Comments Thread For: The Top 25 Heavyweights of All-Time – Top Ten

[crold1]

So 188-198 lbs Dempsey does what 250 Vitali couldn`t do, while being a lesser puncher? Very objective here

You talk as if Dempsey was undefeated and undefeatable... God damn! Firpo knocked Dempsey down twice...

It is not about disrespect to the Champion (cause i actually respect Dempsey a lot) - it is simply logical... When two ****ers step into the ring, the one with longer arms, bigger punch, better chin, and bigger weight usually ends victorious...

Vitali isn't a much better puncher than Dempsey, and his stuff is slower and less sharp. Dempsey had that rare ability to detonate guys in the first round. Klit is excellent at bludgeoning people over the course of a fight. Dempsey would go through Arreola in 2-3 rounds tops. Doesn't mean he'd go through Vitali the same way. That would be interesting actually; Vit-Dempsey I mean.

[Capital Punch]

Vitali isn't a much better puncher than Dempsey, and his stuff is slower and less sharp. Dempsey had that rare ability to detonate guys in the first round. Klit is excellent at bludgeoning people over the course of a fight. Dempsey would go through Arreola in 2-3 rounds tops. Doesn't mean he'd go through Vitali the same way. That would be interesting actually; Vit-Dempsey I mean.

Give Vit Klit credit, he's totally dominated three contenders at 38 and throwing punches like a man half his age. If we're talking fighters over 35, Vit Klit would be my #1 HW of all time.

[Lacrimosa]

Vitali isn't a much better puncher than Dempsey, and his stuff is slower and less sharp. Dempsey had that rare ability to detonate guys in the first round. Klit is excellent at bludgeoning people over the course of a fight. Dempsey would go through Arreola in 2-3 rounds tops. Doesn't mean he'd go through Vitali the same way. That would be interesting actually; Vit-Dempsey I mean.

When i told "lesser puncher" i meant that Vitali hits harder... I know that Vitali`s punching technique could be improved... As for Dempsey i would rather call him a pressure-type fighter with heavy hands rather than a puncher... After all he had about 15 decision wins and many draws and news-paper decisions... Maybe if there was more videos of Dempsey, I would have thought the other way... but a KO 1 (boxrec) over a guy with a poor record or absent record doesn`t mean much to me...

And, in the end, Dempsey would have been an average-sized cruiserweight if he fought today... And taking a look at the history I don`t remember many cruiserweights succeeding at heavyweight division...

P.S. I forgot to say "Thank You" for the article

[sammiza567]

alot of uneducated fans talk about tyson being the best heavyweight and i try to no avail to bring them to reality he is no where near ali or louis or a few others. on the other hand with hardcore boxing fans i have to talk tyson up, and many dont give him credit. if cus doesnt die for like 10 more years you have one of the top 3 p4p boxers ever imho. but if one is to argue for tyson like i do, you cant argue based off of his resume. his resume is not in the same ballpark as the other heavies in the top ten. if your gonna talk up tyson, your only argument can be that during his prime the skills he demonstrated in the ring were unmatched, and thats something i wont even argue with.

[Alex_Ex]

Without Klitschkos this Top 25 is doubtful and disappointing.

[crold1]

Without Klitschkos this Top 25 is doubtful and disappointing.

Only one active fighter is on the list and that's because he's so old it doesn't matter. Nothing personal.

[BattlingNelson]

I like the top 5. And I like Cliff's algorithmic approach.

I don't like Holyfield being as high. He holds the record for most titlefight losses and is a highly suspected PED abuser.

Other than that I think the list is very good. Excellent actually.

[crold1]

I like the top 5. And I like Cliff's algorithmic approach.

I don't like Holyfield being as high. He holds the record for most titlefight losses and is a highly suspected PED abuser.

Other than that I think the list is very good. Excellent actually.

The formula stuff only gives me a baseline of fighters. The rest is up to me. Most of the top ten guys also scored that high but a guy like Frazier was limited. Subjectively, I don't care and he belongs in any top ten.

[BattlingNelson]

The formula stuff only gives me a baseline of fighters. The rest is up to me. Most of the top ten guys also scored that high but a guy like Frazier was limited. Subjectively, I don't care and he belongs in any top ten.

I was thinking about Holyfield. I think all those losses should count more against him.

[crold1]

I was thinking about Holyfield. I think all those losses should count more against him.

They do, but he also gets credit for fighting so many guys. He wouldn't have that many title fight losses without 81,000 belts anyways. Heck, most of the losses on his record came after 40 and three blemishes (Ruiz II where he got screwed out of a KO win, Ruiz III where he got screwed out of an easy decision, and Valuev where he just got screwed) shouldn't be.

Thanks for the feedback as always brother.

One of these days, I'll redo the Jr. Lists by the same rules as this. Eliminates outlandish results and I don't have to disagree with something I wrote.