Your Top 10 Heavyweights Of All Time.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Fake news.

Louis didn't make one defense against a losing record. Just looking through his list of title defenses the lowest win % was around 65-68%.

Also, fights above 175 back in those days were officially Heavyweight fight so you can't go and not count them now. You may not count hall of famers or whatnot but it's usually a solid measuring stick and Joe Louis defeated 8 different hall of fame fighters for I believe 10 wins. His only losses were to fighters who ended up in the hall of fame and the only one against a non-great (Max Schmeling) was brutally avenged. That's a solid reference for how good he was especially relative to his era especially when you add that longest ever single reign at any weight with the most defenses at any weight and all were undisputed. Also, the eye test helps Louis too given how good he was.

I'm not arguing against Joe Louis's greatness. But just disputing his quality as a 'heavyweight' by modern standard.

The Titanic may have been the biggest ship 50+ years ago. However, it isn't now. Thus, we don't call it 'the biggest ship in the world' anymore.

Likewise, bouts below 200 pounds may have been called 'heavyweight' bouts 50+ years ago. However, they aren't anymore because heavyweights are much bigger now.

Modern definitions always have greater precedence over ancient definitions. This applies to pretty much everything. From science, to sports.

And hall of fame is an American organisation / establishment. They don't induct boxers based on any objective criteria which evaluates the boxer's quality alone. It's more down to a popularity contest and it mostly inducts local American boxers. That's like me using a Ukrainian hall of fame organisation as a basis to claim that Klitschkos are the greatest heavyweights of all time because it has all the opponents of Klitschkos inducted. It means nothing!

Here is a vital fact:

If we exclude every opponent that Joe Louis fought that weighed below 200 pounds and had 25% or more losses out of his career record in Louis's championship title bouts. Joe Louis beat only 7 opponents in heavyweight world championship title bouts. That is SIGNIFICANTLY less than modern heavyweights.

Most of the opponents that Joe Louis fought in world championship bouts, wouldn't even be allowed to step into the ring against modern heavyweights like a Klitschko or a Lennox Lewis. Wladimir Klitschko never fought opponents with 25% or more losses out of their career records in championship title bouts.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Sorry But I had to partially resent this to make sure you get it...

Most of Vitaly's opponents weren't murderer's row either; Corrie Saunders, Danny Williams, Samuel Peters, Juan Carlos Gomez, Chris Arreola, Kevin Johnson, Albert Sosnowski, Vitaly went the distance w/2010 Shanon Briggs (12 years after Lennox ko'd him in 5), Olanier Solis, Thomas Adamek, Dereck Chisora, Manuel Charr Not one HOF. Not one ATG. Really??? I mean I do give any champion his due especially defending his title so many times. But who really mention these guys?

I truly believe that Trevor Berbick, Pinklon Thomas, James Bonecrusher Smith, Frank Bruno, Razor Ruddick, Carl Williams & the Buster Douglas that beat Tyson is much better then any of those guys that Vitaly defended his title to.

Riddick Bowe would've whip that Arse. HolyField was a warrior see his fights with Lennox they are legendary! Went 12 rounds twice w/ lennox. Four years later Vitaly didn't make it past 6 rds against Lennox.

None of them looked like Murderer's row because Vitali Klitschko didn't allow them to look like that. I don't care what your opinion is of the quality of Vitali Klitschko's opponents. It doesn't change the fact that most were TOP opponents who Vitali Klitschko thoroughly dominated.

You can believe whatever you want. However, it's a fact that Vitali Klitschko had a more dominant career than Mike Tyson did.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Basically it means you're just stupid if you can't distinguish the skill set between George Foreman and Sam Peter. Translate that any way you want.

Okay! I challenge you to go ahead and intellectually prove that point via a thorough analysis / breakdown.

How exactly is 1970's George Foreman any more skilled than Samuel Peter?

Both were big and strong (Peter was even bigger and stronger). Both had technically deficient punch technique and use to throw wild / wide swinging power punches most of the time. Neither had a very good jab. Both used to bully opponents using their size, strength, weight and power. Both were knockout artists. Both used to struggle against slick, defensively sound boxers / counter punchers who were mobile and agile with good movement. One advantage Samuel Peter had over George Foreman was superior stamina!

The main difference between the two was that one was an American whilst the other was a Nigerian. Thus, the American gets looked at from a higher pedestal whilst the foreigner gets looked down on. Otherwise, objectively speaking, both were almost identical boxers.

[joseph5620]

Okay! I challenge you to go ahead and intellectually prove that point via a thorough analysis / breakdown.

How exactly is 1970's George Foreman any more skilled than Samuel Peter?

Both were big and strong (Peter was even bigger and stronger). Both had technically deficient punch technique and use to throw wild / wide swinging power punches most of the time. Neither had a very good jab. Both used to bully opponents using their size, strength, weight and power. Both were knockout artists. Both used to struggle against slick, defensively sound boxers / counter punchers who were mobile and agile with good movement. One advantage Samuel Peter had over George Foreman was superior stamina!

The main difference between the two was that one was an American whilst the other was a Nigerian. Thus, the American gets looked at from a higher pedestal whilst the foreigner gets looked down on. Otherwise, objectively speaking, both were almost identical boxers.

