Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Which Was The Strongest Decade For The Light Heavyweights?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    I'd say 1920 s followed by the 90 s.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by The D3vil View Post
      I've always heard about the '70s with Saad, Qawi, Spinks, Eddie Mustafa, Marvin, Galindez, and Lopez.

      Talk about a stacked ass era.

      Spinks is underrated as hell for coming out on top of that era.
      spinks is mad underated at 175 hes in the top 3 h2h

      even his run at heavyweight is underrated. Beating undefeated Holmes and dominating 6 ft 6 cooney after making 175 not too much earlier

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by DeeMoney View Post

        This was my initial thought. 20s, and some what into the 30s, had great depth. 40s had WWII to deal with, but was carried by a top heavy run by Charles and Moore, and Lesnevich to a lesser extent. The 70s had Foster at the start and Muhammad at the end, with lots of good guys in between
        - Those 40s extended into the 50s with Moore holding the LH title with numerous great young guns and needless to say, that was a very hungry era.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post

          - Those 40s extended into the 50s with Moore holding the LH title with numerous great young guns and needless to say, that was a very hungry era.
          I think the 50's was a pretty average era,apart from Moore,Johnson ,and Maxim there were no standouts Patterson only very briefly paused there.The fact that ex middles Turpin and Lamotta made the top ten underlines the ordinariness of the decade imo.Competitive but not stellar,imo.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Ivich View Post

            I think the 50's was a pretty average era,apart from Moore,Johnson ,and Maxim there were no standouts Patterson only very briefly paused there.The fact that ex middles Turpin and Lamotta made the top ten underlines the ordinariness of the decade imo.Competitive but not stellar,imo.
            - - Looks strong enough to take more than a few 70s era LH down.

            https://boxrec.com/wiki/index.php/Th...yweight--1950s

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post

              - - Looks strong enough to take more than a few 70s era LH down.

              https://boxrec.com/wiki/index.php/Th...yweight--1950s
              It hasnt the depth.
              Saad Muhammad
              Mustafa Muhammad
              Conteh
              Galindez
              Foster
              Hutchins
              Kates
              Cuello
              Johnson
              Scott
              Rondon
              Finnegan
              Burnett
              Parlov
              Ahumada
              Bogs
              Cassidy
              Lopez
              Fourie
              The 50's don't have that. I think you're just arguing for the sake of it,like a reflex action.


              Comment


              • #27
                ...of course, no decade is devoid of praiseworthy stars. Like a scout troop sitting round the campfire, we are all of one accord in that.

                Some noteworthy 1950s 175 pounders:

                Archie Moore
                Harold Johnson
                Bob Satterfield
                Joey Maxim
                Doc Williams
                Jimmy Slade
                Yvon Durelle
                Floyd Patterson
                Oakland Billy Smith
                Harry Kid Mathews
                Nick Barone
                Irish Bob Murphy
                Paul Andrews
                Danny Nardico
                Wes Bascom
                Yolande Pompey
                Hans Stretz
                Tony Anthony
                Chick Calderwood
                Gerhard Hecht
                Chuck Spieser​

                This said, I'll stick with my choice of the 1920's, followed by the 1970's.
                Ivich Ivich JAB5239 JAB5239 like this.

                Comment


                • #28
                  One way to tell how strong the light heavy division is/was is from the heavyweight division. In a truly weak heavyweight era fighters like Tunney, Moore, Spinks, etc, etc would be heavyweights because they could be. Compare that to the 70's when Foster made an effort...

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Rosco3387 View Post
                    One way to tell how strong the light heavy division is/was is from the heavyweight division. In a truly weak heavyweight era fighters like Tunney, Moore, Spinks, etc, etc would be heavyweights because they could be. Compare that to the 70's when Foster made an effort...
                    Man Joe Frazier vs. Bob Foster was B-R-U-T-A-L.
                    Rosco3387 Rosco3387 Ivich Ivich like this.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Willow The Wisp View Post

                      Man Joe Frazier vs. Bob Foster was B-R-U-T-A-L.
                      It was also kind of symbolic. Foster was... "Foster" "the sheriff" a mean, homicidal punching machine. Yet when fighting one of the marquee heavyweights at the time, he was outfostered so to speak, and it was not even close. Some say it was size... If you really pay attention to punch strength measurements, Diana Wolf, a female middle weight hits about as hard as any fellow middle weight in MMA (courtesy of the punch machine in Vegas). Middleweights that punch really hard, may do so, at least in some objective ways, independent of weight. So Foster's punch was still as dangerous as many to Smokin Joe.
                      Ivich Ivich likes this.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP