Top 10 Heavies from best to worst

[LondonRingRules]

Originally Posted by Hawkins

On sidenote, two of the lowest class things I have seen were Bowe and Tyson both dropping belts instead of facing Lewis. That made both of those fighters out to be guys that were afraid to lose.

** Dropping belts has become acceptable when you have plenty more. Ali should have been stripped when he ignored his mandatory against Norton. Spinks was stripped for ignoring Norton, so the one belt Ali won in the rematch was as bogus as some of his fights that he won.

Most accept Tyson was just a mint for King at that point in his career which in no way, shape or form resembled the fighter who originally cleaned up the mess that Holmes and King had left behind.

Lewis dropped two of his belts too, sold 'em actually to King who awarded them to Byrd and Ruiz. Lewis retired rather than be stripped of his last belt for not rematching Vitali, an ignoble end to a really great career, but typical of a new age of ABC-Z org boxing.

I credit Lewis for becoming a great enough fighter that he was widely ducked. Part of that is his being Brit lowered American interest in him, and you noticed also a certain reluctance sometimes to go offensive against fighters he held advantages over. Still, Holy had the one punch KO of Douglas on his record, as well as a pair of Tyson victories, so Lewis, being the banker type, invested in defense bonds and easily jabbed his way over Holy who had no offensive solutions. It wasn't macho, but neither were Ali's victories over Liston who may have been older than Holy was for Lewis.

I could easily replace Frazier with Lewis in the 10th slot, but I like Frazier a lot for doing more with less and his great legacy.

[Hawkins]

Originally Posted by LondonRingRules

** Dropping belts has become acceptable when you have plenty more. Ali should have been stripped when he ignored his mandatory against Norton. Spinks was stripped for ignoring Norton, so the one belt Ali won in the rematch was as bogus as some of his fights that he won.

Most accept Tyson was just a mint for King at that point in his career which in no way, shape or form resembled the fighter who originally cleaned up the mess that Holmes and King had left behind.

Lewis dropped two of his belts too, sold 'em actually to King who awarded them to Byrd and Ruiz. Lewis retired rather than be stripped of his last belt for not rematching Vitali, an ignoble end to a really great career, but typical of a new age of ABC-Z org boxing.

I credit Lewis for becoming a great enough fighter that he was widely ducked. Part of that is his being Brit lowered American interest in him, and you noticed also a certain reluctance sometimes to go offensive against fighters he held advantages over. Still, Holy had the one punch KO of Douglas on his record, as well as a pair of Tyson victories, so Lewis, being the banker type, invested in defense bonds and easily jabbed his way over Holy who had no offensive solutions. It wasn't macho, but neither were Ali's victories over Liston who may have been older than Holy was for Lewis.

I could easily replace Frazier with Lewis in the 10th slot, but I like Frazier a lot for doing more with less and his great legacy.

Personally I don't place much importance on the alphabet titles. So it's not a big thing in all reality it's just the fact that top guys drop 'em so they don't have to fight other top guys. I don't understand that rationale and I never have.

That is the prime reason I miss the old school fighters, they were more apt to fight anyone and everyone just to prove they were the best around.

[Toddy]

Originally Posted by LondonRingRules

** Dropping belts has become acceptable when you have plenty more. Ali should have been stripped when he ignored his mandatory against Norton. Spinks was stripped for ignoring Norton, so the one belt Ali won in the rematch was as bogus as some of his fights that he won.

Most accept Tyson was just a mint for King at that point in his career which in no way, shape or form resembled the fighter who originally cleaned up the mess that Holmes and King had left behind.

Lewis dropped two of his belts too, sold 'em actually to King who awarded them to Byrd and Ruiz. Lewis retired rather than be stripped of his last belt for not rematching Vitali, an ignoble end to a really great career, but typical of a new age of ABC-Z org boxing.

I credit Lewis for becoming a great enough fighter that he was widely ducked. Part of that is his being Brit lowered American interest in him, and you noticed also a certain reluctance sometimes to go offensive against fighters he held advantages over. Still, Holy had the one punch KO of Douglas on his record, as well as a pair of Tyson victories, so Lewis, being the banker type, invested in defense bonds and easily jabbed his way over Holy who had no offensive solutions. It wasn't macho, but neither were Ali's victories over Liston who may have been older than Holy was for Lewis.

