Top 10 Heavies from best to worst

[-CANE-]

The thing about Damiani is he was beating Ray Mercer pretty soundly (won every round if I remember right) before losing to a miracle KO punch. So he did have SOME ability. Carnera went on to be a very good pro wrestler, a fan favorite in fact.

Remember, when I evaluate a fighter it's nothing personal. I'm just giving an evaluation as honestly as I can. I love Floyd Patterson but I'll be the first to point out his glass jaw.

Poet

Fair enough mate. I too try and be as honest as I can.

[Hawkins]

Hawk - I was classing belt holders as champions.

I don't really like discussing them that much though I don't really see them as worthy of spending hours discussing seriously.

I tell you what would be funny is pitting these so called champs against your best 10 and predicting who would last the longest against who. Might have to try that sometime when I'm bored and have nothing to do.

There have been some good fighters that held some of the ABC trinkets, however I think most were average/above average fighters and because of the belt they had they felt they could lay claim to being the man in their division. It's all ridiculous, really.

[Hawkins]

Has anyone ever considered doing a consensus heavyweight list for the history section? Take a group of posters and make a consensus list by vote? I think it could prove entertaining and informative and produce some lively discussion?

Anyone interested?

[Toddy]

Good list but different. Personally Gene Tunney goes into the light heavyweights for me, but saying that a greatly underated fighter who beat Dempsey twice at heavyweight. Don't think I've ever seen James J. Braddock on anyones top10 and certainly not that high. Just curious as to your reasons for this also Tunney and Dempsey. Not slagging you off just want to know how you compile your list which makes it easier for me to understand your placements. Is it overall ability and who would beat who or achievments and impact or what.

No i respect your criticism mate. I put braddock up so high because for a man who had been exiled and had such a disasterous career at one point, for him to make a come back and beat the likes of john henry lewis and max baer, it takes a lot to accomplish such things against such good fighters at the time. You are right, tunne is naturaly a light-heavy and i know he beat a born heavyweight but dempsey had by far the better knock out ratio and he did create an impact from a young age, i just think their contrast of styles makes me put dempsey higher up because IMO dempsey was more exciting, but then again that is my opinion mate.

[-CANE-]

There have been some good fighters that held some of the ABC trinkets, however I think most were average/above average fighters and because of the belt they had they felt they could lay claim to being the man in their division. It's all ridiculous, really.

You're not wrong for example Herbie Hide was a prime example after getting the WBOgus title he was spouting off about how he was the best in the division. He actually believed it as well, but fair play he had the guts to defend against Riddick Bowe.

[-CANE-]

Has anyone ever considered doing a consensus heavyweight list for the history section? Take a group of posters and make a consensus list by vote? I think it could prove entertaining and informative and produce some lively discussion?

Anyone interested?

I'm up for that Hawk. Who you thinking of including in this?

[Toddy]

id like to take part please lads. If thats alright like

[-CANE-]

No i respect your criticism mate. I put braddock up so high because for a man who had been exiled and had such a disasterous career at one point, for him to make a come back and beat the likes of john henry lewis and max baer, it takes a lot to accomplish such things against such good fighters at the time. You are right, tunne is naturaly a light-heavy and i know he beat a born heavyweight but dempsey had by far the better knock out ratio and he did create an impact from a young age, i just think their contrast of styles makes me put dempsey higher up because IMO dempsey was more exciting, but then again that is my opinion mate.

Not criticizing it is your opinion which you are entitled to.
You didn't say what criteria you take into consideration.
While I agree with you his comeback was impressive his career wasn't, so what he achieved was remarkable considering but after beating max baer who was an underated fighter and very heavy hitter although impressive he never defended the title and his 1st defence two years later he lost to the great Joe Louis which is no great shame and even had him down but he never achieved what other greats did.

Don't know if you've seen my list as it has changed from the 1st page it's on page 18 #178 of this thread and the criteria and how I scored it is on page 19 #182 if you're interested. Take a look and let me know what you think.

[Toddy]

Not criticizing it is your opinion which you are entitled to.
You didn't say what criteria you take into consideration.
While I agree with you his comeback was impressive his career wasn't, so what he achieved was remarkable considering but after beating max baer who was an underated fighter and very heavy hitter although impressive he never defended the title and his 1st defence two years later he lost to the great Joe Louis which is no great shame and even had him down but he never achieved what other greats did.

Don't know if you've seen my list as it has changed from the 1st page it's on page 18 #178 of this thread and the criteria and how I scored it is on page 19 #182 if you're interested. Take a look and let me know what you think.

sorry mate. My criteria would probably be:
-What each fighter has achieved.
-The quality of opposition
-Their ability to bounce back from a loss
-Their ability to fight even when experiencing life issues

[Hawkins]

I'm up for that Hawk. Who you thinking of including in this?

I'm not sure but if we did it I would think we'd need to include some cats that are knowledgable in the old school guys as well as the modern fighters. I was thinking of anywhere from 6-10 people to cast their votes and whatnot.