My top heavyweight list.

[Dr. Z]

Enclosed are my top 15 ranked heavyweights by 20 year intervals. The criteria for the ranking as follows.

1 ) Head to head vs. the field, which is strictly my personal opinion. 40%

2 ) Resume of wins and losses, excluding losses that happened when a fighter was past their prime. When the fight took place, the results, and draws are factored in. 30%

3 ) Distinction of the fighter as champion by beating top contenders in title matches if applicable. 20%

4 ) Historians input, which matter most to fighters not on film. 10%

I will try to list each fighter only once, placing him closest to his prime years. I am also open to shifting the ratings as bit . So constructive feedback with explanations is most welcome.


1885-1905 Pioneer era: The transitional time between bare knuckles and London Prize ring rules to Queensberry rules.

1.Jeffries
2.Fitzsimmons
3A. Jackson
3B. Corbett
5. Sullivan
6. Sharkey
7. Slavin
8. Ruhlin
9. Goddard
10. Griffin
11. Maher
12. Choynski
13. Hart
14. McCoy
15. O’Brien


1906-1925 Black and white filmed era:

1. Dempsey
2. Tunney
3. J Johnson
4. Langford
5. Wills
6. Jeannette
7. McVey
8. Willard
9. Greb
10. Gibbons
11. Burns
12. Billy Mi@ke
13. Godfrey
14. Norfolk
15. Smith

1926-1945 Great Depression to World War II: An era where war and the great depression in the USA hurt boxing. I have trouble with the bottom of this list, as the depth is rather thin.

1. Louis
2. Schmeling
3. Walcott
4. M Baer
5. Carnera
6. Godfrey
7. Bivins
8. Schaff
9. &harkey
10. Conn
11. H@mas
12. Pastor
13. Farr
14. Rosenbloom
15. Gains

1946-1965 Golden age era:

1. Liston
2. Marciano
3. Charles
4. Patterson
5. Johansson
6. Ray
7. Terrell
8. Machen
9. A Moo@e
10. Folley
11 Williams
12.H. Johnson
13. Nino Valdes
14. D Jones
15. Chaulvo





1966-1985: TV expansion to Cable and PPV: This era is loaded with talent.

1. Ali
2. Holmes
3. Foreman
4. Frazier
5. Norton
6. Witherspoon
7. Thomas
8. Quarry
9. Page
10. Coetzee
11. Shavers
12. Lyle
13. C00ney
14. Young
15. Weaver


1986-2000: 12 round era and super heavyweight era. This era had tremendous depth, and a lot of talent.

1. Lewis
2. Holyfield * Drug PED issues
3. Tyson
4. Bowe
5. Ibeabuchi
6.Byrd
7. Morrer
8. Mercer
9. Douglas
10. Tua
11. Morrison
12. Bruno
13. Rhaman
14 McCall
15. Ruiz


2001 - 2024 – Eastern European dominance era. The nations producing the top talent has shifted. Once the iron curtain in Eastern Europe fell both the amateur and professional ranks have been dominated by Eastern Europeans. Only 3 Americans made the top 15. Since many of the below fighters careers are over, and future talent in the amateurs will arrive, this list will likely look very different 2025-2045. Hopefully we will all be here to debate it!

1A. V Klitschko
1B. W Klitschko
3. Usyk* active fighter
4. Joshua
5. Povetkin * PED issues very late in his career
6. Chagaev
7. Sanders
8. Ibragimov
9. Fury * active fighter, drug suspended PED ISSUES.
10. Haye
11. Adamek
12. Chambers
13 Brewster
14. Peter
15. Wilder * active fighter



Head to head is different as many heavyweights of old we just too small to face modern 1990-2025 heavyweights. 105 names are listed.

* Updated 7-20-24

[Willow The Wisp]

Good effort, good lists. I beleive that.

...or, just maybe
A long, drawn-out post designed to slag Wilder?

I've seen many of the guys you've listed from almost always great seats. Watched them in training, gotten on with them and their teams. I have to pronounce the final list as....well. I can't agree with many of those rank order choices.

But its a free country my friend. I appreciate the effort put into this.

[Willow The Wisp]

Something I've explained some time ago here; well knowing that posting on a message board is entirely different from writing newspaper (what are those?) And ****zine features, where people interested in the sport WILL read; is that the surge of Eastern European fighters coincides with the "fall of the wall" and the expanded freedoms that served as the cause of the fall, but their "dominance" is more attributable to more prosperous (or increasingly prosperous) nations pulling back from producing fighters; nations such as the United States, France, Italy, Spain, Argentina.
Therefore, Eastern European professionals did not come and conquer, as might be inferred; but rather; they simply filled a void left by a departure.
It's faily simple to imagine that if Klitschko, Usyk, Povetkin, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Ademek and Valuev fought in a word where Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Young, Lyle and Shavers roamed the field; their rate of success would have been diminished.

Just an addendum.

[Willow The Wisp]

Is Dr. Kevorkian being boycotted?

[Willie Pep 229]

Hope not.

Be me, I don't do boxing prowess lists.

Who is better than whom only counts in the ring, not on a keyboard.

A debate on a possible match up can be interesting too, but an all encompassing list can't rise about mere (biased) opinion.

Also unranked lists are a little more legit as well; when you start arguing that Tyson is here and Hollyfield is there, it gets pointless.