I could easily replace Frazier with Lewis in the 10th slot, but I like Frazier a lot for doing more with less and his great legacy.

IMO belts are only in boxing so that fighters can strive to fight "The Best". If there were no belts in boxing, the fighters would just be put up against anyone. Belts encourage fighting between the top contenders and the champions. Its good for the sport in that perspective. In many ways it also isn't because of all this striping of titles as such, it just creates a fuss when really the best of the best should just box, see who the better fighter is and shake hands afterwards

[poet682006]

Originally Posted by Hawkins

I take nothing away from Lennox. I loved watching the man perform. He brought a level of prestige and class back to the division that had been lacking for abit. I've come close to placing him in my top 10 on a few occasions.

BTW I wasn't trying to **** on your list, just offering some points of interest.

Originally Posted by hurricane72

We all have differing opinions no ones right or wrong but that's what's great discussing it and why.

I totally respect poet and hawkins and quite a few others that have posted here yet we have different opinions.

I personally have to have Lennox Lewis right up near the top while many disagree. But if you're taking accomplishments into account then I find it hard not to rank him high.

Apart from the 70's he fought in the strongest era ever and he reigned as at least one belt holder and undisputed champ for nearly 10 years. 3 time champ, he beat the 2 other greats of his time, he beat every opponent he ever faced avenging his 2 defeats which is the mark of a great champion. He made 14 succesful defenses with only Louis,Ali and Holmes making more. He beat everyone there was to beat with only the exception of Bowe and Moorer who both avoided him. Lewis stopped Bowe in 2rnds in the Olympic final and I think he would have beaten him again and Moorer wouldn't have took his punches. He was given the run around throughout his career but fought through all the boxing politics and still unified the titles, he retired as champion. If that isn't enough then I don't know what is. That's why I have him above the like of Tyson,Holyfield,Frazier,Dempsey,Foreman and Marciano as there accomplishments just don't match up.

Well Hawkins, Hurricane, this is STILL the hot thread thanks to you guys I'm in on the consenses vote if you'll have me of course

Let me start of by saying I'm a Lennox Lewis fan and have been from the begining. I love the guy and he'll go down as an all-time favortite of mine. That being said, I still rate him at 13th: A near great rather than an ATG. The only thing keeping him from cracking my "Dynamite Dozen" of ATGs is his chin. It was his biggest weakness and one likely to be exploited by fighters ranked higher. My assesment of his chin is not based on his two stoppage losses but rather on the number of times I personally watched him get wobbled by opponents not known for their punch (the McCall fight was as quick a stoppage as I've ever seen). Had it not been for his chin issues I would undoubtably have him in the top ten: I believe he was that good and only that one glaring fault holding him back.

Poet

[Hawkins]

Originally Posted by Toddy

IMO belts are only in boxing so that fighters can strive to fight "The Best". If there were no belts in boxing, the fighters would just be put up against anyone. Belts encourage fighting between the top contenders and the champions. Its good for the sport in that perspective. In many ways it also isn't because of all this striping of titles as such, it just creates a fuss when really the best of the best should just box, see who the better fighter is and shake hands afterwards

They may in fact be a motivating factor for some guys, but ultimately they were created so the leeches called sanctioning bodies can make a sanctioning fee. I think the sanctioning bodies are a cancer in boxing and they are contributing to the overall poor public perception of boxing.

All you have to do is look at some of the rankings and you know alot of it's a sham and the belts are no different. As are most things in life, the motivation is political and monetary for these guys.

[Toddy]

Originally Posted by Hawkins

They may in fact be a motivating factor for some guys, but ultimately they were created so the leeches called sanctioning bodies can make a sanctioning fee. I think the sanctioning bodies are a cancer in boxing and they are contributing to the overall poor public perception of boxing.

All you have to do is look at some of the rankings and you know alot of it's a sham and the belts are no different. As are most things in life, the motivation is political and monetary for these guys.

Crying shame too mate . Boxing is such a good sport and could be better without the sactioning bodies. As well as belts being motivators for the fighters, the hunger to be noticed and respected is also there. if only that were stronger than the need to win a damn belt.

