The Top 10 Heavyweights of all time

wald pussy #9 :mut::atu::drl::giggle:

 

Yes, but it doesn't really matter.

Any list along these lines (even if you provide your own criteria) is easily picked apart. This thread will garner the usual "where is Frazier?", "Wlad on the list!? What a joke!" and so on. Boxing fans are tired of it.

I'm sure we look forward to a few "controversial" choices in the top 10 middleweights ever.

 

A very solid list, IMO. I like the reasons behind the rankings: it is not based solely on numbers (such as defenses, victories or title belts), styles of fighters if removed from the equation (as it should be) and the list is balanced between appreciating old and new era, which can't be compared directly.

Personally I'd rank Johnson higher (perhaps at #3 even), not based on his reign but rather what he did before it (when he beat all the best comers). Also, I would remove Marciano and put Liston on the list: he was as dominant as Tyson, beating all the contenders, and only lost to the best of them all. Just the fact that he was denied the chance to win the official title should not count against him


Btw. a couple of nit-pickings I spotted: 1) Joe Louis defended his title 25 times (26th was the time he won the title, unless you count Lee Savold as a title holder) 2) in addition to Marciano Lennox also Ingemar Johanson won everybody he faced 3) Technically Tyson didn't win back 2/3 of the title since when winning WBA he vacated WBC 4) Larry Holmes' record of successive KOs is tied by Tommy Burns

 

Any list like this is obviously less about ranking fighters and more about choosing criteria - how can you compare Jack Johnson to Rocky Marcinao to Vitali Klitschko? it's hard enough comparing welterweights from 1910 to 2010. The list seems pretty good though. Mr. Ugo makes some points too.

 

wald pussy is number one on the Gayest Heavyweights of all time

 

All seem to belong...except for wald pussy of course...he shouldn't be anywhere near top 10 all time heavyweight list...

I still don't get some peoples fascination with him.....I think that in a FIGHT... VITALY would do a whole lot better against the other TOP 9 heavys on that list

 

No doubt

And Vitali would slap his brother around like a two-bit hooker

 

Wlad #9? He should be ranked much higher. And where is SSS on the list?

 

Agreed, I think vatili is a tough fight for anyone, wald pussy not so much.

 

Liston or Frazier should replace Wald Pussy.

 

Wladimir Klitschko is not amongst loadedgloves favorite fighters.

 

If Wlad is #9 where is Ross Purity at #8??

 

What was really funny about the wald part of this stuff was when his resume was described as "impressive" and then names of washed up opponents like Mercer and Rahman were mentioned as highlights. And I don't know that in Tyson's case Alphabet title wins against Frank Bruno (who looked like he wanted to be anywhere but in the ring that night) and Bruce Seldon (who flopped as soon as he could) amount to a "tremendous" accomplishment.

Overall...this piece is nothing to write home about.

 

This. Liston is often underrated by folks who only look at his career from the Patterson fights on and ignore that he was clearly the best heavy in the world and beating up all the best contenders (while Patterson was being carefully matched and STILL getting knocked down) available for a number of years while being avoided. And yes, he was every bit as dominant as Tyson in those years.

The list was ok (even though most boxing fans can get most of the fighters who should be in the Top 10 correct), even though I didn't agree with a good chunk of the reasoning for the order (outside of the obvious choice of Ali at#1). And like Whiskey...I don't think I have the strength to get into an extended discussion about it. :)

 

You dudebros notice the article is by Stafford?

 

Sly won't post here but he writes articles for the site? The fuck?

 

First thing I noticed.

Solid enough list, as most have said with the obvious exception of the Ukrainian Octopus.

 

::

 

Is Wlad a top 10 hw? no. Would he have sparked a lot of so-called top 10 hw? Yes. Lists are meaningless, unless it is 1944 and your name is Schindler.

 

Frightened, homosexual, Ukrainian Octopus, yes.

 

So it is! Sly :bears:

 

Which now makes the claim of it being the "most objective list you will find" even more funny than the first time I read it. ::

 

:mut:

 

Figures that retard would write something like that...No Liston no Dempsey.....Fucking Klit brother? yeah thats Sly.

 

i got:

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Jack Johnson
5. Foreman
6. Frazier
7. Marciano
8. Lennox
9. Evander
10.Tyson
11. Dempsey

 

I like the list. It's a bit different, but i do think the Klitschko's are going to have to make an appearance in people's top 15 rankings pretty soon. Tyson probably ranked too high, ranked on mystique rather than merit... but mystique goes a long way

 

holmes is the best heavy ever. considering how unpopular he was, he still made like 20 defenses. stylistically, he's a nightmare for everyone. i personally think he would've shut foreman down. also, at age forty something, he took ray mercer to school when guys like holyfield and lennox barely won.

 

I know you can do this to every resume ever, but seven of Holmes' challengers had 16 fights or less- Some of them turned out to be credible (Witherspoon, Bonecrusher), but besides these novices he fought some rather hapless guys such as Scott Frank, Scott Ledoux and Leroy Jones. Also late in his reign he avoided his best contenders

Thus, although I see Holmes as a top-5 heavyweight too, he is a guy that would get plenty of shit on Internet from his opposition if he fought now