C`mon lets here the flak for this [Archive]

sonnyboyx2

12-01-2009, 11:43 AM

Top all time heavyweights IMO - based on their ring abilities when in their prime.

1/. Muhammad Ali
2/. Joe Louis
3/. Jack Johnson
4/. Joe Frazier
5/. Jack Dempsey
6/. Sonny Liston
7/. Mike Tyson
8/. George Foreman
9/. Larry Holmes
10/. Rocky Marciano
11/. Ezzard Charles
12/. Riddick Bowe
13/. Michael Spinks
14/. Lennox Lewis
15/. Wlad Klitschko
16/. Vitali Klitschko
17/. Jim Jeffries
18/. Floyd Patterson
19/. Gene Tunney
20/. Jersy Joe Walcott

poet682006

12-01-2009, 01:02 PM

sonnyboyx2

12-01-2009, 03:44 PM

Frazier probably too high, Foreman too low, Holmes WAY too low, and where's Evander Holyfield? And why is a career Light-Heavyweight in Michael Spinks on the list?

Poet

my mistake... forgot about Holyfield i took him out of No12 and put Bowe in and forgot to add him at No13

14/. Michael Spinks
15/. Lennox Lewis
16/. Wlad Klitschko
17/. Vitali Klitschko
18/. Jim Jeffries
19/. Floyd Patterson
20/. Gene Tunney

Michael Spinks is in because he was one of the greatest ring tachticians of all times, beating a good Larry Holmes twice and destroying 6ft 7ins Gerry Cooney before losing to the best version of Mike Tyson any fighter ever faced.

Joe Frazier won Fight of the Century`and was a brilliant pressure fighter who`s 3 fights with Ali, 2 with Bonavena & 2 with Quarry entitle him to the position i placed him

Foreman & Holmes are in their correct positions, i could not see them beating any of the above fighters prime 4 prime.. yes Foreman beat Frazier twice but Frazier was blind in one eye by then and totally out of shape for their 1st fight plus Foreman never fought Quarry or Bonavena like Frazier, he also lost easily to Ali whereas Frazier vs Ali was a different story.

Sugarj

12-01-2009, 04:03 PM

Everyone has their own order and there is some good names in there, although my list would be a bit jumbled around.

I'd venture that Ken Norton would beat a few guys there, maybe Michael Moorer too or a prime Tim Witherspoon. Although granted they are lesser champions in the 'legend' sense. I may well pick a prime David Tua over several too, certainly the more chinny guys.

cooper5

12-01-2009, 08:11 PM

This is what Id say today

1 Joe Louis
2 Muhammad Ali
3 Larry Holmes
4 Jack Johnson
5 Rocky Marciano
6 George Foreman
7 Joe Frazier
8 Jack Dempsey
9 Mike Tyson
10 Ezzard Charles
11 Evander Holyfield
12 Lennox Lewis

But tomorrow it might be different

poet682006

12-01-2009, 08:12 PM

my mistake... forgot about Holyfield i took him out of No12 and put Bowe in and forgot to add him at No13

14/. Michael Spinks
15/. Lennox Lewis
16/. Wlad Klitschko
17/. Vitali Klitschko
18/. Jim Jeffries
19/. Floyd Patterson
20/. Gene Tunney

Michael Spinks is in because he was one of the greatest ring tachticians of all times, beating a good Larry Holmes twice and destroying 6ft 7ins Gerry Cooney before losing to the best version of Mike Tyson any fighter ever faced.

Joe Frazier won Fight of the Century`and was a brilliant pressure fighter who`s 3 fights with Ali, 2 with Bonavena & 2 with Quarry entitle him to the position i placed him

Foreman & Holmes are in their correct positions, i could not see them beating any of the above fighters prime 4 prime.. yes Foreman beat Frazier twice but Frazier was blind in one eye by then and totally out of shape for their 1st fight plus Foreman never fought Quarry or Bonavena like Frazier, he also lost easily to Ali whereas Frazier vs Ali was a different story.

Spinks only had 5 fights at Heavyweight after a career spent at Light-Heavy.

Poet

Earl-Lesnar

12-01-2009, 08:20 PM

sonnyboyx2

12-02-2009, 03:06 AM

No offence, but on his best day, I would say Lennox Lewis was a top 10 heavyweight. I know he lost twice, but he punished those who beat him in rematches.

