Post-2000 HW Top 10 Compared to Pre-2000 HW Top 10

[MisterHardtop]

There has been a lot of talk recently about Joe Frazier and his place amongst the all time greats, there has been talk of both Klitschkos beating Frazier and making Ali look a fool, which is why I decided to rank my top 10 heavyweights post and pre-2000. You guys can compare the two, post your own lists and let's have a nice, civilised discussion, between knowledgeable boxing fans.

Post-2000 HW Rankings:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Ruslan Chagaev
4. Nikolai Valuev
5. John Ruiz
6. Samuel Peter
7. Hasim Rahman
8. David Haye
9. Chris Byrd
10. Alexander Povetkin

I've left out the likes of Lewis and Holyfield for obvious reasons. A lot of these names could easily be replaced with the likes of Adamek or even Toney, that's how thin it has been at the top. Of course it's a much smaller talent pool and sample but these are the modern fighters who are meant to be bigger, stronger and just more physically enhanced than the greats of the past.

Pre-2000 HW Rankings:

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

I would give almost any heavyweight in the second list a chance of stopping Wladimir, names such as Foreman, Frazier or Lewis could probably do it within 5 rounds. There are some names, such as Liston, Tyson and Bowe who couldn't make it into my top 10 who would be able to stop Wladimir, even so-called journeymen such as Shavers.

This is not to disrespect Wladimir but his chin has been smashed into a million pieces by many fighters who don't even hit as hard as the ones I mentioned and who lack the required skill to work on the inside.

There is no denying that both Klitschko has the power to hurt some of the guys with lesser chins, such as Holyfield, Lewis or Frazier. Vitali probably has the best chance but he is often slow and plodding, easily outworked or out skilled by the likes of Ali or Holmes but his power could tell against someone like Louis, or the very small guys in Dempsey and Marciano.

None of the rest of the fighters post-2000 really have the skills or the chin or the heart to match the best pre-2000. That os a quite simplistic fact in my opinion. Haye may have the speed and power but does he have the will?

Feel free to comment away.

[Holywarrior]

What are these lists from?

[Ivansmamma]

wilder vs dempsey who wins?

[Holywarrior]

Dempsey top 10? Nah.

[Tom Cruise]

100+ years of boxing talent vs. 14?

Seems fair

[bklynboy]

Dempsey top 10? Nah.

Funny how Ray Arcel considered Jack Dempsey to be TOP 3-5 heavyweight of all -time.

Arcel was in the fight game from Dempsey to Larry Holmes (was alive until Mike Tyson). He trained Barney Ross, Henry Armstrong, Roberto Duran, James Braddock (Cinderella Man), Max Baer, Ezzard Charles and many others.

Arcel was not the only one to rate Dempsey so high. At the very least Dempsey's a TOP 3-5 until 1960.


Joe Louis
Jack Johnson
Jack Dempsey

Blackburn (Louis' trainer) and many others considered Jack Johnson to be better than Joe Louis until after Schmelling II.

Jack Dempsey deserves to be considered an ATG and while he may not be a TOP 10 in everyone's book you're not overestimating him if you place him there.

(in chronological order)

1900-1960

Jack Johnson
Jack Dempsey
Joe Louis
Sonny Liston

1960-present

Muhammad Ali
Joe Frazier
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Lennox Lewis

Honorable Mentions - potential TOP 10

Harry Wills * Colored Champion
Gene Tunney * (retired early)
Rocky Marciano

Mike Tyson
Evander Holyfield
WK

[kiDynamite92]

Liston should be on that list and so should Mike if you're talking about h2h.

[bklynboy]

wilder vs dempsey who wins?

Let's see an all-time great bob and weaver with great speed against a wide-armed looping puncher (granted with power).

I'll take the ATG bob and weaver with great speed (and great power).

[Boxing Goat]

This is not to disrespect Wladimir but his chin has been smashed into a million pieces by many fighters who don't even hit as hard as the ones I mentioned and who lack the required skill to work on the inside.

Vitali probably has the best chance but he is often slow and plodding, easily outworked or out skilled by the likes of Ali or Holmes but his power could tell against someone like Louis, or the very small guys in Dempsey and Marciano.

I half-way took this seriously until I read the highlighted parts.

Lets start with Wladimir.

He's been stopped 3 times in his losses. Two of those times was due to fatigue and not really because he got his 'chin smashed into a million pieces'. LOL!

It should be noted that in his Sanders loss, it was a TKO and he was on his feet when the fight was stopped.

Next, saying Vitali is slow and plodding is an insult to Foreman bro and Vitali has never been outworked or out skilled in a boxing match which includes a 14-2 title fight record.

I can see the whole point of the thread is another attempt to crap on the Klitschko era once again seeing as how you have a full century of fighters listed in one column and just over a decade in the other.

This crap is transparent. Why just not come right out and say, "I don't like or respect the Klitschko era", and save everyone the worthless read.

(waiting on the reply saying how this has nothing to do with personal dislike for the Klitschko's or this era which doesn't include A) a black/african decended champ or B) an American champ, which will surely be complete lying BS)

[MisterHardtop]

I half-way took this seriously until I read the highlighted parts.

Lets start with Wladimir.

He's been stopped 3 times in his losses. Two of those times was due to fatigue and not really because he got his 'chin smashed into a million pieces'. LOL!

It should be noted that in his Sanders loss, it was a TKO and he was on his feet when the fight was stopped.

Next, saying Vitali is slow and plodding is an insult to Foreman bro and Vitali has never been outworked or out skilled in a boxing match which includes a 14-2 title fight record.

I can see the whole point of the thread is another attempt to crap on the Klitschko era once again seeing as how you have a full century of fighters listed in one column and just over a decade in the other.

This crap is transparent. Why just not come right out and say, "I don't like or respect the Klitschko era", and save everyone the worthless read.

(waiting on the reply saying how this has nothing to do with personal dislike for the Klitschko's or this era which doesn't include A) a black/african decended champ or B) an American champ, which will surely be complete lying BS)

Well if you think I am crapping on the Klitschkos, then you obviously haven't read many of my previous posts. I've always respected the two and hold them in high regard. Am I crapping on the post 2000 era? Most definitely, outside of the brothers, there hasn't been a single heavyweight worthy of the title "champion", not one. Maybe you can refresh my memory.

I agree, Vitali hasn't been outboxed in his era but if you read what you. yourself have highlighted, you will see I'm saying the likes of Ali can outbox him. So your whole point is mute.

This thread was in response to the many threads that have popped up about how current heavyweights would be too much for heavyweights of the past but when you break it down and look at the top 10s alone, there is noway you can say anyone below the top 2 post-2000 can even hold a candle to the likes of Ali, Holmes etc.

In terms of Wladimir, it is fair to say exhaustion had a huge roll to play in his stoppages but he was also dropped in those fights and badly hurt. Samuel Peter, who even you must admit probably hits a tenth as hard as the likes of Shavers, Tyson and Dempsey, had Wlad on the floor 3 times.