Heavyweight Top Ten All-Time...

how can foreman be ahead of Holmes...because Ali beat him. Your posts are as slanted as double L's and your teeth are cinder blocks

 

Fool.


What is Foremans legacy built off?? Frazier and Ali and Norton and Moorer.

Alis is built off Longevity, Foreman, Frazier, Norton, not solely, but especially.

Fraziers is built off Ali, Foreman, and other common opponents that they had were~:

Bonavena,Quarry, Bugner.

So please.......don't fucking diss the Bowe cos his name is built off Holy: the big 3 from the 70's built a large part of their name of each other and other common opponents:nono: :nono:

 

ridiculous.

if jack johnson is better than larry holmes, or if you are qualifying ur list by citing amateur's who never fought professionally, than you really are just trying to be inflammatory and off base

 

these rankings should be based on accomplishments and how they fared against best available opposition during their era.

jackson was small and would've competed at cruiser if he was alive today. but at the end, he was a heavyweight champion during his era and same goes for dempsey, marciano and rest of those old-timers. you can't just say they suck because they wouldn't be competitive against a modern giant like lewis.

 

Who is the most overrated Black heavyweight???

Bowe??:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

 

1) ALI
2) Louis
3) Holmes
4) Lewis
5) Foreman
6) Johnson
7) Holyfield
8) Tyson
9) Marciano
10) Liston

 

So please.......don't fucking diss the Rahman his name is built off Lewis ...:nono: :nono:

 

dsimon writes:

T stevenson was the great Cuban heavyweight. Unfortunately Stevenson and Savon never were allowed to fight professionally. But both guys (Stevenson and Savon) were dominant and one can see their skill level. You can watch Savon on Utube Knocking out the likes of Tua, Brewster, etc... with ease. Internationally I don't think either man ever lost a bought, most they dominated.

They were just so good that even though they fought amatuer I can't see any fighter touching them. Think natural ability like Roy Jones, technical ability like Mayweather and the confidence of Ali all rolled up into one. I think Stevenson was the best ever.

#5 Both guys were very good and if they had been in the mix in their prime they would have been a lot more succesful. Evander was the most succesful "blown up" heavy but Charles and Walcott laid the blueprint and proved a good small heavy could win coming up from the lower classes.

 

this is the dumbest thing you've ever written....EVER

 

Greatness is based on real accomplishments.

Stevo and Savon never accomplished as pro heavyweights.

So speculating ... woulda, coulda, shoulda are off base :nono:

 

I don't diss Rahman but he only had 1 big win and no defences. Not enuff to get into the top 10:laughing: :laughing: :nono: He lost to Maskaev, Tua, Ruiz....be real. Compare apples and apples.

 

Bowe beat Holy
Rahman beat Lewis
Douglas beat Tyson
Berbick beat Ali

:blobbox:

 

dsimon writes:

I am using a couple of criteria. Any American heavy who fought olympics (a standard of distinction) was owned by Savon and Stevenson... not outpointed BTW owned as in buckled, KO'ed... not easy to do in the olympics. When you watch these guys you can see how technically incredible their skills are... they have the speed of a lightweight (like Ali)ect. They managed to be dominant without having to succumb to the capitolist system of giving half their purse away to the likes of King, etc.

Johnson had incredible footwork and skill. A lot of the skills Johnson had were grappling skills because those skills were necessary to survive in a boxing ring at the time.

Open your mind a little at least watch a video of Savon and Stevenson. I personally think no fighter in their era, including Ali would last a fight with them.

 

Bowe beat Holy....twice.

What did Douglas do after he beat Tyson? He lost his very next fight and never won a big one again.

What did Rahman do after his fight with Lewis? He lost the rematch and hasn't won a big one since.

What did Berbick do after he beat Ali? He beat Thomas, and got KTFO by Tyson.

Bowe had a consistency at the highest level that NONE of those guys had, and in Berbicks case anyways, all he did was beat a chronically ill old man. Bowe won a trilogy of great fights against a great fighter, and that is enuff for me, combined with Riddicks balls, to get him into the top 10.

Galento floored Joe Louis, Maybe he should be in the top 10 too by your twisted reckoning. Apples and apples homey.:nono:

 

dsimon writes:

you are just being inflammatory. You offer no logical rebuke just an empty statement. My list is contraversal but I back it up.

 

dsimon writes:

They beat any professional heavy who entered the ring with them convincingly. This is not speculation it is a fact. It is harder to Ko someone in olympic boxing BTW.

 

Even though all-time lists are "subjective", it's usually the same group of guys. Just a matter of where you place them.

#1 and #2 are usually Ali and Louis (or the other way around).

Tyson should rank in the 8-10 spot, as should Rocky Marciano and Joe Frazier (IMO, Frazier isn't top ten, but if so it's in the 8-10 spot).

#3-7 are usually a combination of Holmes, Foreman, Holyfield, Lewis and either Jack Johnson/Jack Dempsey (most often Johnson, thereby knocking Dempsey down to the 8-10 spot, which in turn should knock Frazier or Marciano [likely Frazier] out of the top 10).

 

They have no professional heavyweight record.

So they cannot be considered in a professional top 10 all time heavyweight list.

Dang, maybe I shoulda precede the title of this thread with Professional?

 

THEY WERE AMATEURS

AMATEUR BOXING AND PROFESSIONAL BOXING ARE VERY DIFFERENT.

If you are seriously making a list of best HW by including guys without a single pro fight, a single title defense, a single win against anyone of note, than you are further showing how dumb you are. There is absolutely no justification for stevenson or savon to be in this discussion, none. And to say one combined the ability of RJJ the blah blah of mayweather, etc. is really really really really fucking stupid on many many levels.

 

This is strong ... strong on many, many levels ::

 

savon did clock briggs in 1 round tho. wonder how these cuban heavies would've done in the pro ranks. jc gomez imo, would beat some of these mediocre russian cats like ibragimov and changaev.

 

You should, if its about pros. If its about heavyweight boxers, period, then don't. You didn't include the word "Champion" either which opens the possibility of guys like Quarry getting in. I left him out, but he is regarded as the best HVY never to get a belt. Cleveland Williams too.:dunno:

 

No need to include "champion".

Greatness is based on accomplishment.

 

Still looking for a fight little boy? Sorry, you wont get one..

 

Okay then.

This is where it gets confusing.

Johnson being the 1st black h/w champ is an "accomplishment" of great note. But getting KO'd by Choynski, Willard, and fighting {and getting floored by} middlweights like Ketchel....pushes him right off the radar in my opinion.

That said, Ring had him 3rd on the list {if not 2nd} of the most important fighters of the century, whilst admitting that he would have lost to Foreman, Holmes etc.

Dempsey accomplishment was elevating the status of HW Champ to one of the most important sporting titles in the world. But he obeyed the colour line and fought some bums. So thats him gone.

You see.....:dunno:

 

justify Holmes below foreman for me

 

Greatness is based on accomplishment.

It is up to u to interpret it as u please in your list. :cheer:

 

Okay, thats coolio!!:clap:

 

Foreman DEMOLISHED a prime and undefeated Joe Frazier..Holmes never defeated with ease a prime and undefeated great Heavyweight (I don't think he even defeated one..WITHOUT ease).

Foreman regained the Linear Heavyweight Title (one of only a handful of men to do so)....and did it breaking the record for the oldest man to ever win a Heavyweight belt. Holmes never regained the title after losing it.

Those are my reasons.

I can accept an argument for Holmes over Foreman as well...but my position has some justification...