Top 10 Heavies from best to worst

[Willie Pep 229]

H2H debates utilise data and analysis of bouts and stylistic matchups to render objective judgements.

Are those judgements impervious to refutations? Of course not.

But "greatness" is almost purely derived through nostalgia and a subjective perception of legacy which includes irrelevant topics outside the ring.

E.g. That dude above probably has Jack Johnson in his top 10 because of muh waycism

Of course he does . . . He is obvious . . . I understand the difference you are suggesting but I wouldn't use the term 'objective.' But I understand your reasoning now and don't want to play semantics with you.

Personally I think it is all conjecture and don't like to make lists using either logic. I like talking about what actually happened and why it happened.

Thanks for getting back to me.

[Good ol' Douglas]

Of course he does . . . He is obvious . . . I understand the difference you are suggesting but I wouldn't use the term 'objective.' But I understand your reasoning now and don't want to play semantics with you.

Personally I think it is all conjecture and don't like to make lists using either logic. I like talking about what actually happened and why it happened.

Thanks for getting back to me.

Sure, but that limits you to comparing and discussing fighters purely within the context of their own eras, which is not the case for the vast majority of fans.

My POV is simple; I wish to examine who are the best HWs to ever step foot in the ring.

For example, you can watch Ali vs. Mildenburger and then realise Chris Byrd would take "The Greatest" to school.

Comparing title defences, fight records, etc. across generations is an impossible task because various variables, e.g. improvements in nutrition and training, increasing access to technology, PED use, past styles being studied and outdated, advancements in technical and physical ability, frequency of bouts, the larger global talent pool vs. smaller US talent pool of modern HW boxing, etc. cannot be accounted for.

Technical skills, boxing styles, athleticism, size disparities, etc. can be objectively analysed unlike the subjective and inherently flawed criteria used to determine "greatness".

[QueensburyRules]

Sure, but that limits you to comparing and discussing fighters purely within the context of their own eras, which is not the case for the vast majority of fans.

My POV is simple; I wish to examine who are the best HWs to ever step foot in the ring.

For example, you can watch Ali vs. Mildenburger and then realise Chris Byrd would take "The Greatest" to school.

Comparing title defences, fight records, etc. across generations is an impossible task because various variables, e.g. improvements in nutrition and training, increasing access to technology, PED use, past styles being studied and outdated, advancements in technical and physical ability, frequency of bouts, the larger global talent pool vs. smaller US talent pool of modern HW boxing, etc. cannot be accounted for.

Technical skills, boxing styles, athleticism, size disparities, etc. can be objectively analysed unlike the subjective and inherently flawed criteria used to determine "greatness".

- - It's like U know nothing and mean to prove it.

The US was The Panoply of the Global Migration from thousands of Global port of calls and still is, but the US no longer dominates boxing because of cultural changes where modern boxing is seen by the youth as a DEAD END, a bunch of preening sissyboys or thugs. Sissyboys can go into modeling and movies and thugs can pose in Rap.

Hence a $5 Bil all inclusive combat sport like the UFC now dominates youthful interests while your boxing be circling your potty.

[Ingo Bingo]

I have studied boxing history for over 50 years and I am still fascinated by it. Here is my top 10 list of the greatest
heavyweights, from my point of view. It is not a list of who beats who. What impresses me most is how you dominate your era.

1. Jack Johnson
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Joe Louis
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Larry Holmes
6. Wladimir Klitschko
7. Rocky Marciano
8. Jim Jeffries
9. Jack Dempsey
10. John L Sullivan

Future champions will find it hard to get on the top 10 list.

[StarshipTrooper]

1 post. Claims to be a boxing scholar. Disappears. Only question is which regular this alt belongs to

[Yaconcha]

Your brain must be the size of a peanut if you cannot understand my explanation of the list.

Regardless, I regret making this mutt of a list because "greatness" is nothing more than a subjective perception of legacy.

I am far more interested in objective H2H matchup analysis. In that case, no HW champion pre-80/90s would make the cut.

Like I said before you ****** fool, you know nothing.

[Porky Pig]

Hi everyone, just joined and I know this has probably been done a million times, but just letting everyone know what I think.

Top 10 Greatest Heavyweights of all-time

1> Muhammad Ali
2> Larry Holmes
3> Lennox Lewis
4> Joe Louis
5> Evander Holyfield
6> Jack Johnson
7> George Foreman
8> Rocky Marciano
9> Joe Frazier
10>Mike Tyson

Top 10 Favourite Heavyweight's of all-time

1> Larry Holmes
2> George Foreman
3> Muhammed Ali
4> Joe Louis
5> Mike Tyson
6> Rocky Marciano
7> Jack Johnson
8> Lennox Lewis
9> James J. Jeffries
10>Sonny Liston

Top 10 Worst Heavyweight Champions of all-time
1> Franceso Damiani
2> Corrie Sanders
3> Chris Byrd
4> Michael Bent
5> Nickolay Valuev
6> Lamon Brewster
7> Frans Botha
8> Greg Page
9> John Tate
10>Henry Akinwande

Top 10 Most underated heavyweights of all-time
1> Larry Holmes
2> Lennox Lewis
3> Gene Tunney
4> Ezzard Charles
5> Tim Witherspoon
6> Ken Norton
7> James J. Jeffries
8> George Foreman
9> Jersey Joe Walcott
10>Rid**** Bowe
Feel free to get back I know many will disagree especially why I have Lewis 3rd and Tyson 10, so if you want to know just ask and I will explain my reasons

Substitute Charles Martin for Chris Byrd who was a heck of a boxer, and I like your list better in the 'worst ever' category I don't think Ezzard is underrated at all. I have seen him on several forums rated highly in the pond for pound category, counting this forum. I think he was great but i just wonder which heavyweights he would really beat. I saw a thread about who would be the favorites if certain people fought. I am going to copy that format for a thread.

[StarshipTrooper]

Substitute Charles Martin for Chris Byrd who was a heck of a boxer, and I like your list better in the 'worst ever' category I don't think Ezzard is underrated at all. I have seen him on several forums rated highly in the pond for pound category, counting this forum. I think he was great but i just wonder which heavyweights he would really beat. I saw a thread about who would be the favorites if certain people fought. I am going to copy that format for a thread.

I wouldn't rate Ezzard at Heavyweight at all: It wasn't his best weightclass. I have him the GOAT at Light-Heavyweight, though. That being said, some boxing writers at the time thought he narrowly beat Marciano.

[Porky Pig]

I wouldn't rate Ezzard at Heavyweight at all: It wasn't his best weightclass. I have him the GOAT at Light-Heavyweight, though. That being said, some boxing writers at the time thought he narrowly beat Marciano.

Boxing writers always say something. Charles has quite a few moves I watched both fight in abbreviated firm tonight. The full fights were no longer available on Youtube.

He never got a chance avenge his loss---and draw---against Ken Overlin, who caught him green. I have hm somewhere behind Tunney. I might push him to #2 lhw. We know he can beat Archie Moore. That makes it easier---since anyone who loses to moore cannot beat Charkes either.

[StarshipTrooper]

Boxing writers always say something. Charles has quite a few moves I watched both fight in abbreviated firm tonight. The full fights were no longer available on Youtube.

He never got a chance avenge his loss---and draw---against Ken Overlin, who caught him green. I have hm somewhere behind Tunney. I might push him to #2 lhw. We know he can beat Archie Moore. That makes it easier---since anyone who loses to moore cannot beat Charkes either.

I have an 18 minute long clip of the first fight. Not the full fight, but what it shows looked close as hell. I think Tunney is a touch overrated, mostly from playing hit and run with an over-the-hill Dempsey. "anyone who loses to Moore cannot beat Charles either" <----- That's WAY too simplistic. You have to look at the fights in context. By that standard you'd get Foreman >>>>> Frazier therefore Foreman >>>>> Ali. Boxing just doesn't work like that. Sometimes one fighter just has another fighter's number.