Sorry, but Liston and Marciano are not more able heavyweights than Lewis IMHO.

you are entitled to your opinion, yet IMO Lewis would be a 2rd KO for Sonny Liston maybe even going in the opening round, Marciano would apply to much pressure for him and also KO Lewis.. Lewis struggled with smaller guys like Tua, Mercer, Billups and took 8rds to beat a heavily sedated Tyson.. he would have no chance against `The Rock

sonnyboyx2

12-02-2009, 03:22 AM

Spinks only had 5 fights at Heavyweight after a career spent at Light-Heavy.

Poet

Those 5 fights was championship fights, where he twice beat a good Larry Holmes and took-apart 6ft 7ins Gerry Cooney who had a left-hook as destructive as any punch in history, IMO Spinks would be a 50/50 fight for any heavyweight champion in history and he was tall enough at 6ft 3 1/2

JAB5239

12-02-2009, 06:11 AM

you are entitled to your opinion, yet IMO Lewis would be a 2rd KO for Sonny Liston maybe even going in the opening round, Marciano would apply to much pressure for him and also KO Lewis.. Lewis struggled with smaller guys like Tua, Mercer, Billups and took 8rds to beat a heavily sedated Tyson.. he would have no chance against `The Rock

While Lewis did struggle with Mercer, he had no problems at all with Tua or Tyson. I'd like some proof that Mike was heavily sedated, as you put it, other than getting his ass kicked after he realized his initial onslaught was ineffective.

Other Smaller fighters (shorter) who Lewis beat pretty easily were Holyfield in the second fight, Morrison and Botha. I don't recall any fight with Billups, but may be wrong.

JAB5239

12-02-2009, 06:20 AM

Those 5 fights was championship fights, where he twice beat a good Larry Holmes and took-apart 6ft 7ins Gerry Cooney who had a left-hook as destructive as any punch in history, IMO Spinks would be a 50/50 fight for any heavyweight champion in history and he was tall enough at 6ft 3 1/2

What makes you think this though? I have great respect for Spinks. But at heavyweight he only fought one great fighter at his peak and was destroyed in 91 seconds.

Could Spinks have handled the 1978 Holmes or the pre 1974 Ali? How about the 1941 Louis or the 1958 Liston? How would he deal with the 1971 Frazier or the 1999 Lennox Lewis? 1908 Jack Johnson? How about the 1992 Riddick Bowe and Evander Holyfield? I would pick all these fighters over Spinks and probably more if I thought about it.

1SILVA

12-02-2009, 09:46 AM

1SILVA

12-02-2009, 09:50 AM

While Lewis did struggle with Mercer, he had no problems at all with Tua or Tyson. I'd like some proof that Mike was heavily sedated, as you put it, other than getting his ass kicked after he realized his initial onslaught was ineffective.

Other Smaller fighters (shorter) who Lewis beat pretty easily were Holyfield in the second fight, Morrison and Botha. I don't recall any fight with Billups, but may be wrong.

There were reports that Tyson was given Xanex before the fight, but that being said, Lewis would have been a difficult fight for Tyson anytime during his career. Tyson ducked Holyfield in 96, having King pay him 4 million dollars as well as vacating the WBC title.

sonnyboyx2

12-02-2009, 10:36 AM

What makes you think this though? I have great respect for Spinks. But at heavyweight he only fought one great fighter at his peak and was destroyed in 91 seconds.

Could Spinks have handled the 1978 Holmes or the pre 1974 Ali? How about the 1941 Louis or the 1958 Liston? How would he deal with the 1971 Frazier or the 1999 Lennox Lewis? 1908 Jack Johnson? How about the 1992 Riddick Bowe and Evander Holyfield? I would pick all these fighters over Spinks and probably more if I thought about it.

i never rated Spinks above Frazier 71, Louis 41, Liston 58, Ali pre 74, Johnson 08, but i would definately take Spinks to beat any version of Lewis

sonnyboyx2

12-02-2009, 10:40 AM

While Lewis did struggle with Mercer, he had no problems at all with Tua or Tyson. I'd like some proof that Mike was heavily sedated, as you put it, other than getting his ass kicked after he realized his initial onslaught was ineffective.

