View Full Version : Who is the greatest of the 2nd tier heavyweights?


fight_professor
07-04-2009, 09:46 PM
The first tier being the top 20 or so HW fighters of alltime. The broad characteristics being:

Undisputed or widely recognized world champion.

Numerous title defenses.

A dominant champion.

Success when faced with other great HW's.

I think that's a fair list. So a 2nd tier can be composed of those who:

Held legitimate world titles

Some successful defenses

A respected champion, if not dominant.

Some success or equal success/failure against great HW.

Using that broad criteria, please adjust it as you deem fit, who would be the best of the 2nd string?


I am caught in 2 minds on Bowe. Personally, head to head, I think he'd make list A-great HW, there arent more then 5-6 guys who'd beat him IMHO, but he may also slip into list B...

Any ideas?:boxing:

mickey malone
07-05-2009, 06:08 AM
My 'old mate' Joe Bugner is a good candidate (oldest man to win the WBF belt)
He was in & out of the top 10 for nearly 30 years!
Fought in the best company without getting KTFO
beat all of his closest competitors at veteran level.. Some of these names included Greg Page, Bonecrusher Smith, David Bey & 'Quick Tillis'
Prime, he twice went the distance with Ali, gave Frazier one of his hardest fights (DC)
as well as giving Ron Lyle problems for 10 rounds..
I'd say he won 90% of his fights in the 'second tier' division, & dominated as European champ on more than one occasion.. Although, not regarded as a concussive puncher his KO resume finished at 50%.. He had over 80 fights, only losing 16, in good company.. I think he is a worthy candidate.. He had a long & successful career...

JAB5239
07-05-2009, 07:18 AM
Might not be the greatest of the 2nd teir heavies, but Jerry Quarry's name comes to mind.

mickey malone
07-05-2009, 08:52 AM
Might not be the greatest of the 2nd teir heavies, but Jerry Quarry's name comes to mind.
For sure... He aptly falls into the mix.. Didn't have Bugners longevity though..

Bugner Quarry would'a been very interesting!

TheGreatA
07-05-2009, 09:02 AM
Quarry probably defines the term "2nd tier heavyweight" better than anybody.

He didn't beat the best (Ali, Frazier, Norton) but he beat just about everyone else with names like Floyd Patterson, Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, Mac Foster, Thad Spencer, Buster Mathis, Lorenzo Zanon, Joey Orbillo, Randy Neuman, Jack Bodell, Larry Middleton, Brian London, George Johnson on his extensive resume.

He was above the European level heavyweights and the journeymen. Truly a world class top 10 heavyweight contender.

The best heavyweight who never got a chance against the best (Dempsey) was Harry Wills. I wouldn't call him second tier though since I'd probably rate him among my top 15 or top 20 ATG heavyweights.

GJC
07-05-2009, 10:27 AM
So a 2nd tier can be composed of those who:
Held legitimate world titles
Some successful defenses
A respected champion, if not dominant.
Some success or equal success/failure against great HW.
Using that broad criteria, please adjust it as you deem fit, who would be the best of the 2nd string?



Can I totally cheat and use your criteria and have Sonny Liston? :)
Lost in 2nd defence, won two and lost two title fights.

fight_professor
07-05-2009, 11:36 AM
I did say adjust the criteria as you deem fit. Most place Sonny in the A list.

WBF isnt a real title re: Bugner. I mean WBC/WBA/IBF and then WBO a bit below them.

Unless its one of those 4, said person wasnt a title holder.

mickey malone
07-05-2009, 11:41 AM
I did say adjust the criteria as you deem fit. Most place Sonny in the A list.

WBF isnt a real title re: Bugner. I mean WBC/WBA/IBF and then WBO a bit below them.

Unless its one of those 4, said person wasnt a title holder.
By no means telling you how to run your own thread, but 2nd tier does kinda = non titlist

GJC
07-05-2009, 11:47 AM
I did say adjust the criteria as you deem fit. Most place Sonny in the A list.



