The Ten Worst Heavyweight Champions

Reading the article on the ten most underrated heavyweights there I was prompted to review my own list of the worst ever heavyweight champions I complied a while go:

1. Michael Bent (11-2-0) - A 13 fight professional veteran that was knocked out in his first ever professional round by a 6 fight novice, he would go on to upset Tommy Morrison in his 12th pro fight for the WBO title. Prompyly lost it to Herbie Hide and retired.

2. Francesco Damiani (30-2) - Never seen this guy fight to be honest but he became the first holder of the WBO belt. Promptly lost it to Ray Mercer before retiring after a defeat to Oliver McCall.

3. Sergie Liakhovitch (28-3) - A forgettable champion who managed to briefly hold the WBO with 0 successful defences.

4. Henry Akinwade (55-4-1) - Another WBO holder who beat hardly anyone of note. Won his title in an eliminator after Bowe vacated.

5. Herbie Hide (49-4) - Probably better as a cruiser, he won his heavyweight title against the aforementioned Micheal Bentt before losing it immediately to Bowe. Managed to beat TOny Tucker to reclaim the vacant WBO and defend it against a few lowly rated fighters before being knocked out by Vitali Klitschko.

6. Bruce Seldon (40-8 - Beat Tony Tucker for the vacant WBA and defended it once before being knocked out in 1 by Mike Tyson in a bout that became famous for being the scene of Tupac Shakurs murder.

7. Greg Page (58-17-1) - Briefly held the WBA title in the early 80s with a win over Coetzee and made 0 successful defences. Fight with Coetzee was controversial for several reasons. Page was a late replacement for David Bey who refused to fight Coetzee as a stance against apartheid. The fight itself would be controversial also as Page scored an 8th round KO in a round that went 48 seconds over the 3 minutes due to poor timekeeping.

8. Haseem Rahman (57-7-2) - Considered leaving him off the list due to his win over Lennox Lewis but his record overall reads with losses to the whos who of heavyweight alphabet champs of the 90s/00s. Losses to Ruiz x 2, Maskaev x 2, Tua x 2 and a draw and NC with Toney are probably enough to include him.

9. Oleg Maskaev (43-7) - a strangely inconsistent fighter, he nonetheless has to go down as one of the worst to hold a title. Beat Hasim Rahman for the WBC title only to lose it to Samuel Peter soon after.

10. John Ruiz (44-9-1) - Another veteran of the alphabet scence and WBA favourite, he may well have had more title shots than any other fighter in history and managed to hold the WBA on a couple of occaisions, notably beating Evander Holyfield in a split trilogy.Retired recently after defeat to David Haye.

Just missed out:

Primo Carnera
Nikolay Valuev
Mike Weaver
Leon Spinks
John Tate

Greg Page could have been so much more. Glimpses of a really good heavyweight.

Now all we need is to wait for Azania to turn up and mention Marciano.

You're being harsh on Carnera, beat the likes of Uzcudun, Sharkey& Loughran & Shaaf

Remove him from the list, because that's just plain wrong and being honest - stupid.

I think Carnera deserves to be up there. Not only was he poor, but he also had the rather shady element of his mob connection hanging over the legitimacy of many of his bouts.

Do you have any proof that his run as champ (and wins) were the result of mob involvement?

In black and white you don't have any, and his record is definately not one i'd consider worthy of getting near such a list. And i'm pretty sure 95% of sensible people would agree with me.

If Valuev and Ruiz are top 15, why isn't Haye there?

Serious question...

wow_junky wrote:If Valuev and Ruiz are top 15, why isn't Haye there?

Serious question...

Because he beat them?

Beating 2 of the worst champions, 1 when he was aged 50000 and the other he scraped past isn't exactly a stunning resume.

Look at Rahman, at least he has wins over Lewis, Sanders and a couple of decent contenders, yet he comes in at number 8.

coxy0001 wrote:Do you have any proof that his run as champ (and wins) were the result of mob involvement?

In black and white you don't have any, and his record is definately not one i'd consider worthy of getting near such a list. And i'm pretty sure 95% of sensible people would agree with me.

No proof no, but I dont need one to have an opinion on it. The fact he was controlled by mob guys, the enormous speculation and many of his opponents having to claim they were not paid to take a dive I feel is all worthy of consideration. Even Sharkeys wife suggested he had taken a dive after Sharkey had died. Most reports indicated Sharkey had easily beaten Carnera the previous year and were at a loss to explain why he was so lacklustre in the second bout. Smoke and fire etc.

I dont see his record as being particularly much better than the likes of Ruiz or Valuev for instance even without the mob element.

wow_junky wrote:Beating 2 of the worst champions, 1 when he was aged 50000 and the other he scraped past isn't exactly a stunning resume.

Look at Rahman, at least he has wins over Lewis, Sanders and a couple of decent contenders, yet he comes in at number 8.

Well I suppose I am allowing a certain amount of subjectivity. Haye is a more talented fighter in my opinion than the likes of Rahman and the others on the list. His record at heavyweight is not specacular for sure but I suppose I am confident in his abilities.

The likes of Roy Jones for instnce only has a singular win at heavyweight over Ruiz but he isnt included because he displayed his obvious talents elsewhere. Haye is similar. If you are talking pure title reigns then the list might look a bit different but I would be pretty confident that Haye is more talented than anyone on it and wins over Ruiz and Valuev are probably just about good enough on their own to keep him off it.

Fair enough Manos

Would you re-consider if Haye were to lose, and lose badly, against Wlad, and then retire?

You're basing your view on rumours, and that's about me done on this article in that case.

Coxy,

Because you've never let a rumour in boxing affect your opinion...?

wow_junky wrote:Fair enough Manos

Would you re-consider if Haye were to lose, and lose badly, against Wlad, and then retire?

I still dont think I could find a spot for him in the top ten. He would have to lose to a really mediocre opponent for me to consider him I think. If he were to lose to say a Chagaev or a Peter then I would reconsider but as hes going to into this fight with Klitscho as an underdog anyway against the top heavy I would cut him some slack.

Guys like Rahman had a few good results but also consistently lost to mediocrity which is why hes in there. Haye hasnt done that and Wlad is an elite heavy so even if he does lose I would keep him off the list.

wow_j

I've never let it effect an overall ranking. Claiming people took dives etc is a bit wishy washy as nothing has ever been proven.

Guess the mob were so involved that Baer was told not to deck him. Which is why he put him down 11 times.

As before, i'm not spending any more time on this as having him in this silly top 10 is beyond something i can't be arseed to debate.

You realise he isn't in the top 10?

Coxy,

Alright - maybe you could give your opinion on the rest of the list then? You shouldn't let 1 difference of opinions affect the whole article... there's plenty more in it to be discussed

Manos

How would your list look if you restricted it to the worst lineal/unified champs?

wow_junky wrote:Coxy,

Alright - maybe you could give your opinion on the rest of the list then? You shouldn't let 1 difference of opinions affect the whole article... there's plenty more in it to be discussed

Manos

How would your list look if you restricted it to the worst lineal/unified champs?

Hmmm, thats a thinker. The lineality has probably got lost at various points in history

I suppose in no particular order I would have:

Carnera
Braddock
Hart
Douglas
Rahman
Moorer (does he count?)
Johnasson
Sharkey
Spinks
Burns

I may have missed out an obvious one or two there though.

Shannon Briggs was a lineal champ.

How did Briggs become lineal?

Once Lewis retired I would have thought there was no lineality?

manos de piedra wrote:How did Briggs become lineal?

Once Lewis retired I would have thought there was no lineality?

He beat Foreman.

Lewis won the 'lineal' title from Briggs.

In all fairness Manos once Jeffries retired the whole lineal thing ended, I believe it was all sort of dug up a few years ago to legitimise Foreman's reign and so if you bought this guess you have to consider Briggs lineal as he beat Foreman

Well Briggs would certainly be a contender then. Just remembered Willard aswell which would have a claim.

To be fair Valuev defended his title quite a few times and I know he was just a really really really big guy he wasn't THAT bad and could pose problems to a lot of HW's that don't have speed.

I'd put in Haye - drop Page.

Still I guess we'd better wait until he's KlitchKO'D.

fearlessBamber wrote:I'd put in Haye - drop Page.

Still I guess we'd better wait until he's KlitchKO'D.

If Haye doesn't beat Wlad and retires in October he would be right up that list for me.

If Haye doesn't beat Wlad and retires in October he would be right up that list for me.

I can't see how any other conclusion could be reached.