Other Smaller fighters (shorter) who Lewis beat pretty easily were Holyfield in the second fight, Morrison and Botha. I don't recall any fight with Billups, but may be wrong.
you are in the minority if you think Lewis beat Holyfield in their 2nd fight (easily)... 42 of 47 ringside sports writers had Holyfield the clear winner as did the vast majority watching on HBO

Lewis struggled to outpoint Levi Billups yet almost every other fighter Billups fought poleaxed him in less than 3rds.

Mike Tyson was `Heavily Sedated` for the Lewis fight.

poet682006

12-02-2009, 11:37 AM

but i would definately take Spinks to beat any version of Lewis

Yes, but that's because you'd favor any random 90 year old emaciated wino to KO Lewis in less than 5.

Poet

sonnyboyx2

12-02-2009, 11:51 AM

Yes, but that's because you'd favor any random 90 year old emaciated wino to KO Lewis in less than 5.

Poet

we had a pole on this forum a few months ago on who the members thought would win Lewis vs Spinks... it turned out roughly 50/50... i dont have any issues with Lewis other than i feel he is vastly over-rated, if i was to claim Ray Robinson was vastly over-rated (which i dont) then no-one would give a dam or even call me into question, but because i dont rate Lewis as highly as some then i am a cunt or a hater which i find quite bazzare... it is obvious that you are a huge LL fan and i have come to the conclusion that LL fans do not and will not accept that his career was not all that they try to make it out to be, infact you did not know that he struggled with the mediocre Levi Billups, you did not know that he had even fought Billups so how can you possibly call into question my opinion that i feel Michael Spinks would take care of Lewis, Spinks took care of Cooney who was a bigger, stronger more destructive fighter than Lewis, Spinks beat Holmes twice the same Holmes who years later easily beat Ray Mercer, the same Mercer who gave Lewis fits, if Rahman can poleaxed Lewis then it would be over the first time `The Spinks Jinx` landed

poet682006

12-02-2009, 12:11 PM

we had a pole on this forum a few months ago on who the members thought would win Lewis vs Spinks... it turned out roughly 50/50... i dont have any issues with Lewis other than i feel he is vastly over-rated, if i was to claim Ray Robinson was vastly over-rated (which i dont) then no-one would give a dam or even call me into question, but because i dont rate Lewis as highly as some then i am a cunt or a hater which i find quite bazzare... it is obvious that you are a huge LL fan and i have come to the conclusion that LL fans do not and will not accept that his career was not all that they try to make it out to be, infact you did not know that he struggled with the mediocre Levi Billups, you did not know that he had even fought Billups so how can you possibly call into question my opinion that i feel Michael Spinks would take care of Lewis, Spinks took care of Cooney who was a bigger, stronger more destructive fighter than Lewis, Spinks beat Holmes twice the same Holmes who years later easily beat Ray Mercer, the same Mercer who gave Lewis fits, if Rahman can poleaxed Lewis then it would be over the first time `The Spinks Jinx` landed

Actually if you said Ray Robinson was vastly overrated I'd be all over you like white on rice. That's blasphamy. While Spinks' win over Cooney looks good on paper, the truth is "Gentleman" Gerry was an alcoholic head-case by the time Spinks fought him and was never the same after Holmes put his lights out. Cooney was a name and nothing more. Even at his best Cooney was a big punch (left hook) but not much else: He was slow, crude, no defense, and couldn't wipe his ass with his right. BTW, Bowe got his ass kicked twice by mediocre Andrew Golota and Tyson struggled against the mediocre "Bonecrusher" Smith.

Poet

sonnyboyx2

12-02-2009, 12:34 PM

Actually if you said Ray Robinson was vastly overrated I'd be all over you like white on rice. That's blasphamy. While Spinks' win over Cooney looks good on paper, the truth is "Gentleman" Gerry was an alcoholic head-case by the time Spinks fought him and was never the same after Holmes put his lights out. Cooney was a name and nothing more. Even at his best Cooney was a big punch (left hook) but not much else: He was slow, crude, no defense, and couldn't wipe his ass with his right. BTW, Bowe got his ass kicked twice by mediocre Andrew Golota and Tyson struggled against the mediocre "Bonecrusher" Smith.