As do I, just having some fun :)

TheGreatA
07-05-2009, 11:48 AM
If this thread is about champions who never held onto their title for long then I'd have to mention one of my favorites Jack Sharkey.

He was incredibly inconsistent but he could have beaten some of the greats at his best.

Sharkey came up short against Dempsey after an impressive start, lost his title to Carnera and was blown out by Joe Louis while past his prime.

He also had wins over Harry Wills, Max Schmeling, Primo Carnera, Tommy Loughran, George Godfrey, Young Stribling, Jack Delaney, Mike McTigue, Jim Maloney, Floyd Johnson...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/v9cZdbNTUFk&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/v9cZdbNTUFk&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/162Qk7ARqNY&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/162Qk7ARqNY&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_c_djw214oQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_c_djw214oQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cwz3HtxPv7o&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cwz3HtxPv7o&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/j9N72Okb5wU&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/j9N72Okb5wU&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

fight_professor
07-05-2009, 11:54 AM
Where would you place Patterson?

I know he has a huge rep, a 2 time champ, but he got crushed by other greats, and often KO'd but had silky skills. Ali opined that of all the guys he fought, Floyd was the most skillful. He'd not beat many of the top 20 HW (any?), and yet as the first 2 time champ, the (then) youngest champ, a beautiful boxer-he has much to play with.

If he's 2nd tier, he may top it as the greatest of them. And I suppose we are talking overall, not head-2-head.

fight_professor
07-05-2009, 11:56 AM
By no means telling you how to run your own thread, but 2nd tier does kinda = non titlist

Maybe in common usage, but I did specify it as "those outside the top 20 or so HW of alltime".

So it has a narrower context in this thread. :friday:

mickey malone
07-05-2009, 12:54 PM
Maybe in common usage, but I did specify it as "those outside the top 20 or so HW of alltime".

So it has a narrower context in this thread. :friday:
Ok.... Ken Norton (Ali's boogie man) would be a good call....

sonnyboyx2
07-05-2009, 02:52 PM
Quarry probably defines the term "2nd tier heavyweight" better than anybody.

He didn't beat the best (Ali, Frazier, Norton) but he beat just about everyone else with names like Floyd Patterson, Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, Mac Foster, Thad Spencer, Buster Mathis, Lorenzo Zanon, Joey Orbillo, Randy Neuman, Jack Bodell, Larry Middleton, Brian London, George Johnson on his extensive resume.

He was above the European level heavyweights and the journeymen. Truly a world class top 10 heavyweight contender.

The best heavyweight who never got a chance against the best (Dempsey) was Harry Wills. I wouldn't call him second tier though since I'd probably rate him among my top 15 or top 20 ATG heavyweights.i agree, Quarry was a real class act his 1st fight against Frazier was a forgotten classic and FOTY ... Quarry would have held his own with virtually every heavyweight champion since 1992

joe strong
07-05-2009, 02:58 PM
I'd have to say francois Botha or hasim Rahman.

joe strong
07-05-2009, 03:11 PM
Botha won ibf title(stripped because of steroids)& never ducked anyone.when he stepped up he lost to moorer,Tyson,wlad,lewis.Rahman is a 2 time champ,made 5 defence,& fought almost everyone of his era.he fought lewis twice,maskaev twice,tua twice,ruiz,toney twice,Barrett,Holyfield,wlad,meehan,obed Sullivan,sanders.some ugly fights but he never ducked anyone.