I like a good list now and again, but it needs a new wrinkle to foster discussion.

[Dr. Z]

Something I've explained some time ago here; well knowing that posting on a message board is entirely different from writing newspaper (what are those?) And ****zine features, where people interested in the sport WILL read; is that the surge of Eastern European fighters coincides with the "fall of the wall" and the expanded freedoms that served as the cause of the fall, but their "dominance" is more attributable to more prosperous (or increasingly prosperous) nations pulling back from producing fighters; nations such as the United States, France, Italy, Spain, Argentina.
Therefore, Eastern European professionals did not come and conquer, as might be inferred; but rather; they simply filled a void left by a departure.
It's faily simple to imagine that if Klitschko, Usyk, Povetkin, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Ademek and Valuev fought in a word where Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Young, Lyle and Shavers roamed the field; their rate of success would have been diminished.

Just an addendum.

The history of the division would have been different if the Eastern Euro fighters went pro in the 1970's. Every man would have a few more losses on his resume in the most talented times of heavyweight boxing! You could rank eras. I tend to think this era is the 3rd best or 2nd best of the 7 listed in the ring. I leave popularity at the door.

What will heavyweight boxing in the next era of 2025-2045 be like? My guess is very international big men 6'3"+ 220+ lbs to 6'10" 270+ lbs. The next wave I think will feature some Western Asian fighters from Uzbekistan and the surrounding counties that are Asian is geography but mixed in with Eastern European blood. Lots of Eastern Euro guys. Some UK fighters. And a few USA based fighters,

The history of the division would have been different if the Eastern Euro fighters went pro in the 1970's. Every man would have a few more losses on his resume in the most talented times of heavyweight boxing! You could rank eras. I tend to think this era is the 3rd best or 2nd best of the 7 listed in the ring. I leave popularity at the door.

What will heavyweight boxing in the next era of 2025-2045 be like? My guess is very international big men 6'3"+ 220+ lbs to 6'10" 270+ lbs. The next wave I think will feature some Western Asian fighters from Uzbekistan are the surrounding counties that are Asian in geography but mixed in with Eastern European stock.

That is until the designer babies mature in 2045 and beyond... Don't kid yourself, it is comming. When that happens, the heavyweights will literally be monstrous in abilities. Check out the Super r@ts in labs and you will get a taste of things to come. They are, much bigger, stronger, faster and with double the stamina...and that doesn't even begin to describe the potential of DNA mixed with CRISPR gene editing. At that point human boxing history itself will change and the will have a " CRISRP " division.

[Biledriver]

Something I've explained some time ago here; well knowing that posting on a message board is entirely different from writing newspaper (what are those?) And ****zine features, where people interested in the sport WILL read; is that the surge of Eastern European fighters coincides with the "fall of the wall" and the expanded freedoms that served as the cause of the fall, but their "dominance" is more attributable to more prosperous (or increasingly prosperous) nations pulling back from producing fighters; nations such as the United States, France, Italy, Spain, Argentina.
Therefore, Eastern European professionals did not come and conquer, as might be inferred; but rather; they simply filled a void left by a departure.
It's faily simple to imagine that if Klitschko, Usyk, Povetkin, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Ademek and Valuev fought in a word where Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Young, Lyle and Shavers roamed the field; their rate of success would have been diminished.

Just an addendum.

The only thing allowing Eastern Europeans in would have done (and did do when it eventually happened) is water down the talent pool with inferior talents.

[billeau2]

The only thing allowing Eastern Europeans in would have done (and did do when it eventually happened) is water down the talent pool with inferior talents.

I see workman like talent, but the skills that define great professional fighters are lacking. I see a similar thing with Cuban fighters, except they have better, err I should say, more suitable skill sets to apply to the professional ranks. These big heavyweights are out of shape. They gas, they cannot compete with fighters that can move, at the elite level. To me a fighter like Ortiz, Odinair Solise, are examples of truly skilled fighters. Solis had problems with conditioning as well... Cuba has produced a lot of good fighters in the division per capita... Fighters like Gonzalez and Sanchez, not really elite but like a lot of the Eastern European guys... decent level of skills.

But The Eastern European fighters tend to clump up around decent level. They tend to look better precisely because we do not have marque talent like once existed in the division (as you say). To say Usyk and Klitsko are examples of this migration is fair, but given the amount of fighters coming in from that area, one would expect a few elite fighters. Usyk is not an example of big, amatuer trained Eastern European fighters as he is in a class by himself, and in my opinion this includes a class above the Klitchko brothers.

[Bronson66]

the only thing allowing eastern europeans in would have done (and did do when it eventually happened) is water down the talent pool with inferior talents.

one of their most promising men and a mandatory challenger just got cruelly exposed by decent. But not exceptional dubois.

[billeau2]

one of their most promising men and a mandatory challenger just got cruelly exposed by decent. But not exceptional dubois.

Great example... If we do a forensic on the stiff croat we can look at his fights, what level of skills do we really see? Prior to the Dubois fight...Body movements, defensive movements, range of punches thrown... Gas tank...

What we find is a mediocre fighter who did well as an amateur, something we will see with a good deal of these guys. Even guys a little more savy, like Povatkin, if we watch them in the ring, there just is not much to see.