Poet

Cooney took care of Lyle, Young & Norton in devastating fashion and held him own with a prime Larry Holmes.Spinks beat Holmes 3yrs later and it was a good Holmes.. Holmes then went 21-4 afterwards including winning the WBO title from Mercer and losing 3 World title fights.. it was his style and the way he took Cooney apart that showed Spinks to be a great fighter

Mike Tyson scored a `Shut-Out`over Bonecrusher Smith he never struggled with him like you claim.

Mike Tyson offered nothing against Lewis because he was a `shot fighter` who was on ant-depressents and turned up for the money only, to claim otherwise is fictional

poet682006

12-02-2009, 01:00 PM

Cooney took care of Lyle, Young & Norton in devastating fashion and held him own with a prime Larry Holmes.

Lyle, Young, and Norton were washed up when Cooney fought them.

Spinks beat Holmes 3yrs later and it was a good Holmes...

Spinks got two controversial decisions over a past-prime, out-of-shape, and unmotivated Holmes.

Holmes then went 21-4 afterwards including winning the WBO title from Mercer and losing 3 World title fights..

Holmes went 21-4 against the usual slew of tomato cans that washed-up name fighters face and won against a Ray Mercer who fought one of the dumbest fights I've ever seen by someone who's SUPPOSED to be a title contender.

it was his style and the way he took Cooney apart that showed Spinks to be a great fighter

Style points are meaningless. It's who you do it against and when you do it against them that counts.

Mike Tyson scored a `Shut-Out`over Bonecrusher Smith he never struggled with him like you claim.

Box-Rec answer. Just because you win a round doesn't mean you didn't stuggle in it. Tyson delivered his worse performance as a prime fighter against Smith. The fact that Smith looked aweful as well and did nothing but act as a "spoiler" doesn't change that.

Mike Tyson offered nothing against Lewis because he was a "shot fighter" who was on ant-depressents and turned up for the money only, to claim otherwise is fictional

Strawman. I've never seen anyone in the Boxing History section ever claim Tyson WASN'T shot when he fought Lewis.....quite the contrary.

As for anti-depressents, they don't "sedate" you they bring you up. Mood stablizers "even you out" and anti-anxiety meds such as Prozac "sedate" you. I know, I take all three types of meds and am well aware of their effects.

Poet

1SILVA

12-02-2009, 01:16 PM

my mistake... forgot about Holyfield i took him out of No12 and put Bowe in and forgot to add him at No13

14/. Michael Spinks
15/. Lennox Lewis
16/. Wlad Klitschko
17/. Vitali Klitschko
18/. Jim Jeffries
19/. Floyd Patterson
20/. Gene Tunney

Michael Spinks is in because he was one of the greatest ring tachticians of all times, beating a good Larry Holmes twice and destroying 6ft 7ins Gerry Cooney before losing to the best version of Mike Tyson any fighter ever faced.

Joe Frazier won Fight of the Century`and was a brilliant pressure fighter who`s 3 fights with Ali, 2 with Bonavena & 2 with Quarry entitle him to the position i placed him

Foreman & Holmes are in their correct positions, i could not see them beating any of the above fighters prime 4 prime.. yes Foreman beat Frazier twice but Frazier was blind in one eye by then and totally out of shape for their 1st fight plus Foreman never fought Quarry or Bonavena like Frazier, he also lost easily to Ali whereas Frazier vs Ali was a different story.

Question-do you give any credit to Foreman for his two ko wins over Frazier and Holyfield for his two wins over Tyson? Do those wins mean anything for the fighters who won or do you feel that they were lucky wins? The men who lost these fights lose nothing as far as their career goes?

sonnyboyx2

12-02-2009, 01:49 PM

Question-do you give any credit to Foreman for his two ko wins over Frazier and Holyfield for his two wins over Tyson? Do those wins mean anything for the fighters who won or do you feel that they were lucky wins? The men who lost these fights lose nothing as far as their career goes?

yes i give Foreman & Holyfield credit for their 2 wins over Tyson & Frazier.. my list is based on fighters at their peak and sadly both Tyson & Frazier was years past their peak when suffering those defeats

Lord Finesse

12-02-2009, 01:54 PM

yes i give Foreman & Holyfield credit for their 2 wins over Tyson & Frazier.. my list is based on fighters at their peak and sadly both Tyson & Frazier was years past their peak when suffering those defeats

Holyfield wasn't in his prime, either, against Tyson. Foreman was in his prime against a semi-prime Frazier but I think it would've always been a bad style match-up for Frazier. Even in Frazier's prime.

sonnyboyx2

12-02-2009, 02:09 PM

Lyle, Young, and Norton were washed up when Cooney fought them.

