breaking down this heavyweight era and others: Why today stinks!!

[BattlingNelson]

Off the top of my head with Wlad, you forgot Thompson. Think he was ranked 4 or 7. He also beat Brewster and Mercer(don't remember if by belt org or Ring 10).

With Vitali, Juan Carlos Gomez was ranked in the top 10 as well as Solis.

Without having checked, I think Jab has got it right under the premises he made. Since the rankings is by years end there has to be opponents that is out of the top 10 after a loss. Even though it's a significant flaw in the model, at least it is the same for everybody.

[Luilun]

So we've had this conversation a million times. I'm adamant todays era sucks because fighters don't fight one another and the champion (and his titlist brother) do not often enough fight the best fighters. so I've done a little research and selected the Klits and 3 fighters who people say their era was weak. Now lets remember, ANY fighter can only fight who's there to fight, I've never blamed either brother for that. Now, head to head means nothing in this thread, it doesn't prove anything because its just a fantasy fight.

So, for the purpose of this thread I've used The Ring's annual rankings. Some ranked contenders may have been missed because rhese are year end rankings, but it's an even playing field for each fighter. Feel free to check my work, I've already double checked it. How this works is I've taken each fighter and listed every top 10 fighter he has fought while being top 10 ranked himself. I did not use ABC champion such as Bruno for Tyson or Schultz foe Wlad because they were not ranked. The only exception I made was ranking Spinks a champion because he was in fact the lineal champ when he fought Tyson. I've used each contenders rank from The Ring and divided that number by number of contender. Champions naturally have a zero and you can figure out the rest.

Here we go!!

Vitaly Klitschko

Byrd 10 loss
Lewis Champion loss
Sanders 9
Peter 8
Arreola 6
Adamek 3

6 top 10 fighters faced, average rank 6

Wladimir Klitschko

Byrd 10
McCline 10
Sanders 3 loss
Brewster 10 loss
Peter 9
Ibragimov 9
Chagaev 4
Chambers 7
Haye 2
Povetkin 2

10 top 10 fighters faced, average rank 6.6

Mike Tyson

Berbick 7
Thomas 5
Tucker3
Biggs 9
Spinks Champion
Williams 8
Douglas 7
Ruddock 4
Ruddock 4
Holyfield 1
Holyfield champion loss
Lewis champion loss

12 top 10 fighters faced, average rank 4.4

Joe Louis

Carnera 3
Schmeling 1 Loss
Ettore 9
Pastor 9
Braddock champion
Farr 2
Pastor 2
Godoy 2
Godoy 2
B. Baer 7
Simon 5
Conn 1
Nova 8
Mauriello 1
Walcott 3
Walcott 1
Charles champion loss
Brion 7
Marciano champion loss

19 top 10 fighters faced, average rank 3.6

Larry Holmes

Norton 2
Evangelista 7
Weaver 4
Shavers 5
Berbick 6
L. Spinks 7
Snipes 10
Cooney 7
Cobb 9
Witherspoon 5
Smith 9
Williams 9
Spinks champion loss
Tyson champion loss
Mercer 8

15 top 10 fighters faced, average rank 5.12

Make of this what you will, but the facts speak for themselves.

If a Brother was Champion it would be the best ERA ever in your opinion ,stop the hating on the Klitchko's yea their boring but they get the KO. Floyds boring for 12 rounds never gets the KO but he's the best ever I guess

[Swarmfan]

I like this, its an interesting stat. I think that doing something similar with the opponents is a good idea too. Obviously this cant tell you everything that you need to know about an era or a fighter, but it can tell you something and I think that is really enough to make it worth doing. I appreciate your work here and look forward to seeing the rest.

[JAB5239]

If Vitali hadn't been a fighter, almost all of Wlads opponents would have gone up a notch. That's a point that detracts from this method, since your method would then have this era being better without one of the brothers which is of course ridiculous.

So it's not a statistic that can stand alone when measuring the 'greatness' of an era.

No, that is an assumption on your part. I don't judge by what I think would or wouldn't have happened, only by the actual facts which I have provided and broken down. Its on par with saying something like "so and so would have undoubtedly been champion had they been given their shot".

