Vote in boxing.com's HW poll

[Barn]

thats your opinion, id personally put money on tunney against any version of ali.

similar to louis vs conn but with tunney winning.

I'm referring to Michael Spinks.

Beat Larry Holmes, who was less past it than Dempsey was IMO, over 15 rounds twice, then fought some other standard opposition before retiring.

Only difference is Spinks got murked by Tyson, however it wouldn't surprise me if Tunney would have in that situation as well.

[bklynboy]

How is that relevant?

Spinks has just as good a resume as Tunney at heavyweight, no-one ranks Spinks anywhere near the Top 20 though.

We can never get fighters of different eras to fight each other so all we have are their records. I think too many people think of Tunney as a Light-Heavyeight because he only has 5 or 6 fights as a Heavyweight.

Here's a guy that dominated the Light-Heavy division and would have (in my humble opinion) have dominated the Heavyweight division for another 3-5 years with only a Max Schmelling or Baer in 1932-33 being able to take him. Although even then I wouldn't put it past a 34-35 year old Tunney to keep his title.

We would think much differently about Tunney if he fought 4-5 times a year, defending his title 20 times. Tunney did something remarkable. He retired at his peak and never looked back. It would have been as if Michel Jordan had quit for real (had never played baseball and never came back).

I think Tunney's retirement is something to take into consideration when evaluating his ranking.

[Spartacus Sully]

I'm referring to Michael Spinks.

Beat Larry Holmes, who was less past it than Dempsey was IMO, over 15 rounds twice, then fought some other standard opposition before retiring.

Only difference is Spinks got murked by Tyson, however it wouldn't surprise me if Tunney would have in that situation as well.

i was pointing out that i could imagine tunney beating ali, but not micheal spinks.

tunney would have done much much better against tyson, if you consider dempsey as having punched any where near as hard as tyson.

you can rate him where you want but at heavy id rate tunney higher then spinks (either way, at heavy they are both in the 20-30's), and probly the same for rating them at light heavy with tunney beating spinks.

[Barn]

We can never get fighters of different eras to fight each other so all we have are their records. I think too many people think of Tunney as a Light-Heavyeight because he only has 5 or 6 fights as a Heavyweight.

Here's a guy that dominated the Light-Heavy division and would have (in my humble opinion) have dominated the Heavyweight division for another 3-5 years with only a Max Schmelling or Baer in 1932-33 being able to take him. Although even then I wouldn't put it past a 34-35 year old Tunney to keep his title.

We would think much differently about Tunney if he fought 4-5 times a year, defending his title 20 times. Tunney did something remarkable. He retired at his peak and never looked back. It would have been as if Michel Jordan had quit for real (had never played baseball and never came back).

I think Tunney's retirement is something to take into consideration when evaluating his ranking.

You can't rank some with the assumption that they could have defended there title 20 times, that's way off. I don't rank Carlos Monzon higher than Marvin Hagler because I feel if he did not retire he would have defended his title another 6 times.

Tunney was a great LHW but at HW, beat a past prime great twice and other standard opposition. A bit like Michael Spinks.

[Barn]

i was pointing out that i could imagine tunney beating ali, but not micheal spinks.

tunney would have done much much better against tyson, if you consider dempsey as having punched any where near as hard as tyson.

you can rate him where you want but at heavy id rate tunney higher then spinks (either way, at heavy they are both in the 20-30's), and probly the same for rating them at light heavy with tunney beating spinks.

That's fair enough, It's not strange at all to have them both a few places of each other. To have one in the 20's and another in the 10's for resumes quite similar is something I can't quite fathom.

Tunney vs Tyson would be interesting while it lasted. I'm off the opinion a prime Tyson like the one who entered the ring against Jinx would end it in about 4.

[The Iron Man]

The results of this poll are in:

1. Muhammad Ali 673 pts.
2. Joe Louis 605
3. Larry Holmes 368
4. Rocky Marciano 365
5. George Foreman 316
6. Lennox Lewis 287
7. Jack Dempsey 266
8. Joe Frazier 243
9. Mike Tyson 199
10. Jack Johnson 198
11. Sonny Liston 154
12. Evander Holyfield 154
13. Gene Tunney 81
14. Wladimir Klitschko 52
15. Jim Jeffries 47
16. Vitali Klitschko 36
17. Riddick Bowe 24
18. Ezzard Charles 16
19. Jim Corbett 10
20. Bob Fitzsimmons 9

http://www.boxing.com/muhammad_ali_t...ight_poll.html

[SBleeder]

Can I not post my list for other weight classes?


Why is everything so freaking heavyweight-centric? It's one of the least talented divisions in history.

[Capaedia]

The results of this poll are in:

1. Muhammad Ali 673 pts.
2. Joe Louis 605
3. Larry Holmes 368
4. Rocky Marciano 365
5. George Foreman 316
6. Lennox Lewis 287
7. Jack Dempsey 266
8. Joe Frazier 243
9. Mike Tyson 199
10. Jack Johnson 198
11. Sonny Liston 154
12. Evander Holyfield 154
13. Gene Tunney 81
14. Wladimir Klitschko 52
15. Jim Jeffries 47
16. Vitali Klitschko 36
17. Riddick Bowe 24
18. Ezzard Charles 16
19. Jim Corbett 10
20. Bob Fitzsimmons 9

The list actually turned out pretty good, all things considered.

Most importantly, it got the top two right, even if personally I'd reverse the order.

[Rspen46]

My Top 10

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Rocky Marciano
4. Jack Johnson
5. Jack Dempsey
6. Larry Holmes
7. Sonny Liston
8. Mike Tyson
9. James Jeffries
10.George Foreman