Emanuel Steward: Ali is the greatest HW of all time, Wladimir is 8th

[BigAlexSand]

I rate Wlad somewhere after Marciano... His competition was as if not less difficult than Rockys.

You hear a lot about how Rocky had a easy career, with limited competition.... well what do you call Wlad competition? In my eyes at least he finish his career undefeated, not losing once to weak comp (unlike Wlad)

[bklynboy]

Is that list supposed to go in order?

no. chronological order.

[LacedUp]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Foreman
4. Holmes
5. Lewis
6. Frazier
7. Holyfield
8. Wlad
9. Marciano
10. Liston/Johnson

Something like that...

Jack Johnson's resume includes some of the best fighters of all times.

He beat Sam Langford (best resume in boxing history?) decisively, beat Jim Jeffries (top 20 atg heavy for sure), McVey, Ketchel, Fitzsimmons (ATG), Joe Jeanette (ATG heavy), Tommy Burns (breaking the colour barrier in boxing).. The guy's resume is stacked with quality and it's clearly better than Wlad's.

The one problem there is with Johnson is that there's a lot of doubt about his wins due to fixes as well as he didn't fight the guys he should have been fighting later on in his career.

[PainfromUkraine]

Jack Johnson's resume includes some of the best fighters of all times.

He beat Sam Langford (best resume in boxing history?) decisively, beat Jim Jeffries (top 20 atg heavy for sure), McVey, Ketchel, Fitzsimmons (ATG), Joe Jeanette (ATG heavy), Tommy Burns (breaking the colour barrier in boxing).. The guy's resume is stacked with quality and it's clearly better than Wlad's.

The one problem there is with Johnson is that there's a lot of doubt about his wins due to fixes as well as he didn't fight the guys he should have been fighting later on in his career.

Well, based on that, my list could make sense - but really I just put that together to illustrate how Manny described the division in the video.

[LacedUp]

no. chronological order.

Hmm..

Intriguing list. How can you rate Ali #4 when his resume is quite clearly the strongest in heavyweight history?

[LacedUp]

Well, based on that, my list could make sense - but really I just put that together to illustrate how Manny described the division in the video.

I get that. And at some point it's also redundant to compare fighters from 100 years ago to the current fighter.

But Jack Johnson should definitely be high on all lists.

I think Steward said 8 or 9. He probably didn't give it much thought at the time - and could probably have given a more in-depth reason behind it, had he been given more time.

[LacedUp]

I rate Wlad somewhere after Marciano... His competition was as if not less difficult than Rockys.

You hear a lot about how Rocky had a easy career, with limited competition.... well what do you call Wlad competition? In my eyes at least he finish his career undefeated, not losing once to weak comp (unlike Wlad)

Marciano only became relevant very late in his career, and didn't really beat any top fighter in their prime. Of course, Charles was a pretty good win and so was the first Walcott fight.

But people also had him losing to La Starza I believe, and he was dominated by a past prime Walcott for 13 rounds before finding the best KO punch (probably) in heavyweight title fight history.

This shouldn't take away from his legacy, but just add a little perspective. I don't think Wlad's resume is that far behind Marciano's, if at all.

[MDPopescu]

Steward said he has a "size" issue when ranking Wlad...
Fortunately, he didn't watch Wlad's last fight...

[bklynboy]

I rate Wlad somewhere after Marciano... His competition was as if not less difficult than Rockys.

You hear a lot about how Rocky had a easy career, with limited competition.... well what do you call Wlad competition? In my eyes at least he finish his career undefeated, not losing once to weak comp (unlike Wlad)

Rocky beat some pretty good people.

Joe Louis: People make it out as if Louis was completely out of it (the way Ali was when he fought Holmes). Louis was past prime (as Lenox Lewis) was past prime when he fought VK - which means he was still pretty damn good.

Jersey Joe Walcott: Walcott was a Bernard Hopkins of his day (as was Archie Moore) and thought Marciano was a bum who didn't have a chance. He anticipated it to be a Hopkins - Pavlik fight.

Ezzard Charles: Charles was no bum. He might have started out as middleweight (where did Pacquiao and Mayweather start out?) but had been a heavyweight for 5 years when he fought Marciano.

Archie Moore: A true Bernard Hopkins fighting ranked fighters until his late 40s. He fought Ali 7 years after he faced Marciano.

I don't have Marciano in the TOP 10 but he wan't a bum and he beat some very good fighters. Pavlik was shut out by Hopkins. Marciano KOed Walcott.

[bklynboy]

Hmm..

Intriguing list. How can you rate Ali #4 when his resume is quite clearly the strongest in heavyweight history?

It's a chronological list. It's based on when they fought.

Jack Johnson fought from 1900-1920 or so. He comes before Ali who fought from 1960 - 1980 who comes before Wladimir Klitschko who fought from 1995 - ?

I do that to avoid controversies about ranking. I'm simply saying I think these men are better than WK.