Spinks got two controversial decisions over a past-prime, out-of-shape, and unmotivated Holmes.

Holmes went 21-4 against the usual slew of tomato cans that washed-up name fighters face and won against a Ray Mercer who fought one of the dumbest fights I've ever seen by someone who's SUPPOSED to be a title contender.

Style points are meaningless. It's who you do it against and when you do it against them that counts.

Box-Rec answer. Just because you win a round doesn't mean you didn't stuggle in it. Tyson delivered his worse performance as a prime fighter against Smith. The fact that Smith looked aweful as well and did nothing but act as a "spoiler" doesn't change that.

Strawman. I've never seen anyone in the Boxing History section ever claim Tyson WASN'T shot when he fought Lewis.....quite the contrary.

As for anti-depressents, they don't "sedate" you they bring you up. Mood stablizers "even you out" and anti-anxiety meds such as Prozac "sedate" you. I know, I take all three types of meds and am well aware of their effects.

Poet

yes Lyle, Norton & Young were washed up, but so was Tyson, Holyfield, Morrison, Ruddock & Weaver when they fought Lewis.

nothing controversial about Holmes vs Spinks (1) Spinks out-jabbed Holmes and out-fought Holmes winning a UD
their rematch was closer but Spinks was still the winner.

Holmes went 21-4 yet was still able to be a top ranked fighter earning 4 title shots against Mercer, Tyson, Holyfield & McCall losing on a split-decision to McCall, the same McCall who poleaxed Lewis in less than 2rds.

by style... i mean the manner of Spinks victory over Cooney, flooring Gerry 4 times with huge punches thrown in bunches with terrific speed... Cooney was not `Shot` he pressed the attack from the opening bell but like Holmes could not handle Spinks herky-jerky style.

nothing to do with Boxrec, i have the fight and had Tyson winning every round which is a shut-out, Smith sole intention was to survive.

Spinks matches up too or betters Lewis in almost every asspect of the sport and with only 1ins difference in height i would take Spinks to come out the victor in a match up.

1SILVA

12-02-2009, 03:44 PM

yes i give Foreman & Holyfield credit for their 2 wins over Tyson & Frazier.. my list is based on fighters at their peak and sadly both Tyson & Frazier was years past their peak when suffering those defeats

Was Frazier past his peak when he lost the title to Foreman. Wasn't Holyfield past his peak when he defeated Tyson as well. I agree that Tyson was, but wasn't Holyfield as well?

JAB5239

12-02-2009, 11:23 PM

i never rated Spinks above Frazier 71, Louis 41, Liston 58, Ali pre 74, Johnson 08, but i would definately take Spinks to beat any version of Lewis

Im going by the post where you gave him a 50/50 chance over any heavyweight champion. We'll have to disagree here. I think Lewis would beat Spinks handily.

JAB5239

12-02-2009, 11:28 PM

you are in the minority if you think Lewis beat Holyfield in their 2nd fight (easily)... 42 of 47 ringside sports writers had Holyfield the clear winner as did the vast majority watching on HBO

My bad. I confused it with the first fight. The second was much closer.

Lewis struggled to outpoint Levi Billups yet almost every other fighter Billups fought poleaxed him in less than 3rds.

This is one fight my friend. Fighters are permitted to have off nights in my book. That said.....Lewis still con comfortably.

Mike Tyson was `Heavily Sedated` for the Lewis fight.

Can you produce a medical report, or are you just going by what you've heard and think?

JAB5239

12-02-2009, 11:30 PM

There were reports that Tyson was given Xanex before the fight, but that being said, Lewis would have been a difficult fight for Tyson anytime during his career. Tyson ducked Holyfield in 96, having King pay him 4 million dollars as well as vacating the WBC title.