mickey malone
07-05-2009, 03:41 PM
Botha won ibf title(stripped because of steroids)& never ducked anyone.when he stepped up he lost to moorer,Tyson,wlad,lewis.Rahman is a 2 time champ,made 5 defence,& fought almost everyone of his era.he fought lewis twice,maskaev twice,tua twice,ruiz,toney twice,Barrett,Holyfield,wlad,meehan,obed Sullivan,sanders.some ugly fights but he never ducked anyone.
Ken Norton beats both of these guys, just on the hellish nightmares he gave Ali & Holmes..
If Botha lost to Moorer, drew with Briggs & narrowly beat Schultz, he aint gonna live with a prime Norton.. Rahman could almost be the Norton of this era, but I think it's general consensus, the 70's crop were marginally superior.. Don't forget, Norton was the second man to break Ali's jaw in a winning performance.. Pretty sure they fought 3 times, with each fight going to the wire.. I state that Ken Norton had a far better resume... MM

fight_professor
07-05-2009, 06:14 PM
Yeah I can see a place for Rahman. Good HW, not great. But very good. Big hitting hw, he'd beat a lot of guys with that power. Big heart too, if not limited skills.

mickey malone
07-06-2009, 12:54 AM
Yeah I can see a place for Rahman. Good HW, not great. But very good. Big hitting hw, he'd beat a lot of guys with that power. Big heart too, if not limited skills.
Have you put me on ignore or something??

fight_professor
07-06-2009, 08:03 AM
NO. Why would I?

mickey malone
07-06-2009, 08:57 AM
NO. Why would I?
Because after discarding Bugner, you won't discuss Norton, who in my opinion wins this debate hands down.. I've given you more facts than any other poster & all you've replied to, is a couple of comments on Rahman, who isn't anywhere near as worthy.....

fight_professor
07-06-2009, 02:40 PM
I neither discarded Bugner or refused to talk Norton. Sometimes, I'm away from the keyboard, away from the forum.

I have huge respect for Kenny. Is he the best 2nd tier, maybe.

It would have to be decided p4p/who beats who in terms of rating these guys.

mickey malone
07-06-2009, 03:06 PM
Bugner has been eliminated, but that was my misrepresentation of the question..
Even Norton could fall into this criteria, as he didn't win his title in the ring (awarded when Spinks got stripped)
Do you have Patterson at no1?
Only reason I ask, is that it's a good choice... Not sure about his chin though.. He was almost a 'poor mans' Ali, regards style & nowhere near as big.. Look what Norton did with Ali & Holmes.. Could Patterson have done the same? This is taking into account, that Ali (Clay) whooped an OLD Patterson.. Prime 4 prime, must admit, Patterson Vs Norton would be a classic.. Now we have a tourney final, wad'ya think? peace MM

fight_professor
07-06-2009, 05:24 PM
Its hard to put Floyd in the top 20 ATG HW, he had the skills, he was a 2 time champ, but they'd all without exception I feel stop him. Too small, too fragile.

Is he the best of the rest? By achievements, probably. first 2 time king is a major feather, as is youngest champ (then). but he wouldnt beat any of them. i suppose first we had better decide in the tier 1 HW are being chosen by p4p greatness, or on a who beats who list.

I will say that as long as there are guys who have been world champion, even multiple champions, a non WC cannot be the best of tier 2.

As for h-2-h, I feel Norton beats Floyd. Just too rugged, too tough. He'd KO Floyd late.

JAB5239
07-06-2009, 10:18 PM
Its hard to put Floyd in the top 20 ATG HW, he had the skills, he was a 2 time champ, but they'd all without exception I feel stop him. Too small, too fragile.

Is he the best of the rest? By achievements, probably. first 2 time king is a major feather, as is youngest champ (then). but he wouldnt beat any of them. i suppose first we had better decide in the tier 1 HW are being chosen by p4p greatness, or on a who beats who list.

I will say that as long as there are guys who have been world champion, even multiple champions, a non WC cannot be the best of tier 2.

As for h-2-h, I feel Norton beats Floyd. Just too rugged, too tough. He'd KO Floyd late.