[JAB5239]

If a Brother was Champion it would be the best ERA ever in your opinion ,stop the hating on the Klitchko's yea their boring but they get the KO. Floyds boring for 12 rounds never gets the KO but he's the best ever I guess

Give it a rest with all the "hating" business and your racial innuendo. The numbers don't lie. If they do than feel free to prove me wrong.

[JAB5239]

Your numbers don't prove that previous eras are superior. They are just rankings, what do they prove? Nothing, other than this champ fought so many ranked opponents, bla bla, doesn't mean the contenders were actually better than today's contenders in any way.

In the end, the real question boils down to whether past top guys are better than the Klitschko's, something you can't possibly prove in a 'scientific' way as you try to pretend doing. It's silly really. We get the point for the umpteenth time, you don't like that the Klitschko's are champions and you keep discrediting them for their 'poor' oppositions. But the rankings you list don't mean shit.

The Klitschko's would have been competetive in any era. So shove your rankings where the sun don't shine.

The Klits would have been competitive in any era, I've said this hundreds of times. That doesn't mean THIS era isn't lousy. Why does this bother you so much?

[JAB5239]

'I don't buy the idea that today's fighters are not as good as the old fighters. If you had asked Joe Frazier if he could beat me when I was at my best, he would have said, 'Hell yeah'.
That's the way boxing goes. I think I could beat the next generation of fighters but the reality of history is that the fighters get better and better, bigger and bigger and stronger and stronger. I think the heavyweight scene is pretty good right now. The Klitschkos are doing great.'

Mike Tyson, in 2012

(Source: http://www.boxing.com/play_it_again_mike.html)

Unfortunately you're not intelligent enough to look at the division as a whole. You watch two fighters. As for Tyson...he's always said what was good for the sport. Funny how you can call him an overrated. thug, rapist in one post and than want to quote him for your benefit in the next.

[daggum]

tony thompson and chris arreola are considered good contenders and they haven't beaten anyone in the top 10. look at a guy like jerry quarry who was considered a good contender. he beat about 8 top 10 guys. essentially what we have is a berto era where guys get hyped up and ranked based on knocking over tomato cans without any real substance. even some of wlad's best wins like haye and povetkin have maybe 1 or 2 top 10 wins. the watering down of boxing. you used to have to fight through the best to get a title shot but now you just have to beat 1 decent fighter or a host of bums. era=crap

[THE REED]

The idea that today's heavyweight era is 'weak' is bollocks. Champions don't become champions out of nothing, the title is not handed to them for free. Today's HW division is strong.

I know OP is not comfortable with the fact that the two headed dragon that is the HW champion is from an Eastern European country most Americans couldn't locate on the world map. It buggers him.

Many people also said the HW era was 'weak' when Larry Holmes, Joe Louis, Tyson, or even when Lewis dominated. Louis had his 'bum of the month club', remember? Lennox only became truly acknowledged as an ATG after he knocked out a much faded Tyson.

Point being, every champ Down history fought their share of 'bums'. The Klitschko's being no different. Doesn't mean this era is particularly weak compared to other eras.

The Klitschko's are dominating in their own fashion, just as past greats like Ali, Holmes, Louis, Jack Johnson, Tyson, etc. dominated in their own fashion. Each champion has his own way of dominating his era.

Boxing is never in a weak era. The best are always the best.

Do not insinuate someone is racist, when they've posted nothing racist at all.

Stop doing it, or I'll stop you from doing it.

Do not reply to this.

[JAB5239]

Off the top of my head with Wlad, you forgot Thompson. Think he was ranked 4 or 7. He also beat Brewster and Mercer(don't remember if by belt org or Ring 10).

With Vitali, Juan Carlos Gomez was ranked in the top 10 as well as Solis.

Neither Thompson or Gomez were in the year end ranking the year the fought Vits and Wlad respectively. As pointed out in my opening post some fighters were ranked at the time of fight, but if not at the end of year they weren't counted. Its the same for the other fighters I used. I know for a fact Joe Louis fought more than 20 top 10 rated contenders, yet he only has 19 on my list. The formula is fair and its objective.