Rating Frazier

[Joeyzagz]

Why is every era that isn't the Golden Era classed as ****?

Here are some Average-Good Heavyweight era's:

1990's
1930's
1920's
1910's
1900's
1890's


Here are the WORST Heavyweight eras

2000's
1980's
1950's
1940's

[StarshipTrooper]

Why is every era that isn't the Golden Era classed as ****?

They aren't all ****e. The Golden Era (for Heavyweights anyway) from '65-'75 is the measuring stick, but that doesn't mean anything that doesn't meet that standard sucks. There's a wide range of quality in Heavyweight eras. Some are better than others. For example, the '90s were damn good for Heavies, while the '80s were very poor. '45-'55 was pretty weak, but.....unlike Zags assertion '55-'65 was pretty solid: Not spectacular but pretty decent as far as eras go. The '30-'45 was about average but the '20s were poor. Today's division is about as bad as any ever was, but we were coming off a damn good run in the '90s and I suspect in the next 5 years or so the worm will turn and the Heavies will pick up in quality again. These things run in cycles.

PS. Partly what you have is the lamentable mentality of sports fans to think in terms of either something is the best ever or total ****e.

Poet

[StarshipTrooper]

Here are some Average-Good Heavyweight era's:

1990's
1930's
1920's
1910's
1900's
1890's

The 1920s? There were about 2 Heavyweights worth a damn: Dempsey and Wills and that's it. That's hardly what I'd call a good to average era.

Here are the WORST Heavyweight eras

2000's
1980's
1950's
1940's

Are you including '40-'45 in that? Because if you are there were a number of good Heavies in that period. Not all of them were off fighting WWII.

Poet

[Joeyzagz]

The 1920s? There were about 2 Heavyweights worth a damn: Dempsey and Wills and that's it. That's hardly what I'd call a good to average era.

[/COLOR]

The great Heavyweights of the 1930's were all in their 20's Schmelling, Jack Sharkey, Primo Carnera.

You also had Luis Firpo who would be considered a giant Marciano's era.

Oh yeah, primeGENE TUNNEY!Not the best era, but better than the 1950's

[StarshipTrooper]

The great Heavyweights of the 1930's were all in their 20's Schmelling, Jack Sharkey, Primo Carnera.

You also had Luis Firpo who would be considered a giant Marciano's era.

Oh yeah, primeGENE TUNNEY!Not the best era, but better than the 1950's

The great Heavies of the '30 hadn't risen to prominence yet.....that's why they're considered greats of the '30s and not the '20s.

Firpo was a crude unskilled brawler who would be a dime a dozen in ANY era.

Gene Tunney was a LIGHT-Heavyweight who stopped by Heavyweight division for a cup of coffee and left just as quickly. 5 fights at Heavyweight out 60+ fights doesn't make you a Heavyweight.

Poet

[Barn]

They aren't all ****e. The Golden Era (for Heavyweights anyway) from '65-'75 is the measuring stick, but that doesn't mean anything that doesn't meet that standard sucks. There's a wide range of quality in Heavyweight eras. Some are better than others. For example, the '90s were damn good for Heavies, while the '80s were very poor. '45-'55 was pretty weak, but.....unlike Zags assertion '55-'65 was pretty solid: Not spectacular but pretty decent as far as eras go. The '30-'45 was about average but the '20s were poor. Today's division is about as bad as any ever was, but we were coming off a damn good run in the '90s and I suspect in the next 5 years or so the worm will turn and the Heavies will pick up in quality again. These things run in cycles.

PS. Partly what you have is the lamentable mentality of sports fans to think in terms of either something is the best ever or total ****e.

Poet

I know but, that's the vibe I seem to pick up some times :S
For examples Louis' era often gets heavily critisized, I don't think it was that bad

[The Surgeon]

I usually have Frazier in at around 7-8. I love him tho, id like to rate him 3 but its not a popularity contest

I think his chin gets slated too much around here personally and his power under rated a bit too

[Holtol]

Here are some Average-Good Heavyweight era's:

1990's
1930's
1920's
1910's
1900's
1890's


Here are the WORST Heavyweight eras

2000's
1980's
1950's
1940's

I don't know if I agree with you about the 50s. Lots of good fighters in the decade. Marciano, Liston, Patterson, Moore, Walcott, Charles, Louis. Lots of other good fighters also. Louis did not fight for long in the 50s but had quite a few fights.

[Daddy T]

I'd have frazier towards the bottom of the top ten (9-10) i'd like to rate him higher but I don't think he has sufficient wins against top notch opponents to justify it. He had one great win against Ali but his style was well suited to Ali. (One win against an all time great doesn't make you top 3 if it did Buster Douglas would be ranked in the top ten) Frazier beat up on a few okay heavyweights Quarry/Bonavena and a jumped up lightheavy or two. Lost two good fights against one of the best ever and got flatened by Foreman twice.

Perhaps if he'd been in a slightly early era he'd have dominated - I'd back him against the likes of marciano/patterson/moore/walcott/charles but not against the likes of Liston/Louis. I reckon Liston would do something similiar to what foreman did to him. In slightly later eras Holmes and Tyson would have had too much for him.