he even begin to compete in achievements with the deck stacked like that?

If ranking fighters was objective, how could Ali go from unranked to head of the class in many polls in the worst period of his life based on his performances?

7 of your picks are from the 60s up. How can that be balanced? It seems an excessive rush to modern fighters to me.

Can you find me a list by a scribe in the day that ranks Ali anywhere in the top 10 in his prime after, what, 10 consecutive title fights? That's a pretty long history right there to make a dent one would think. Seems to me like maybe the Liston wins weren't widely regarded as legit and his defenses featured more than a few weak opponents, but I'm only giving my interpretation, Typically only Nat Fleischer ever bothered to give detailed explanations, but there may be a few other updated lists say by Charley Rose listing details.

Interesting point you make about Norton being frozen out of the heavyweight picture. Many people think Norton actually had the better of Ali in those 3 fights. I myself when considering Ali don't really consider the Liston fights, something not quite right there about both fights. I'm not saying they were fixed, but there will always be a doubt about them for me anyway.

Going back to what you said about Norton, I think the same applies to Lennox Lewis, which is why his achievments are so great because he stuck around for a long time and eventually after beating everyone and avenging his defeats there was no choice but to give him the opportunity to become undisputed champion.

Your right 7 of my picks are from the 60's and later, and it looks like you say, but my list was based on achievments as champion and only as champion.

How many years they reigned, how many title defenses made and how many times they became champion. All factual and the other criteria was subjective but it was quality of opposition and impact they made on the sport.

I did do another list and I'll have to try and dig it out and this was on a who would beat who, I tried to balance out things like the era they fought in and thought about how great would Jack Johnson be in todays era and Mike Tyson back in the early 1900's.

My list changed quite dramatically if I can remember rightly and featured a lot more old timers in the top 10.

So basically a list is all down to your criteria, now was yours on achievments overall, as champion or a who would beat who or what? If you tell me this then it is easier to understand your placements.

[Mersey]

10. Evander Holyfield
9. Rocky Marciano
8. Vitali Klitchko ( I can see him beating some of these fighters)
7. Joe Frazier
6. George Foreman
5. Joe Louis
4. Mike Tyson
3. Lennox Lewis
2. Larry Holmes
1. Muhammad Ali

[RODHOOK]

Heavy,s

Ali is of a class in his own. There was never a fighter is history
to match. There will not be one in our lifetime. Rodhook

[0Rooster4Life0]

Top Ten Greatest in my opinion

#1 Joe Louis
#2 Muhammad Ali
#3 Rocky Marciano
#4 George Foreman
#5 Jack Dempsey
#6 Jack Johnson
#7 Ezzard Charles
#8 Lennox Lewis
#9 Joe Frazier
#10 Mike Tyson

[JAB5239]

Top Ten Greatest in my opinion

#1 Joe Louis
#2 Muhammad Ali
#3 Rocky Marciano
#4 George Foreman
#5 Jack Dempsey
#6 Jack Johnson
#7 Ezzard Charles
#8 Lennox Lewis
#9 Joe Frazier
#10 Mike Tyson

With all due respect, why do you have Charles in your top 10? P4p.....he was a beast. At heavy....still a great fighter, but not great enough to make my own top 10. That of course is only MY opinion. I think both Holmes and Liston belong on the list before Ezzard, any day. Thats just me though.

[The Iron Man]

I would have to agree with JAB. I think its one of the first lists i have seen without Larry Holmes who is someone (i think) should be in every list no questions asked.

[Beeston Brawler]

You can't have Tyson above Lennox, surely?

[-CANE-]

I would have to agree with JAB. I think its one of the first lists i have seen without Larry Holmes who is someone (i think) should be in every list no questions asked.

Exactly I don't understand why Holmes is not rated by some.

[hardmanbrit]

Maybe Jack Dempsey deserves to be in there as he was the most entertaining and attack-minded Heavyweight of all time and he destroyed the man who destroyed Jack Johnson.

Rocky Marciano is the only Heavyweight Champion of the World in the history of the sport to never be beaten so he must also be there, although there are other great candidates for the list.

In my opinion, the only Englishman that deserves to make the top ten list is Lennox Lewis.