You mean Lewis, correct?

1SILVA

12-03-2009, 01:13 AM

You mean Lewis, correct?
Thanks for the correction. I meant to say Lewis, as he received the 4 million and Tyson fought Seldon and Holyfield instead

sonnyboyx2

12-03-2009, 02:30 AM

Holyfield wasn't in his prime, either, against Tyson. Foreman was in his prime against a semi-prime Frazier but I think it would've always been a bad style match-up for Frazier. Even in Frazier's prime.

i agree.. Holyfield was not in his prime either, but he had not deteriated as far has Tyson had, Tyson was only a shell of the fighter he was in the 80s he had served several prison sentences and Rooney & Cayton was a decade in the past..

Yes Foreman was a `bad match-up` style wise for Frazier but Frazier`s best days was behind him, he was blind in one eye and wearing contact lenses in the ring.

sonnyboyx2

12-03-2009, 02:39 AM

Im going by the post where you gave him a 50/50 chance over any heavyweight champion. We'll have to disagree here. I think Lewis would beat Spinks handily.

and you are entitled to your opinion, what swings it in Spinks favour for me is that Lewis had `2 left-feet`and would have had no chance of getting to Spinks, Larry Holmes who can fight on his toes could not get to Spinks, Dwight Braxton one of the ATG pressure fighters could not get to Spinks... Spinks out-jabbed Holmes for 30 rounds yet Lewis was given a lesson in jabbing by Frank Bruno, speed, boxing ability, combination punching, ring generalship - it all lies with Michael Spinks, and Spinks could really punch, the `Spinks Jinx`was a devastating punch.... its Spinks for my money KO8

them_apples

12-03-2009, 04:07 AM

poet682006

12-03-2009, 11:01 AM

yes Lyle, Norton & Young were washed up, but so was Tyson, Holyfield, Morrison, Ruddock & Weaver when they fought Lewis.

nothing controversial about Holmes vs Spinks (1) Spinks out-jabbed Holmes and out-fought Holmes winning a UD
their rematch was closer but Spinks was still the winner.

Holmes went 21-4 yet was still able to be a top ranked fighter earning 4 title shots against Mercer, Tyson, Holyfield & McCall losing on a split-decision to McCall, the same McCall who poleaxed Lewis in less than 2rds.

by style... i mean the manner of Spinks victory over Cooney, flooring Gerry 4 times with huge punches thrown in bunches with terrific speed... Cooney was not `Shot` he pressed the attack from the opening bell but like Holmes could not handle Spinks herky-jerky style.

nothing to do with Boxrec, i have the fight and had Tyson winning every round which is a shut-out, Smith sole intention was to survive.

Spinks matches up too or betters Lewis in almost every asspect of the sport and with only 1ins difference in height i would take Spinks to come out the victor in a match up.

You know, attempting to have any discussion with you is like debating a broken record. And you wonder why people in this section don't talk TO you but rather talk AT you.

Poet

sonnyboyx2

12-03-2009, 12:50 PM

You know, attempting to have any discussion with you is like debating a broken record. And you wonder why people in this section don't talk TO you but rather talk AT you.

Poet

maybe its because i have followed this sport for over 40yrs and seem to have an answer for anything on the sport..you are entitled to your opinion that you feel Lewis would `readily`beat Michael Spinks and i appreciate your opinion yet you dont "like i have" state how you think Lewis would readily beat him!

as for the people on the forum talking at me, thats imaterial to me, i dont know any of the people on the forum and i am not likely to know any of them, all i am doing is talking boxing without any idolization towards any fighter in history, every fighter is the same to me, they are a professional prize-fighter who has their strengths and their weaknesses, i look at those strengths and weaknesses when debating a head-to-head and in this head-to-head which has been brought up i have stated the case for Michael Spinks to be the victor IMO.... yet knowone has stated the strengths and weaknesses and made a case for Lewis being the victor, all they have done is make a claim that they think Lewis would beat him, so infact i am the one who is holding the discusion in the correct manner, not just making fancyfull claims and accusations, so i will move on to another subject and maybe return to this one should someome make a case for Lewis which is based on his abilities over Spinks lack of them.

sonnyboyx2

12-03-2009, 01:08 PM

Why is Frazier over Foreman, I know Foreman lost to Ali, but so did Frazier at least once, not to mention Foreman smashed Frazier silly in 2 fights.

