who are the top five light heavies ever

[Sugarj]

Maybe the greatest Supermiddleweight of all time

Ha ha yea.

[Barn]

Harry Greb is borderline IMO.

[StarshipTrooper]

I think Fitzsimmons is defo a top 10 middleweight. He beat an ATG, Dempsey for the middleweight title, he beat another hall of fame middleweight Joe Chonyski and he also KO'd several top heavyweights while still weighting in as a middleweight.

Ruby Robert is definitely a top-10 Middleweight. Hell, I have him in my top-5.

Poet

[StarshipTrooper]

I gave Sam some serious thought, but he was classed as a heavyweight rather than a light heavyweight......despite what he weighed, which was often not recorded.

I actually classify Langford as Middleweight. I used to rank him at Welter but the late GJC convinced me that Middle was more apropos.

Poet

[StarshipTrooper]

On topic:

#1 Ezzard Charles
2-5 in no particular order:
Archie Moore
Gene Tunney
Bob Foster
Michael Spinks

[NChristo]

He makes my Top Five.

In no particular order.......
Bob Foster
Archie Moore
John Henry Lewis
Michael Spinks
Gene Tunney

With an honourable mention to Georges Carpentier who lost many of his prime years to WWI.

No Charles ?.

[NChristo]

Not sure I'm comfortable ranking Langford as high as 5 for light-heavy. I don't think he ever actively campaigned as a light-heavyweight, unlike at middleweight and heavy where he won several titles, coloured championships, regional titles and the like.

I think people who rank him so highly at light-heavy do so out of speculation of how well he would have done had a campaigned regulary at the weight, which I think is unfair on the likes of Spinks, Rosenbloom, Greb, Harold Johnson, Bob Foster who excellent light-heavyweight resumes are more clear-cut.

Nope, not really done out of speculation, Light Heavy is arguably his strongest weight.

As a small light heavy he was regularly beating men much bigger then himself (Proven heavies in McVea, Jeanette, Klon***e, Gunboat Smith and others) which should add too his Light Heavy resume and not his Heavyweight seeing as he still weighed below 175 and above 160, he was 50-1 (might be wrong and he has 2 losses ?) while fighting these much bigger men between 1908 - 1912.

It's obviously all down too opinion but give me Langfords Light Heavy resume over Foster's anytime, especially with Foster generally being the bigger man against his opponents.

[taansend]

No Charles ?.

He probably deserves to be there but in my mind I view him as a heavyweight, even though I know the majority of his great work came at Light Heavy.

This is a difficult weight to judge as, pre 1960, most Heavyweights were the same size as today's Cruiserweights (or less, with nutrition etc) so many LH's fought at both weights, depending on where the money was.

[taansend]

Carpentier shouldn't be anywhere near a top 10 LHW list.

Why Ruben? This is the history section. We share knowledge, not just knock back ideas. How would The Orchid Man has done in those missed years?

[IronDanHamza]

He probably deserves to be there but in my mind I view him as a heavyweight, even though I know the majority of his great work came at Light Heavy.

This is a difficult weight to judge as, pre 1960, most Heavyweights were the same size as today's Cruiserweights (or less, with nutrition etc) so many LH's fought at both weights, depending on where the money was.

It is difficult considering a lot of fights happend at "Heavyweight" were pretty much Light Heavyweight fights. With both fighters being 180 or less.

For example, Johnson-Charles was "Officially" a Heavyweight fight but I rank it at LHW for Johnson.

But Ezzard Charles is absolutely no question a Top 5 LHW. It's very difficult to consider him to be lower than #1. Only person who has an argument is Archie Moore.