Top 10 Heavies from best to worst

[Hawkins]

** Funny, but last I checked, Tyson beat more future, current, or former heavy champions in history, yet you say he never beat an elite heavy.

You seem to be stuck on failures, so by default would rank Marciano as the best, if, IF you were following a uniform logic. I doubt you are, but at any rate I only rank Tyson 9th because of balancing his success with failure.

Champions? Other than Michael Spinks & an old Larry Holmes what other elite*champions* did he defeat? If you mean beltholders then ok, but I don't know of any other heavyweight champions he defeated.

I'm stuck on failures? Nice of you to make assumptions about someone. Do that often? Do you often respond harshly to questions about your rankings?

[LondonRingRules]

[QUOTE=hurricane72;2765384]I'm only including champions and Langford as good as he was never was champ, but a great nonetheless.
[QUOTE]

** So, am I to assume you value Bruce Seldon and Leon Spinks greatly over Langford?

The thread asked about the greatest heavies, not heavy champs.

[LondonRingRules]

Champions? Other than Michael Spinks & an old Larry Holmes what other elite*champions* did he defeat? If you mean beltholders then ok, but I don't know of any other heavyweight champions he defeated.

I'm stuck on failures? Nice of you to make assumptions about someone. Do that often? Do you often respond harshly to questions about your rankings?

** I said you seem to be stuck on failures. Thus far every comment about Tyson from you has been negative or about failures. Some noobie perusing your post a hundred years from now is going to think Tyson never accomplished squadoodle other than wear a belt that said noobie will probably think Tyson purchased at Walmart from a cardboard display.

[-CANE-]

[QUOTE=LondonRingRules;2765474][QUOTE=hurricane72;2765384]I'm only including champions and Langford as good as he was never was champ, but a great nonetheless.

** So, am I to assume you value Bruce Seldon and Leon Spinks greatly over Langford?

The thread asked about the greatest heavies, not heavy champs.

I wasn't criticizing I was just saying. I have stated several times in the thread it was just champions. I couldn't fit the word champions in the title as it was Top 10 Heavies best to worst and there was no more room.

You have after putting up a good list and redeeming yourself reverted back to getting all defensive and making silly assumptions. There is no need for it as you obviously by the list you put up have knowledge on the fight game.

Check the 1st page of the thread and you'll see that both Seldon and Spinks are on my worst list of champions.

I never said I didn't value Langford and just stated he was a great did you not see that. I only said I NEVER INCLUDED HIM BECAUSE HE WASN'T CHAMPION not that he wasn't worthy of being mentioned.

Lay off of the insults and silly assumptions you're intelligent and don't need to resort to such childish behaviour.

[Hawkins]

** I said you seem to be stuck on failures. Thus far every comment about Tyson from you has been negative or about failures. Some noobie perusing your post a hundred years from now is going to think Tyson never accomplished squadoodle other than wear a belt that said noobie will probably think Tyson purchased at Walmart from a cardboard display.

When every post I see about Tyson is kind of on the deepend I feel compelled to add in the reality of his career in that he is vastly overrated by most. It's my opinion of course, but it's an opinion shared by many.

On a side note, if someone reading my posts base their opinions on a fighter based solely on what I said then they aren't much of an objective fan. Someone needs to do their own research not base their opinions on one person.s viewpoint.

Regardless, if you feel Tyson is top 10 material then more power to you. I just dont see it the same way and just asked you to clarify how you to came to that conclusion. Nothing more, nothing less.

[them_apples]

I said you seem to be stuck on failures. Thus far every comment about Tyson from you has been negative or about failures. Some noobie perusing your post a hundred years from now is going to think Tyson never accomplished squadoodle other than wear a belt that said noobie will probably think Tyson purchased at Walmart from a cardboard display.

everyone rips on Tyson because of his popularity, they think they are being the devils advocate....but it's leading to him getting almost no recognition at all..hell I've even seen a bowe ranked above Tyson.

It's also a good Idea to look at peoples avatars, if they have "2 ton tony galento" or "max Baer" for example, they are probably still living in the black and white era and won't acknowledge anything past 1970's a la "poet"

[Hawkins]

everyone rips on Tyson because of his popularity, they think they are being the devils advocate....but it's leading to him getting almost no recognition at all..hell I've even seen a bowe ranked above Tyson.

No, I don't think thats it. I don't rip on Tyson at all. I just don't agree with the way alot of his fans warp the facts, as well as tear others down, in order to make Tyson more than he was. I'm a Tyson fan, there was no one better to me when I was a younger, but that doesn't mean blind allegiance without a close examination of the facts.

[-CANE-]

everyone rips on Tyson because of his popularity, they think they are being the devils advocate....but it's leading to him getting almost no recognition at all..hell I've even seen a bowe ranked above Tyson.

It's also a good Idea to look at peoples avatars, if they have "2 ton tony galento" or "max Baer" for example, they are probably still living in the black and white era and won't acknowledge anything past 1970's a la "poet"

He get's a lot of recognition from me but I don't distort it that's all.
You seem to base your thoughts and opinions on who would beat who which is your perogative. But you don't give the old time fighters any recognition yourself. You always come up with the same point that today's fighters are fitter,stronger,bigger and better skilled and the old timers would get blown away. Which to a certain extent is true. But the majority of us take into account overall ability for the time they boxed in, their impact and also what they achieved. Just because someone has for instance Marciano ranked above Lewis (Which I don't by the way) you start saying that is ****** and Marciano could never have beaten Lewis and that particular person must be old and stuck in the dark ages which isn't true. Your seem to me to be very young and are misunderstanding what everyone is trying to do here.

[them_apples]

He get's a lot of recognition from me but I don't distort it that's all.
You seem to base your thoughts and opinions on who would beat who which is your perogative. But you don't give the old time fighters any recognition yourself. You always come up with the same point that today's fighters are fitter,stronger,bigger and better skilled and the old timers would get blown away. Which to a certain extent is true. But the majority of us take into account overall ability for the time they boxed in, their impact and also what they achieved. Just because someone has for instance Marciano ranked above Lewis (Which I don't by the way) you start saying that is ****** and Marciano could never have beaten Lewis and that particular person must be old and stuck in the dark ages which isn't true. Your seem to me to be very young and are misunderstanding what everyone is trying to do here.

Yea what you said is perfectly true, I was only stating the other side. But I agree.

Yes I do tend to not give older fighters a chance (other than a few) but only because a lot of the time Older fighters are getting overrated so much on this forum that its humorous..I mean come on.."Marciano vs Lewis who would win?" was one topic, this is where common sense kicks in. A 185 lb 5'10 slow slugger will not have a chance in hell against a faster, more powerful 245 6'5 Lennox Lewis regardless of how tough some people think the competition was back in the 50's.

There is a reason why we have weight divisions in boxing.
my 2 cents

[-CANE-]

Yea what you said is perfectly true, I was only stating the other side. But I agree.

Yes I do tend to not give older fighters a chance (other than a few) but only because a lot of the time Older fighters are getting overrated so much on this forum that its humorous..I mean come on.."Marciano vs Lewis who would win?" was one topic, this is where common sense kicks in. A 185 lb 5'10 slow slugger will not have a chance in hell against a faster, more powerful 245 6'5 Lennox Lewis regardless of how tough some people think the competition was back in the 50's.

my 2 cents

O.K then let's try something show me what you know.
Disregard who would beat who just this once and give me your top10 list based on achievments such as defenses made and years reigned and how many times they were champ,impact they had,quality of opposition fought in their era and overall ability for the era they fought in.

I'd like to see what you come up with I won't criticize I just wanna see.