Not sure that is fair to guys like Sam Langford and Harry Wills. We could throw Peter Jackson in there as well. Jmo.

joe strong
07-06-2009, 10:57 PM
norton would be a good choice.myself I'm 34 & have an amazing heavyweight collection but I started mostly in the present & 90's & have steadily increased my collection of 80's fighters like James smith,witherspoon,tubbs,etc.I'm now starting to purchase fighters from the 70's & 60's next.I got most of the 80's & 90's top boxers careers.well all the fights off the Internet.I got 4 websites I purchase from.I got all the klits,lewis,Tyson,Holyfield,ruddock,Bruno,foreman, tua,Byrd,Rahman,etc.I could go on.my point is I'm not as familiar with the 60's & 70's as I am with 80's,90's-present.my eastern European collections are a little weak as well.dimitrenko,boytsov,etc.they are harder for me to get.I do have valuev,chagaev,ibragimov,liahkovich available fights.Rahman is my choice for tier 2 because of my lack of knowledge before the 80's

mickey malone
07-07-2009, 03:54 AM
norton would be a good choice.myself I'm 34 & have an amazing heavyweight collection but I started mostly in the present & 90's & have steadily increased my collection of 80's fighters like James smith,witherspoon,tubbs,etc.I'm now starting to purchase fighters from the 70's & 60's next.I got most of the 80's & 90's top boxers careers.well all the fights off the Internet.I got 4 websites I purchase from.I got all the klits,lewis,Tyson,Holyfield,ruddock,Bruno,foreman, tua,Byrd,Rahman,etc.I could go on.my point is I'm not as familiar with the 60's & 70's as I am with 80's,90's-present.my eastern European collections are a little weak as well.dimitrenko,boytsov,etc.they are harder for me to get.I do have valuev,chagaev,ibragimov,liahkovich available fights.Rahman is my choice for tier 2 because of my lack of knowledge before the 80's
Norton was a better fighter than Rahman.. I'm not one of them, but many people believe, Noton should'a got 3 wins in his fights with Ali.. I thought he won 2 of em 4 sure.. The fight with Holmes was for the title.. I'm not sure what the age difference was, but Norton was considerably older.. It went to the wire & Holmes was awarded a SD over 15...

Note the comments of Jab5239, with which I agree.. 2nd tier, should include good fighters who didn't get their shot cos of politics at the time..
Larry Middleton was another one...

Infern0
07-07-2009, 04:14 AM
Mike Tyson?

JAB5239
07-07-2009, 04:46 AM
[QUOTE=mickey malone;5637404][COLOR="Green"]Norton was a better fighter than Rahman.. I'm not one of them, but many people believe, Noton should'a got 3 wins in his fights with Ali.. I thought he won 2 of em 4 sure.. The fight with Holmes was for the title.. I'm not sure what the age difference was, but Norton was considerably older.. It went to the wire & Holmes was awarded a SD over 15...


Age difference was roughly 5 years for Holmes-Norton, and I to had Norton winning 2 of the 3 with Ali.

mickey malone
07-07-2009, 05:02 AM
[QUOTE]

Age difference was roughly 5 years for Holmes-Norton, and I to had Norton winning 2 of the 3 with Ali.
Cos you know you're stuff!

JAB5239
07-07-2009, 05:10 AM
[QUOTE=JAB5239;5637557]
Cos you know you're stuff!

Thanks Mick, thats kind of you. But I learn more from many of you than I can contribute.

On a side note.....the guy I train muay thai from goes to Bangkok a couple of times a year and keeps asking me to come out there. If I ever make it out there can I run a bar tab with you? :beerchug:

GJC
07-07-2009, 06:34 AM
Tim Witherspoon?

mickey malone
07-07-2009, 06:44 AM
[QUOTE=mickey malone;5637591]

Thanks Mick, thats kind of you. But I learn more from many of you than I can contribute.