Why is Liston so high?

Why is Holyfield absent?

In all honesty, Johnson based on resume OR skill doesn't belong that high on the list.

and what others have been saying about Spinks, the man was a LHW with a decent run at HW. He was a skilled boxer but he did get blown out in one round by Mike Tyson.

Frazier IMO was a more accomplished fighter than Foreman, he achieved more than Foreman, he fought better oposition than Foreman, yes Foreman beat Frazier twice but Antonio Tarver beat Roy Jones twice yet no-one claims Tarver was a better fighter than Jones.

Holyfield missing - i have addressed that on the opening page.

Spinks being beaten by Tyson in one round - it is my opinion that almost any fighter in history would have been "wiped-out" by Mike Tyson the night he fought Spinks, it is well documented that night was Tyson at his ultimate best`and his greatest career victory, it was also Spinks final fight of his career which had spanned 11yrs winning everything that was possible to win both amateur and professional

them_apples

12-03-2009, 10:10 PM

Frazier IMO was a more accomplished fighter than Foreman, he achieved more than Foreman, he fought better oposition than Foreman, yes Foreman beat Frazier twice but Antonio Tarver beat Roy Jones twice yet no-one claims Tarver was a better fighter than Jones.

Holyfield missing - i have addressed that on the opening page.

Spinks being beaten by Tyson in one round - it is my opinion that almost any fighter in history would have been "wiped-out" by Mike Tyson the night he fought Spinks, it is well documented that night was Tyson at his ultimate best`and his greatest career victory, it was also Spinks final fight of his career which had spanned 11yrs winning everything that was possible to win both amateur and professional

Foreman busted Norton up as well, another top tier HW. He also went 40-0 (?) and basically brutalized the HW division much like Tyson did only against better opposition. Foreman should be higher on the list. Let's not forget his comeback either, with the destruction of MM.

Tyson was a beast the night he fought Spinks, but it was also a case of a bad style match up. Spinks being a light framed guy, it didn't really matter what skill he brought into the ring he was gonna get smashed either way. I'll admit Tyson that night would have given any ATG hell, but I'm just pointing out..it was party because Spinks was simply a good fight for him.

sonnyboyx2

12-04-2009, 09:56 AM

Foreman busted Norton up as well, another top tier HW. He also went 40-0 (?) and basically brutalized the HW division much like Tyson did only against better opposition. Foreman should be higher on the list. Let's not forget his comeback either, with the destruction of MM.

Tyson was a beast the night he fought Spinks, but it was also a case of a bad style match up. Spinks being a light framed guy, it didn't really matter what skill he brought into the ring he was gonna get smashed either way. I'll admit Tyson that night would have given any ATG hell, but I'm just pointing out..it was party because Spinks was simply a good fight for him.

Foreman was `a beast` yes.. but he never brutalized the division like you claim, he beat 40 tomato cans and was a 3/1 dog against Frazier.

Foremans comeback was not all plain-sailing, he was fortunate against the German Axle Shultz and also against Alex Stewart, he lost to Tommy Morrison and was losing every round against Moorer... so IMO Frazier fought and beat the better opostion

poet682006

12-04-2009, 12:22 PM

Ah! I love it when I can play someone like a Stradivarias! You gave me exactly the response I desired: You went over the edge and made an alt and sent me an unhinged E-Mail. I love it when a mind-fvck comes together! :luvbed:

Poet

JAB5239

12-05-2009, 03:26 AM

Foreman was `a beast` yes.. but he never brutalized the division like you claim, he beat 40 tomato cans and was a 3/1 dog against Frazier.

Foremans comeback was not all plain-sailing, he was fortunate against the German Axle Shultz and also against Alex Stewart, he lost to Tommy Morrison and was losing every round against Moorer... so IMO Frazier fought and beat the better opostion

I would give Frazier the edge in comp beat up until the time of their fight, but I consider George the greater fighter based on his annihilation of Joe. As far as his comeback goes.....I think you have to take his age and time away into consideration. Ass kicking or not, he knocked Moorer out at 45 to win the title back. Thats HUGE. Jmo.