[poet682006]

Originally Posted by Hawkins

They may in fact be a motivating factor for some guys, but ultimately they were created so the leeches called sanctioning bodies can make a sanctioning fee. I think the sanctioning bodies are a cancer in boxing and they are contributing to the overall poor public perception of boxing.

All you have to do is look at some of the rankings and you know alot of it's a sham and the belts are no different. As are most things in life, the motivation is political and monetary for these guys.

The alphabet boys should be ignored and allowed to die the ignomious death they deserve. Right now the only reliable ratings are in Ring Magazine, though I'm not sure how long that will last. Once upon a time their were eight champions and everyone could name them. Eight weight classes, eight champions. No bogus weight classes to create more mony from sanctioning fees, no multiple organizations each with their own champion. Nirvana for a boxing fan I'd say.

Poet

[Hawkins]

Originally Posted by poet682006

Well Hawkins, Hurricane, this is STILL the hot thread thanks to you guys I'm in on the consenses vote if you'll have me of course

Let me start of by saying I'm a Lennox Lewis fan and have been from the begining. I love the guy and he'll go down as an all-time favortite of mine. That being said, I still rate him at 13th: A near great rather than an ATG. The only thing keeping him from cracking my "Dynamite Dozen" of ATGs is his chin. It was his biggest weakness and one likely to be exploited by fighters ranked higher. My assesment of his chin is not based on his two stoppage losses but rather on the number of times I personally watched him get wobbled by opponents not known for their punch (the McCall fight was as quick a stoppage as I've ever seen). Had it not been for his chin issues I would undoubtably have him in the top ten: I believe he was that good and only that one glaring fault holding him back.

Poet

Sadly, Lennox suffers the same fate as Larry Holmes. Where as Holmes was a rather a boring fighter in comparison to Ali, Lennox came along and became a dominant heavyweight in the shadow of Tyson.

It's hard to follow in the footsteps of a dynamic fighter and get due recognition from the public at large. But because the shadows cast by these guys are so encompassing the casual fan will never give them the respect they deserve.

[Hawkins]

Originally Posted by poet682006

The alphabet boys should be ignored and allowed to die the ignomious death they deserve. Right now the only reliable ratings are in Ring Magazine, though I'm not sure how long that will last. Once upon a time their were eight champions and everyone could name them. Eight weight classes, eight champions. No bogus weight classes to create more mony from sanctioning fees, no multiple organizations each with their own champion. Nirvana for a boxing fan I'd say.

Poet

I agree and the only ones with the power and deep enough pockets to rememdy the situation are the networks. True the networks are also motivated by money BUT the networks only make money if they promote good fights and there in lies the solution. The Alphabet boys don't care..as long as their little trinket is bandied about they get a cut. They could care less who fights as long as they get a few greenbacks.

Compared to the original 8, there are what? 6-7 sanctioning bodies each with their own champion? So that means you could potentially have 6-7 different champions per division? That's crazy as hell.

If you do the math, and if every organization had a different champion in each division thats a potential for 70+ belt holders! Unbelievable!

[poet682006]

Originally Posted by Hawkins

They may in fact be a motivating factor for some guys, but ultimately they were created so the leeches called sanctioning bodies can make a sanctioning fee. I think the sanctioning bodies are a cancer in boxing and they are contributing to the overall poor public perception of boxing.

All you have to do is look at some of the rankings and you know alot of it's a sham and the belts are no different. As are most things in life, the motivation is political and monetary for these guys.

Originally Posted by Hawkins

Sadly, Lennox suffers the same fate as Larry Holmes. Where as Holmes was a rather a boring fighter in comparison to Ali, Lennox came along and became a dominant heavyweight in the shadow of Tyson.

It's hard to follow in the footsteps of a dynamic fighter and get due recognition from the public at large. But because the shadows cast by these guys are so encompassing the casual fan will never give them the respect they deserve.

That's true enough Hawkins. I'm more than the casual fan though: I watch fights with a much more critical eye than most: That's why I became a Lennox fan in the first place. I was seeing things the casual fans were missing out on.

Poet