On a side note.....the guy I train muay thai from goes to Bangkok a couple of times a year and keeps asking me to come out there. If I ever make it out there can I run a bar tab with you? :beerchug:
I'll even take you to the best gyms.. I'm good friends with most of the top coach's in Pattaya, who often run up tabs in my bar.. However, I'm never short on back up, or free training sessions.. Had a session with Michael Flatley (River Dance) the other day.. He can box a bit.. Brian Jacks (ex world judo champ) trains here as well.. With the heat, you'll be down to welter in no time lol..

fight_professor
07-07-2009, 07:37 AM
Mike Tyson?

Mike was a dominant champion. The first time.

mickey malone
07-07-2009, 11:59 AM
Tim Witherspoon?
Tim's a good call & so would Bonecrusher Smith be..
I'm not quite in agreement with Capt Sam regarding the term 2nd tier though..
2nd tier to me, would be decent HW's that have won a 2nd tier crown, ie WBF IBO or IBC with the inclusion of credible fighters that didn't get a shot.. In my opinion, someone like Witherspoon is a 3 time HWC & is 1st tier.. I mean this thread is so misleading that another poster has just suggested Mike Tyson!

fight_professor
07-07-2009, 12:35 PM
I set a basic criteria, and explained in was in the context of this thread taken to mean "anyone not in the top 20 or so HW of alltime". Then, I even said "adjust the criteria as you deem fit"-so there's plenty of scope mate.

I dont regard WBF/IBO etc as anything worth mentioning. I set a high bar to seperate the decent from the very good, but just short of ATG status guys.

Its an open thread.

Ziggy Stardust
07-07-2009, 01:48 PM
I set a basic criteria, and explained in was in the context of this thread taken to mean "anyone not in the top 20 or so HW of alltime". Then, I even said "adjust the criteria as you deem fit"-so there's plenty of scope mate.

I dont regard WBF/IBO etc as anything worth mentioning. I set a high bar to seperate the decent from the very good, but just short of ATG status guys.

Its an open thread.

Among Heavyweights I would consider the the top dozen to be ATGs with the next 20 to 25 or so being what I call "Near Greats". Now, would the Near Greats be considered 2nd tier by your estimation or 1st tier along with the ATGs?

Poet

fight_professor
07-07-2009, 02:10 PM
You would have to differentiate between ATG and near great. Why is say no.12 an ATG and 13 not.

I thought 20 was a nice even split, laid out a fair criteria too.

Its not a science.

In the context at hand, outside the top 20 (which would be the GREAT HW), is the next lot.

Ziggy Stardust
07-07-2009, 02:18 PM
You would have to differentiate between ATG and near great. Why is say no.12 an ATG and 13 not.

I thought 20 was a nice even split, laid out a fair criteria too.

Its not a science.

In the context at hand, outside the top 20 (which would be the GREAT HW), is the next lot.

Because the person I have ranked at number 12 I consider an ATG but the person I have ranked at number 13 I consider close but not quite.

I don't have a set number that I try to fill. I have something like 22 Middleweights ranked as ATGs but only 8 ATGs at Flyweight. It varies from division to division. In other words, I taylor the lists to fit the number of fighters in each division that I view as ATGs rather than taylor the number of ATGs to fit the list.

Poet

mickey malone
07-07-2009, 02:44 PM
No21 = Ken Norton then..

DeepSleep
07-07-2009, 07:32 PM
If Norton isnít top 20 than he'd definitely be my pick. I'd also add Vitali to the list if he isn't on the list he'd give almost everyone big problems (Hurray for Puns :haha:) .

mickey malone
07-08-2009, 07:46 AM
If Norton isn***8217;t top 20 than he'd definitely be my pick. I'd also add Vitali to the list if he isn't on the list he'd give almost everyone big problems (Hurray for Puns :haha:) .
You just beat me to it! I note the poster has someone in mind.. Vitaly has to be that name, only if he's considered second tier of course? When you take into account that most of his flirtations have been with the WBO, this has to be a very good call.. Can we now say: It's Klit Vs Nort ?