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

[BattlingNelson]

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.

Oh and thank you for always debating your stuff in here.

Off-topic: Cliff you posted a little while ago about doing an article on the super-six scenarios. Did I miss it or???

[Shazam!]

Holyfield lost about four or five times in his 30's, if I'm not mistaken. The record books have one loss against Lewis but we all know it's two. Lewis was only a few years younger but he won comprehensively. Over twelve rounds Lennox Lewis landed TWICE as many punches and somehow the fight got called a draw. To most people outside of America, that fight pretty much proved who the better heavyweight was.

[crold1]

Oh and thank you for always debating your stuff in here.

Off-topic: Cliff you posted a little while ago about doing an article on the super-six scenarios. Did I miss it or???

Not done yet.

Holyfield lost about four or five times in his 30's, if I'm not mistaken. The record books have one loss against Lewis but we all know it's two. Lewis was only a few years younger but he won comprehensively. Over twelve rounds Lennox Lewis landed TWICE as many punches and somehow the fight got called a draw. To most people outside of America, that fight pretty much proved who the better heavyweight was.

I thought the first fight was a CLEAR Lewis win. I thought Holy fought a draw the first one. The results were right IMO; just in the wrong order.

[Shazam!]

Sorry just checked to make sure I wasn't getting it wrong. Lewis actually landed closer to three times as many punches as Holyfield.

Lennox Lewis (348/613) Evander Holyfield (130/386)

[crold1]

Sorry just checked to make sure I wasn't getting it wrong. Lewis actually landed closer to three times as many punches as Holyfield.

Lennox Lewis (348/613) Evander Holyfield (130/386)

That was an all-time terrible decision.

[Shazam!]

Not done yet.



I thought the first fight was a CLEAR Lewis win. I thought Holy fought a draw the first one. The results were right IMO; just in the wrong order.

There wasn't one part of each fight that ever had me worried. The only thing that had me worried was in the second fight, which I had Lewis winning (albeit by less)...but remembering the corruption in the first fight. I didn't know what Don King had up his sleeve. I knew he'd done something to the first fight in order to set up a rematch and hoped that he'd put it right in the second, under the consideration that people wouldn't accept another screw job. And it was put right.

The second fight was definitely closer. But I remember Lewis outlanding him for the most part and still looking the stronger.

I had Lewis winning the first fight by 6-7 clear rounds. Something like that.

And for the second fight I had Lewis winning by 3-4 rounds.

And Holyfield's headbutts drove me crazy.

[BritishBoxing92]

By Cliff Rold - For any new boxing fan, the time is not long before a fellow fan points out a magic number which grows more mythologized with time: eight. As in boxing’s original eight weight classes. The number represents in the mind of many a time when the sport was compressed into fields which couldn’t help but be talented, couldn’t help but draw crowds, because there were so few places on the scale to go. They were divisions marked by single champions ever challenged by a depth of contenders today’s seventeen weight classes rarely know. [Click Here To Read More]

seems accurate list...although i think tyson is in top 10 Heavyweights of all time..

[Shazam!]

Anyway, I'll quit rambling. Getting a bit off the subject :-D

[Pirao]

Holyfield over Lennox? Terrible IMO.

[Tiozzo]

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...

Here is the destruction of your argument : Vitali fought Arreola going backwards, and Vitali is not even that big a puncher. He's by no means a one punch ko artist. There is no evidence that Dempsey was a lesser puncher. His aggresivity made him a much more dangerous fighter than Vitali.

Dempsey has a totally different style : huge power in both hands, even Bert Sugar believes he had a better left hook than Frazier. So yes, I'm being objective. The come forward styles of both Dempsey and Arreola would have played in Dempsey's favor. I say Dempsey by ko in 1 or 2 rounds. If you read the other replies, you'll realize you're the only one who thinks Arreola would have beaten Dempsey. Not a good sign...