No thank you. I'm not going to engage in this type of idiocy and stupidity. You're beyond the point of anything even resembling an intelligent analysis.

[sugar ray lenrd]

None of them looked like Murderer's row because Vitali Klitschko didn't allow them to look like that. I don't care what your opinion is of the quality of Vitali Klitschko's opponents. It doesn't change the fact that most were TOP opponents who Vitali Klitschko thoroughly dominated.

You can believe whatever you want. However, it's a fact that Vitali Klitschko had a more dominant career than Mike Tyson did.

I beg to differ, Tyson had a more dominant career at one point & if it weren't for the jailed sentence he would Have had a more dominant career. Just like the GREATEST Ali, if it had not been for his jailed sentence he would have had a more dominant career. Vitaly had a good career, but he fought in an era where the heavyweights division was weak.
Now back to you....JIM!

[Sun_Tzu]

Joe Louis, Larry Holmes then becomes a chore for me after tha but those are my two favorites. That's all a personal top ten is anyway.

[sugar ray lenrd]

What a bunch of nonsense. Lewis DOMINATED Holyfield in both fights. It's well documented. No use in disputing that, it just makes you seem even more clueless. When Tyson lost to Lewis he was younger than when Lewis beat Vitali and had not lost in over 5 years, since Holyfield. You fools will say anything to diminish Vitali's shellacking of Lewis! lol!!!

Do the analysis of Ali's opponents records in title fights now......I dare you. Can you not imagine how bad Vitali would be dogged if he fought a guy that had 11 losses like Chuvalo or Cooper? How about if he fought Wepner and let him last 14 plus rounds? He would never live it down. You only know the names of Ali's opponents because they fought him. lol
Quarry lol Chuvalo lol Cooper lol Folley lol London lol Bonevana lol Bugner lol Coopman lol Young ........lost to 6-0 Spinks @ 36 lol! Give me a break.

It doesn't matter if Tyson was younger than... Tyson was a blizzard in the heavyweight division at a young age. This & because he went to jail, burnt out soon enough & abused his body. He was washed up at an early age. Many here do not understand when YOU PERFORM AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL LIKE TYSON DID AT AN EARLY AGE THAT CAN WEAR YOU OUT. Think about it tyson was the baddest man in the planet at an early age. Not even Floyd competed at the world stage at an early age like Tyson did. Floyd did reach this level but he was much older. Tyson was a phenom at a very young age. And this is what lead to him being burnt out at an early age. The Klitchkos didn't perform at this level at an early age either.

I don't need to do an analysis of Ali's opponents. You are not from that era so you can never understand how it was. There were many fighters that Ali carried to go the whole distance. Ali was also an entertainer guys like cooper, webner & others he just wanted put on a show. I already prove to you how Vitaly went the distance with an old Briggs 12 years later after fighting Lewis! Let me tell you why Vitaly wouldn't beat Ali....He doesn't bend his knees, Ali was more athletic all around!
Now back to you...JIM!

[Boxing Goat]

It doesn't matter if Tyson was younger than... Tyson was a blizzard in the heavyweight division at a young age. This & because he went to jail, burnt out soon enough & abused his body. He was washed up at an early age. Many here do not understand when YOU PERFORM AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL LIKE TYSON DID AT AN EARLY AGE THAT CAN WEAR YOU OUT. Think about it tyson was the baddest man in the planet at an early age. Not even Floyd competed at the world stage at an early age like Tyson did. Floyd did reach this level but he was much older. Tyson was a phenom at a very young age. And this is what lead to him being burnt out at an early age. The Klitchkos didn't perform at this level at an early age either.

I don't need to do an analysis of Ali's opponents. You are not from that era so you can never understand how it was. There were many fighters that Ali carried to go the whole distance. Ali was also an entertainer guys like cooper, webner & others he just wanted put on a show. I already prove to you how Vitaly went the distance with an old Briggs 12 years later after fighting Lewis! Let me tell you why Vitaly wouldn't beat Ali....He doesn't bend his knees, Ali was more athletic all around!
Now back to you...JIM!

Yeah, more nonsense. I'm way beyond over this discussion. Next time don't wait several days to respond. Bye

[sugar ray lenrd]

Yeah, more nonsense. I'm way beyond over this discussion. Next time don't wait several days to respond. Bye

Okay, Have a nice day!
Now back to you...JIM!

[Mr Objecitivity]

I beg to differ, Tyson had a more dominant career at one point & if it weren't for the jailed sentence he would Have had a more dominant career. Just like the GREATEST Ali, if it had not been for his jailed sentence he would have had a more dominant career. Vitaly had a good career, but he fought in an era where the heavyweights division was weak.
Now back to you....JIM!

No, Tyson evidently didn't have a more 'dominant' career. Seeing as he was on top of the heavyweight division for a shorter period of time.

Ifs and buts are irrelevant. We go by what actually happened, when evaluating how good a boxer ACTUALLY IS. Not hypothetical ideas.

You say Vitali Klitschko's era was weak. Well, I say Mike Tyson's era was weak. See how easy that was?