Which one these fighters belong in the top 20 heavyweights?

[QueensburyRules]

This directly contradicts your own assertion that 'precious few heavies in the Pantheon can beat Usyk, and precious few have anywhere close to his immaculate 12 year record as a Heavy." If fighters can only be in our own era than Usyk has only been a heavyweight for 5 years with 6 fights at that weight. Pick your poison, because as usual you're all over the place.

- - U got no IQ to contradict anyone.

Fitz and Burns were teensy, yet heavies in their day, yet have no chance vs today vs Usyk.

[JAB5239]

- - U got no IQ to contradict anyone.

Fitz and Burns were teensy, yet heavies in their day, yet have no chance vs today vs Usyk.

It's not about who would win or stand a chance today. Your own words were "fighters can only be in their own era for better or worse". Heavyweight was an open division back than, today it's not. Therefore Usyk has NOT been a Heavyweight for 12 years. This is an indisputable fact. You could say he would have been a Heavyweight back then, but he didn't fight back then. And according to you, you moron, "fighters can only be in their own era". Your double standards when trying to make a point only serve to make you look that much more biased and illogical.

Don't you ever tire of making a fool of yourself?

[QueensburyRules]

It's not about who would win or stand a chance today. Your own words were "fighters can only be in their own era for better or worse". Heavyweight was an open division back than, today it's not. Therefore Usyk has NOT been a Heavyweight for 12 years. This is an indisputable fact. You could say he would have been a Heavyweight back then, but he didn't fight back then. And according to you, you moron, "fighters can only be in their own era". Your double standards when trying to make a point only serve to make you look that much more biased and illogical.

Don't you ever tire of making a fool of yourself?

- - Boxing started off as open 17-18th Century. By 19th Century wt classes clearly established.

Fitz makes the cut as p4p sorta like U dum4dum. Big men rule today as Joe Louis, Dempsey, the Ks and Usyk today.

[JAB5239]

- - Boxing started off as open 17-18th Century. By 19th Century wt classes clearly established.

Fitz makes the cut as p4p sorta like U dum4dum. Big men rule today as Joe Louis, Dempsey, the Ks and Usyk today.

The classes were clearly established you say? Is that why men like Greb, Fitz and Langford amongst others who weighed in under the lightheavyweight limit were allowed to fight at heavyweight? Again, you're clearly wrong and your double standard is indicative of your lack of understanding. Dempsey wouldn't be a heavyweight today, but for some reason you include him. More double standards. Fact still remains, Usyk has only been a Heavyweight for 5 years, not the 12 you made up to polish his knob.

[Bronson66]

As you know, when Tunney elected to retire following his title defence against # 3 Ring ranked Tom Heeney, and his marriage to Polly Lauder, he was already a billionaire, adjusted to inflation in today's dollars. He'd beaten the great Dempsey twice, Harry Greb, a top competitor against heavyweights, thrice; and top rated contenders Tommy Loughran, Battling Levinsky, Herb Crossley, Paul Samson Koerner, Martin Burke, Charley Weinert, Jack Renault, Chuck Wiggins, Jimmy Delaney, Harry Foley, Erminio Spalla, Georges Carpentier, Tom Gibbons, Bartley Madden and Johnny Risko, in an age when the leap from lightheavyweight to heavyweight was no more than a shot of courage; Tunney had done his bit, completely. If he'd stayed on and beaten Max Schmelling, Jack Sharkey, George Godfrey, Paolino Uzcudun, Knute Hansen, Jack Dorval, Arthur DeKuh, Phil Scott, Vittorio Campolo, Jimmy Maloney and the others available at the time, it would be more of the same.

Tunney was far more than the dancing master who befuddled Dempsey. Tunney was a vicious fighter who brought it.

"top rated contenders Tommy Loughran, Battling Levinsky, Herb Crossley, Paul Samson Koerner, Martin Burke, Charley Weinert, Jack Renault, Chuck Wiggins, Jimmy Delaney, Harry Foley, Erminio Spalla, Georges Carpentier, Tom Gibbons, Bartley Madden and Johnny Risko"
Crossley
Koerner
Burke
Madden
Wiggins
Delaney
Foley
Weinert
Carpentier
Levinsky
Loughran

Were not ranked contenders .
Loughran was163lbs
Weinert was not a ranked contender.He fought Tunney twice,in1922 there were no rankings then,and even if there were, he would not have been ranked, he had 7 fights that year and won only 2 of them.
Tunney did not beat Renault,they were both slung out for not trying.
Dempsey Champ
Dempsey was no 1
Risko was no13
Spalla was no 10
Gibbons was no 3
Heeney no 4
Let's look at these 5 men.
Dempsey had been out of the ring for 3 years when Tunney out boxed him in their first fight.
In their second one he caught up with the loping Tunney,but refused to go to a neutral corner,which allowed Tunney extra time to recover.Once back on his feet Tunney returned to boxing on the retreat and Dempsey did not have the legs or stamina to get to him.He was no longer the Manassa Mauler.

Risko was an in and outer with a 19-7-0record ,that year the Ring ranked 15 men otherwise he would not have been ranked.he sc****d in at13.

Gibbons 34 years old was having his last fight,and ,like Carpentier and Levinsky was in significant decline.

Spalla never beat anyone worth talking about and his inclusion at no10 just illustrates how shallow the talent pool was.

Heeney getting a draw with Sharkey enabled Tunney to bypass the more dangerous Sharkey and end his career on a winning note.

Six fights with ranked men.

Thats it!

As far as I can make out Tunney fought15 men ,180lbs and over,in 67 fights, and 25 fights with men over the 175lbs Lhvy limit.

Weights of some of his victims.

Foley 170lbs
Carpentier 173lbs
Delaney 177lbs
Greb 165lbs 171lbs,167lbs
Wiggins 174lbs
Loughran 163lbs
Levinsky176lbs
Burke 175lbs
Koerner 172lbs
Houck173lbs
Smith166lbs
Keiser 167lbs
O' Hare167lbs
Larsen173lbs
Sullivan 170lbs
Pearce166lbs
O Dowd 170lbs
Wenzer 165lbs

[QueensburyRules]

The classes were clearly established you say? Is that why men like Greb, Fitz and Langford amongst others who weighed in under the lightheavyweight limit were allowed to fight at heavyweight? Again, you're clearly wrong and your double standard is indicative of your lack of understanding. Dempsey wouldn't be a heavyweight today, but for some reason you include him. More double standards. Fact still remains, Usyk has only been a Heavyweight for 5 years, not the 12 you made up to polish his knob.

- - Transition be U friend if U could follow a timeline...stooopid@ bartender.com…

[JAB5239]

- - Transition be U friend if U could follow a timeline...stooopid@ bartender.com…

Timeline says Usyk has only been a Heavyweight for 5 years, ya dope.

[billeau2]

If total body of work is the way to rank, then how does Tunney end up 11 for you all time? He has 7 total fights in the heavyweight division, and only a few of those were against high quality opponents.

Unless by total body of work you are transposing his Lt Heavyweight work onto his heavyweight ranking?

Tunney should be off the list entirely... As Bronson says. My opinion is He should instead be in contention for a top 5 position, (I would probably put him number 1) at light heavy/Cruiser.

[billeau2]

As you know, when Tunney elected to retire following his title defence against # 3 Ring ranked Tom Heeney, and his marriage to Polly Lauder, he was already a billionaire, adjusted to inflation in today's dollars. He'd beaten the great Dempsey twice, Harry Greb, a top competitor against heavyweights, thrice; and top rated contenders Tommy Loughran, Battling Levinsky, Herb Crossley, Paul Samson Koerner, Martin Burke, Charley Weinert, Jack Renault, Chuck Wiggins, Jimmy Delaney, Harry Foley, Erminio Spalla, Georges Carpentier, Tom Gibbons, Bartley Madden and Johnny Risko, in an age when the leap from lightheavyweight to heavyweight was no more than a shot of courage; Tunney had done his bit, completely. If he'd stayed on and beaten Max Schmelling, Jack Sharkey, George Godfrey, Paolino Uzcudun, Knute Hansen, Jack Dorval, Arthur DeKuh, Phil Scott, Vittorio Campolo, Jimmy Maloney and the others available at the time, it would be more of the same.

Tunney was far more than the dancing master who befuddled Dempsey. Tunney was a vicious fighter who brought it.

Tunney IMO is either the best, second or at most third best light heavy. I have to give a shout out to my friend (no irony intended) Juggernaut 666 who impressed upon me this idea that weight classes are not really dependent on IF a guy can beat the reigning heavy weight champ... But also about competition, cleaning out one's natural weight division first, before jumping up, etc. Juggernaut often suprised me with somen real sharp comments...I particularly liked his idea that Wilder fight at a lower weight, a weight perhaps more natural for him. This would allow him to dob the jump up, but in the meantime not have to fight being outweighed by double digits.

Just because Tunney was able to beat Dempsey and other heavy weights, does not mean he was a heavyweight... I would argue that he most assuredly was not. He happened to be good enough to jump up, which makes him a greater light heavy...

A great analogy would be the alternative time line where Archie Moore beats Marciano, and becomes the new champ... Moore actually was close to beating Marciano, if he had... would we automatically call him a great heavyweight?

[Bronson66]

Tunney should be off the list entirely... As Bronson says. My opinion is He should instead be in contention for a top 5 position, (I would probably put him number 1) at light heavy/Cruiser.

I think he could reasonably be compared to Charles at Lhvy.
It's interesting to me that the top 4 all time light heavyweights might well be men who never held the world title.
Charles
Tunney
Greb
Langford