Who is the greatest of the 2nd tier heavyweights?

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE=mickey malone;5637591]

Cos you know you're stuff!

Thanks Mick, thats kind of you. But I learn more from many of you than I can contribute.

On a side note.....the guy I train muay thai from goes to ****kok a couple of times a year and keeps asking me to come out there. If I ever make it out there can I run a bar tab with you?

[GJC]

Tim Witherspoon?

[mickey malone]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;5637614]

Thanks Mick, thats kind of you. But I learn more from many of you than I can contribute.

On a side note.....the guy I train muay thai from goes to ****kok a couple of times a year and keeps asking me to come out there. If I ever make it out there can I run a bar tab with you?

I'll even take you to the best gyms.. I'm good friends with most of the top coach's in Pattaya, who often run up tabs in my bar.. However, I'm never short on back up, or free training sessions.. Had a session with Michael Flatley (River Dance) the other day.. He can box a bit.. Brian Jacks (ex world judo champ) trains here as well.. With the heat, you'll be down to welter in no time lol..

[fight_professor]

Mike Tyson?

Mike was a dominant champion. The first time.

[mickey malone]

Tim Witherspoon?

Tim's a good call & so would Bonecrusher Smith be..
I'm not quite in agreement with Capt Sam regarding the term 2nd tier though..
2nd tier to me, would be decent HW's that have won a 2nd tier crown, ie WBF IBO or IBC with the inclusion of credible fighters that didn't get a shot.. In my opinion, someone like Witherspoon is a 3 time HWC & is 1st tier.. I mean this thread is so misleading that another poster has just suggested Mike Tyson!

[fight_professor]

I set a basic criteria, and explained in was in the context of this thread taken to mean "anyone not in the top 20 or so HW of alltime". Then, I even said "adjust the criteria as you deem fit"-so there's plenty of scope mate.

I dont regard WBF/IBO etc as anything worth mentioning. I set a high bar to seperate the decent from the very good, but just short of ATG status guys.

Its an open thread.

[StarshipTrooper]

I set a basic criteria, and explained in was in the context of this thread taken to mean "anyone not in the top 20 or so HW of alltime". Then, I even said "adjust the criteria as you deem fit"-so there's plenty of scope mate.

I dont regard WBF/IBO etc as anything worth mentioning. I set a high bar to seperate the decent from the very good, but just short of ATG status guys.

Its an open thread.

Among Heavyweights I would consider the the top dozen to be ATGs with the next 20 to 25 or so being what I call "Near Greats". Now, would the Near Greats be considered 2nd tier by your estimation or 1st tier along with the ATGs?

Poet

[fight_professor]

You would have to differentiate between ATG and near great. Why is say no.12 an ATG and 13 not.

I thought 20 was a nice even split, laid out a fair criteria too.

Its not a science.

In the context at hand, outside the top 20 (which would be the GREAT HW), is the next lot.

[StarshipTrooper]

You would have to differentiate between ATG and near great. Why is say no.12 an ATG and 13 not.

I thought 20 was a nice even split, laid out a fair criteria too.

Its not a science.

In the context at hand, outside the top 20 (which would be the GREAT HW), is the next lot.

Because the person I have ranked at number 12 I consider an ATG but the person I have ranked at number 13 I consider close but not quite.

I don't have a set number that I try to fill. I have something like 22 Middleweights ranked as ATGs but only 8 ATGs at Flyweight. It varies from division to division. In other words, I taylor the lists to fit the number of fighters in each division that I view as ATGs rather than taylor the number of ATGs to fit the list.

Poet

[mickey malone]

No21 = Ken Norton then..