Top 10 Heavyweights of all times.

[LacedUp]

He ain't better at all larry Holmes is top 5 . I don't know why he's not higher on people's lists

He ranks pretty high on Ring Mags list and SI if i'm not mistaken. The reason I don't have him higher is because of the era he was in. He had all the tools to be the best ever, but was born 10 years too late.

[Simurgh]

Wlad over Lewis?

Just about the same. Sometimes I put lennox on top, sometimes wlad. I explain it many times - resume-wise and H2H wise very close IMO. Both terrific boxers.

[JAB5239]

Louis
Ali
Holmes
Johnson
foreman
Lewis
Tyson
Liston
Holyfield
Marciano

[JAB5239]

Recently, (in historical terms) we have had a variety of a HW ATGs retire or close to it. I know that many of the posters on NSB think that some are the current HWs deserve to be included in the top 10. What do you think?

Here's my take:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Rocky Marciano
5. Lennox Lewis
6. Floyd Patterson
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Larry Holmes
9. Joe Frazier
10. Gene Tunney (happy to explain that one).

NOTE: I know this subject is old, but I'm very interested to hear what some of you guys think, and if especially the two Klitschko brothers, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and the likes should be in the mix and why.

I would respectfully like to hear the Tunney explanation.

[Jamesv3]

He ranks pretty high on Ring Mags list and SI if i'm not mistaken. The reason I don't have him higher is because of the era he was in. He had all the tools to be the best ever, but was born 10 years too late.

It's a bit like the kilts they are top 20 heavy weights and if they been around in the 90's they'd probley of proved it but the current crop are so poor they will never get the credit they probley deserve . Also what's with everyone rating wlad over vitali ? He might be the better boxer but vitali has far more overall

[Barn]

Please explain why Tunney is there and not Mike Spinks.

Both only have a handful of HW fights and beat a past-prime HW ATG two times. (With Larry Holmes clearly being better and greater than Dempsey IMO)

I'd also like to hear your justification for Jack Johnson at #3 which, although I see a lot, I whole-heartedly disagree with.

[LacedUp]

I would respectfully like to hear the Tunney explanation.

Gene Tunney was the first of his kind. He was the first boxer, who moved around the ring and used skill as opposed to being a pure brawler like his predecessors. He laid the foundation for fighters like Louis, Patterson and Ali to become who they were.

[JAB5239]

Just about the same. Sometimes I put lennox on top, sometimes wlad. I explain it many times - resume-wise and H2H wise very close IMO. Both terrific boxers.

Wlad is great and may still crack the top 10, but resume wise it is not close.

[Simurgh]

Wlad is great and may still crack the top 10, but resume wise it is not close.

I beg to disagree.

What Wlad did (just resume-wise) is way too much under-rated. By the end of his career I think I'll have him firmly in top5.

H2H wise I have only two fighters that I would favor against prime Wlad. That's clearly Ali and that's very prime Tyson (but only because I think that's the worst possible match-up for Wlad).

[gauze]

head to head...holmes, lewis, holy, tyson, and klits give any top 10 all-time heavy a run for their money, but i favor them personally.

those 6 guys along with ali, louis, foreman, and johnson/marciano/frazier/liston (i cant pick haha, too close) you got yourself one hell of a heavyweight tournament.

i think a prime lewis wins the most h2h match-ups. no definitive top 10 list from me, sorry!