Who's the best American heavyweight?

[sugarsmosley]

someone please tell me how james toney was ever good at HW.

he needs to retire

[White_Knight]

while it's seen as a "poor excuse" by the most biased poster on bscene (you,) it's a phenomenon regularly cited by virtually all boxing experts. go back through the history of the division, if you must. i'll wait.

That's because, unlike other nations, Americans can't stand not being the center of the universe, so when they are not the best they have to say "we really are the best; our guys just aren't competing".

Don't get me wrong: Americans in general are nice people. I find them much more sincere, less pretentious, and friendlier than people from the majority of other nations. Nevertheless, it would be a lie to say America was a humble or outward-looking nation.

If you want to excuse America's lack of heavyweights by saying they are in NFL or NBA, you also have to excuse Australia's, South Africa's, New Zealand's, Britain's, France's, and Argentina's would-be heavyweights by saying they are in rugby.

[New England]

That's because, unlike other nations, Americans can't stand not being the center of the universe, so when they are not the best they have to say "we really are the best; our guys just aren't competing".

Don't get me wrong: Americans in general are nice people. I find them much more sincere, less pretentious, and friendlier than people from the majority of other nations. Nevertheless, it would be a lie to say America was a humble or outward-looking nation.

If you want to excuse America's lack of heavyweights by saying they are in NFL or NBA, you also have to excuse Australia's, South Africa's, New Zealand's, Britain's, France's, and Argentina's would-be heavyweights by saying they are in rugby.

i understand your premise, but here's why it is not valid.

those countries would undoubtedly produce viable HW. the difference is that they didn't dominate the division. american talent did. go through the best fighters in the history of the division. they're american.

that is the difference. i don't see what about that is hard to understand.


if new zealand produced the best HW in the world for 100 years, and only relinquished the division when the rugby league took away all of their talent, then you'd have a much stonger argument.


show me the best new zealand HW. i showed you the best american HW.


i am not saying that americans are inherently supeior. what i am saying, though, is that we have the history at the top of the division that other nation's don't have. only with the rise of basketball and football in america has the talent at HW gone so far down.

thats the argument. it is one that no other nation can make, because they don't ahve the history with the division.




you can take from the argument what you'd like, but you can't deny the facts upon which it is built. they are facts, not opinions.

do you understand my stance now, or shall i clarify?

[White_Knight]

you can take from the argument what you'd like, but you can't deny the facts upon which it is built. they are facts, not opinions.

do you understand my stance now, or shall i clarify?

East Europe was crippled by communism until the mid 90s. With the end of the cold war, the division is filled with East Europeans - coincidence?

[New England]

Because there were more American HWs, not because American heavyweights are innately superior.

You have a nationalist agenda. I have no racist or nationalist agenda.

I don't believe being of a certain race or being born within any geographical boundaries makes boxers superior. Nationalist and racist beliefs are silly and have been proven to have no basis in reality!

There are good boxers of all races in all countries where there are good boxing gyms for young boxers to train and develop their abilities.

In the past, there were far more good boxing gyms in the bigger cities in the USA than anywhere else, but the rest of the world has been catching up.

so we are crediting countries for HW fighters they didn't produce now, is that it?

[New England]

East Europe was crippled by communism until the mid 90s. With the end of the cold war, the division is filled with East Europeans - coincidence?

they boxed in the amateurs, and americans beat them.

tunny said they didn't box or have good gyms, though. so which is it?

this was back when amateur boxing was essentially short pro fights with large gloves. most of the great american HW were great amateurs at HW or LHW (ali, frazier, foreman, holyfield, all won gold.)


keep going, though. you are doing much better than tunney.

[Tom Cruise]

Can no one accept the premise that American heavies have gotten worse AND Europe has more pro heavies.

They are not mutually exclusive you know

[New England]

Can no one accept the premise that American heavies have gotten worse AND Europe has more pro heavies.

They are not mutually exclusive you know

obviously that's the case. nobody without bias, including myself, denies that an influx of european talent will enhance their standing in the division. it's still a junk division, maybe as bad as it's ever been, and the drop in overall top talent has come with the rise exodus of american talent.

when americans were in control of the division the fighters were much better. who is denying that?

tunney, for sure, but who else?



let me simplify your query:
can anybody recognize that europe is producing more HW, and that american HW with athletic talent are playing basketball and football at the collegiate and pro level?

[New England]

No, and there are STILL more heavyweights in the USA than all European countries combined. But it's not like the 1970s and 1980s, when over 90% of the pro heavyweights were from the USA.

Europe: 302

http://boxrec.com/ratings.php?countr...us=A&SUBMIT=Go

USA: 387

http://boxrec.com/ratings.php?countr...IT=Go&pageID=1

the american HW are the bottom of the barrel in terms of the talent we produce. there could be 3000 of them. they'd still be fat guys with nothing to offer. they're mostly fat guys, needing to lose at least 30 lbs to be considered fit. they don't have the talent to make a college level athletic team. if they did, they almost certainly wouldn't be boxing.


talented young american men with size are steered to collegiate level football and basketball from the time they hit puberty. lebron james was a "prospect" in basketball when he was in high school.


you would not even think some of these guys were real if they came up. deontay wilder is not some unique talent. he's just a guy who didn't make it in basketball.


i'll take 3000 wilders over 3000 thompsons. that is the argument.


done here for now. i've got to get to the gym, to make sure this 240 lb american physique stays an 8.5.

you can go on thinking that talented american men box and are only losing to europeans because they are that good, but it's wrong.



curiously, do you think this is a strong division under european rule?
i know the answer to the question, of course, but i just want to gauge your biases.

[BoxingGenius27]

It's probably between Arreola and Thompson