Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Top 5 Heavyweights of all time

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    1. Ali - Ali and Louis are interchangeable in my opinion
    2. Louis - 22 title defense? ridiculous
    3. Johnson - given his impact on this continent and the fact that he accomplished what he did with the threat of violence following lands him in this spot for me.
    4.Foreman - dominated his moment in the seventies. Then wins again in 1994? amazing.
    5.Holmes 48 - 0? Pretty dominant.

    in that order for me.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Tim Horton View Post
      1. Ali - Ali and Louis are interchangeable in my opinion
      2. Louis - 22 title defense? ridiculous
      3. Johnson - given his impact on this continent and the fact that he accomplished what he did with the threat of violence following lands him in this spot for me.
      4.Foreman - dominated his moment in the seventies. Then wins again in 1994? amazing.
      5.Holmes 48 - 0? Pretty dominant.

      in that order for me.
      Louis has more than that! 25 title defences and as you say it's an incredible feat.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Barnburner View Post
        Louis has more than that! 25 title defences and as you say it's an incredible feat.
        you're right, thank you! Maybe I was thinking of Larry Holmes?

        Either way, thank you for the correction.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by bklynboy View Post
          Muhammad Ali
          Joe Louis

          Are one and two. The following can be in the TOP 5 on any given day.

          Jack Johnson
          Jack Dempsey
          Gene Tunney
          Rocky Marciano
          Sonny Liston
          Joe Frazier

          The following in the TOP 10

          Larry Holmes
          George Foreman
          Mike Tyson

          The following honorable mentions / TOP 15

          Lennox Lewis
          Floyd Patterson
          Originally posted by Mr. Mark View Post
          1. Ali
          2. Louis
          3. Marciano
          4. Dempsey
          5. Tunney
          With all due respect, I don't see how Tunney can rank in the top 10 let alone the top 5. He was a wonderful fighter, but his accomplishments and resume at heavyweight are very thin in my opinion.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
            With all due respect, I don't see how Tunney can rank in the top 10 let alone the top 5. He was a wonderful fighter, but his accomplishments and resume at heavyweight are very thin in my opinion.
            Yeah. In one sense I hate making these lists. I almost deleted my post after sending it in. Except for Ali and Louis my opinion changes so quickly. Like: do we include fighters before the neutral corner rule, when there were 45 round fights (fight until someone is KOed), when fouls were not called as they are now?

            If that's the case boxing history starts in the 1920s.

            I included Tunney because I think that he would have had a long reign (3-5 years) if he didn't retire. (Shoulda/Woulda/Coulda) Maybe I'm wrong but from he's arguably a TOP3 and definitely TOP 5 for the first half of the 20th C.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by bklynboy View Post
              Yeah. In one sense I hate making these lists. I almost deleted my post after sending it in. Except for Ali and Louis my opinion changes so quickly. Like: do we include fighters before the neutral corner rule, when there were 45 round fights (fight until someone is KOed), when fouls were not called as they are now?

              If that's the case boxing history starts in the 1920s.

              I included Tunney because I think that he would have had a long reign (3-5 years) if he didn't retire. (Shoulda/Woulda/Coulda) Maybe I'm wrong but from he's arguably a TOP3 and definitely TOP 5 for the first half of the 20th C.
              JAB is right he didnt really do enough to warrant ur high placing of him but hey ive got Tyson real high and he didnt have the worlds greatest resume. Im not penalizing him for not having great opponents to test himself with in his prime. Its all just opinion anyway but if im honest as good as Tunney was i can see quite alot of fighters besting him at HW, guys like a Rid**** Bowe for example.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by bklynboy View Post
                Yeah. In one sense I hate making these lists. I almost deleted my post after sending it in. Except for Ali and Louis my opinion changes so quickly. Like: do we include fighters before the neutral corner rule, when there were 45 round fights (fight until someone is KOed), when fouls were not called as they are now?

                If that's the case boxing history starts in the 1920s.

                I included Tunney because I think that he would have had a long reign (3-5 years) if he didn't retire. (Shoulda/Woulda/Coulda) Maybe I'm wrong but from he's arguably a TOP3 and definitely TOP 5 for the first half of the 20th C.

                Im not sure where he ranks in the first half of the 20th century, but top 5 would be no surprise.

                As far as what his reign may have been had he not retired....I agree with you. I just can't bring myself to rank a fighter on what MAY have occurred compared to what actually did occur for other greats.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Any of u gents know anything about Tunneys Alcohol problem?

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by The Surgeon View Post
                    JAB is right he didnt really do enough to warrant ur high placing of him but hey ive got Tyson real high and he didnt have the worlds greatest resume. Im not penalizing him for not having great opponents to test himself with in his prime. Its all just opinion anyway but if im honest as good as Tunney was i can see quite alot of fighters besting him at HW, guys like a Rid**** Bowe for example.
                    Tyson had the potential to be an ATG, a potential to be Joe Louis/ Muhammad Ali/Mike Tyson when talking about the best heavyweights. He never lived up to his potential so - how do we rate him? Foreman is often rated in the TOP 5 but he was such a wide-armed, almost sloppy fighter that I have a hard time putting him in the TOP 5. And yet he demolished Ken Norton, just the sort of fighter (like Ali) who you would think would give him trouble.

                    Back to TOP 5 all time and Tunney. I suppose beating a past-prime Dempsey is like Lewis beating a past-prime Tyson and by that reasoning you can't raise Tunney up to all-time status. (Which is what I did.)

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

                      Im not sure where he ranks in the first half of the 20th century, but top 5 would be no surprise.

                      As far as what his reign may have been had he not retired....I agree with you. I just can't bring myself to rank a fighter on what MAY have occurred compared to what actually did occur for other greats.
                      Yeah, I'm rethinking this through - AGAIN. At his prime he would be trouble for the Dempsey, Fraziers and Tysons, would have beaten Liston and been more than a challenge against Louis and Ali. But I think he wouldn't be able to take Foreman (I see a Ken Norton like encounter) or take out other good big heavyweights (Bowe, Lewis).

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP