The Greatest Heavyweight. My All Time Top Twenty

First topic message reminder :

Been a while since we did one of these so thought it might be worth revisiting our oft debated topic of the top heavyweights. Just for variety and to push myself a bit I have broken with tradition and not stopped once I reached ten. Today you get a full top twenty. As tends to be the trend I have not included Sullivan, despite him generally being considered the first champion under Queensbury rules as most of his significant fights were under London Ring Rules it seems unfair to include him as he would either feature far lower than his talents deserve or far higher than his record under Queensbury rules warrants.
 
Putting this together was a lot harder than I imagined. I tend to have a solid seven or eight fighters I feel confident deserve to feature in the top ten and then around another six or seven fighting it out to make up the top ten. Splitting them or deciding who warrants to make up the top ten is nigh on impossible. All of them tend to have some significant highs in their career, i.e Tunney beating Dempsey twice, but some serious lows i.e Lewis getting sparked by Rahman.  Also once you get past those deciding who should fill out the top twenty is similarly a bit tricky. Despite being the flagship division the talent pool is not always that deep at heavy. Seems odd to do a top twenty for 120 years of the division where guys who either have one or two defences to their name or none whatsoever warrant genuine consideration.  Also saying one guy’s one defence is better than another guy’s one defence does somewhat feel like an exercise in sorting out who is the tallest dwarf.

1 Ali
2 Louis
3 Johnson
4 Jeffries
5 Holmes
6 Dempsey
7 Foreman
8 Frazier
9 Lewis
10 Marciano
11 Holyfield
12 Tyson
13 Tunney
14 Liston
15 W Klitschko
16 Charles
17 Walcott
18 Wills
19 Langford
20 Corbett

Pick pre war as well.

Wills, Langford, Jackson, Jeanette, McVey, Godfrey it's not a stretch to see them all giving Dempsey hell if light heavyweight John Lester Johnson was able to smash in two ribs of the the 21 year old Jack in New York in 1916? I think any of the above could definitely be in with a good shout of beating Willard if you could transport them into that bout known as Massacre in the Sun

Greatest heavyweight never to win the title (or a title)?

Zora Folley, Sam Langford, Jerry Quarry, Ron Lyle, Harry Wills and Ike Ibeabuchi would be my first picks (with Quarry or Lyle the best of that lot). Of course, if you include fighters who only won a title (rather than the full championship) then you'd be also looking at the likes of Witherspoon and Norton.

hazharrison wrote:Greatest heavyweight never to win the title (or a title)?

Zora Folley, Sam Langford, Jerry Quarry, Ron Lyle, Harry Wills and Ike Ibeabuchi would be my first picks (with Quarry or Lyle the best of that lot). Of course, if you include fighters who only won a title (rather than the full championship) then you'd be also looking at the likes of Witherspoon and Norton.

A title. If it was the title, I think Ken Norton would be a very good shout.

Funny how Dempsey is seen as one of the greatest champs ever. He wouldn't of beat some of the black challengers of his time.

Racism stinks and it ruined the early part of heavyweight history.

AdamT wrote:

hazharrison wrote:Greatest heavyweight never to win the title (or a title)?

Zora Folley, Sam Langford, Jerry Quarry, Ron Lyle, Harry Wills and Ike Ibeabuchi would be my first picks (with Quarry or Lyle the best of that lot). Of course, if you include fighters who only won a title (rather than the full championship) then you'd be also looking at the likes of Witherspoon and Norton.

A title. If it was the title, I think Ken Norton would be a very good shout.

Funny how Dempsey is seen as one of the greatest champs ever. He wouldn't of beat some of the black challengers of his time.

Racism stinks and it ruined the early part of heavyweight history.

Jimmy Young is worth a shout, also. Arguably beat Ali and retired Foreman.

We don't know that Dempsey wouldn't have beaten the likes of Wills but that is one of the great "if only" fights in heavyweight history, along with the likes of Lewis vs Bowe and Holyfield vs Tyson c1991.

AdamT wrote:

hazharrison wrote:Greatest heavyweight never to win the title (or a title)?

Zora Folley, Sam Langford, Jerry Quarry, Ron Lyle, Harry Wills and Ike Ibeabuchi would be my first picks (with Quarry or Lyle the best of that lot). Of course, if you include fighters who only won a title (rather than the full championship) then you'd be also looking at the likes of Witherspoon and Norton.

A title. If it was the title, I think Ken Norton would be a very good shout.

Funny how Dempsey is seen as one of the greatest champs ever. He wouldn't of beat some of the black challengers of his time.

Racism stinks and it ruined the early part of heavyweight history.

You mean Harry Wills might have beaten him.

Yeah it's who I mean. Wasn't too sure if there were many others. I guess there might of been.

hazharrison wrote:Greatest heavyweight never to win the title (or a title)?

Zora Folley, Sam Langford, Jerry Quarry, Ron Lyle, Harry Wills and Ike Ibeabuchi would be my first picks (with Quarry or Lyle the best of that lot). Of course, if you include fighters who only won a title (rather than the full championship) then you'd be also looking at the likes of Witherspoon and Norton.

Peter Jackson should top that list. Sully ran like the sniveling coward he was in the knowledge that Jackson would have beaten him. Corbett is another who wanted no part of Jackson after he won the title. Tremendous fighter...and a bloody nice bloke to boot.

AdamT wrote:Yeah it's who I mean. Wasn't too sure if there were many others.  I guess there might of been.

What's that comment based on then Adam, you made quite a forceful statement that he would have lost to numerous black challengers yet don't know who they are.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Joe Jeannette is far too small to have a chance against Wlad.

Look at some of the people who beat Wlad with respect to them they're not in Jeanette's league there you go again showing a lack of comprehension of the history of the heavyweight division the harder they fall

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

AdamT wrote:Yeah it's who I mean. Wasn't too sure if there were many others.  I guess there might of been.

What's that comment based on then Adam, you made quite a forceful statement that he would have lost to numerous black challengers yet don't know who they are.

Lucky guess Hammer. Don't care less about knowing everything that happened 100 years ago. I can name most Heavy champs and some of their main fights. I am happy enough with that.

My knowledge is spread of many different things.

Herman Jaeger wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Joe Jeannette is far too small to have a chance against Wlad.

Look at some of the people who beat Wlad with respect to them they're not in Jeanette's league there you go again showing a lack of comprehension of the history of the heavyweight division the harder they fall

You've seen a lot of Jeanette's fights then I presume Herman or did his name just pop up when you were looking at Langford's Wikipedia page?

Wlad has been beaten by big men not mere 180lbers so class doesn't even come into it, times have changed and the Heavyweights have got a lot bigger, at 5'10 with a 74" inch reach he wouldn't stand a chance.

DAVE667 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:Greatest heavyweight never to win the title (or a title)?

Zora Folley, Sam Langford, Jerry Quarry, Ron Lyle, Harry Wills and Ike Ibeabuchi would be my first picks (with Quarry or Lyle the best of that lot). Of course, if you include fighters who only won a title (rather than the full championship) then you'd be also looking at the likes of Witherspoon and Norton.

Peter Jackson should top that list. Sully ran like the sniveling coward he was in the knowledge that Jackson would have beaten him. Corbett is another who wanted no part of Jackson after he won the title. Tremendous fighter...and a bloody nice bloke to boot.

dave's list of greatest fighter's not to be heavyweight champ:
Peter Jackson
P Jackson
Jackson, P
The Jackson 5

Never really saw the fuss about Folley or Quarry personally - maybe watching Ali toy with them both colours that - though Folley was well past his sell-by then. Quarry did have some good wins though, with some disappointing defeats, to be fair - and a near miss against ellis for the title in the WBA 'tournament' - with a broken back apparently... tough fcuker.

You can maybe chuck quarry victim, shavers in from that era too. Not a great fighter, but had his world title shots come against people with lesser talents and lesser chins/recovery powers than ali and holmes he'd have a banger's chance against most.

Langford may be the best middleweight who fought heavyweights, to not be a heavyweight champion!

Jeanette weighed in at up to 205 give him another 20 with today's diet and nutrition so I think he can spot Wlad the weight and give him a hiding too tough too slippery one of the great heavyweights of the beginning of the twentieth century:


http://www.theboxingglove.com/2016/07/on-this-day-joe-jeanette-ironman.html?m=1

Herman Jaeger wrote:Jeanette weighed in at up to 205 give him another 20 with today's diet and nutrition so I think he can spot Wlad the weight and give him a hiding too tough too slippery one of the great heavyweights of the beginning of the twentieth century:


http://www.theboxingglove.com/2016/07/on-this-day-joe-jeanette-ironman.html?m=1

The thing is, you can only rate someone from their own time.

If Tyson fought 185-190 lbs heavies, what would happen?? He would smash them to pieces, no matter how talented they were.

With modern training and other things, then perhaps olden time fighters would win.

Herman Jaeger wrote:Jeanette weighed in at up to 205 give him another 20 with today's diet and nutrition so I think he can spot Wlad the weight and give him a hiding too tough too slippery one of the great heavyweights of the beginning of the twentieth century:


http://www.theboxingglove.com/2016/07/on-this-day-joe-jeanette-ironman.html?m=1

Again what fights of his have you seen to base him being too slippery on?

He was on the most part a 185-195lb fighter and unfortunately you can't just add weight to somebody to suit your argument, i'll give Wlad a better chin while we're at it.

Being a top Heavyweight of the 1910' and 1920's doesn't mean you can compete with the behemoths that came after, I also don't see his struggles with Langford being a positive thing, somebody so good shouldn't be struggling with such a small man no matter how good they are. It's the same for Jeffries, the fact he survived a Fitzsimmons onslaught isn't a positive thing, it shouldn't have happened in the first place.

His struggles with Langford have you any idea how good Langford was some rate him as highly as number two pound for pound any weight you really are a clueless one aren't you?

That generation of negro heavyweights are head and shoulders above Wlad and his a golden era for the heavyweight division tragedy only Johnson was allowed to fight for the title

Herman Jaeger wrote:His struggles with Langford have you any idea how good Langford was some rate him as highly as number two pound for pound any weight you really are a clueless one aren't you?

That generation of negro heavyweights are head and shoulders above Wlad and his a golden era for the heavyweight division tragedy only Johnson was allowed to fight for the title

Langford is a pound for pound great not a Heavyweight great, there is a very clear distinction between the two, you wouldn't laud Joe Louis for beating Ray Robinson would you because size does matter.

What are you basing that second paragraph on Herman? A recently discovered knowledge that these boxers in fact existed and are now on a power trip trying to show off your knowledge.

You are full blown mate

Wlad's generation better than that quartet of negro heavyweights you're so clueless I honestly couldn't be bothered arguing with you

Well if size matters, then why is Louis even in second spot? Lewis would take his head of, as would Bowe and Tyson etc, etc.

Herman Jaeger wrote:You are full blown mate

Wlad's generation better than that quartet of negro heavyweights you're so clueless I honestly couldn't be bothered arguing with you

You come out with statements and have nothing to back them up with then start being antagonistic when you realise you can't quantify or argue your point.

AdamT wrote:Well if size matters, then why is Louis even in second spot? Lewis would take his head of, as would Bowe and Tyson etc, etc.

Head to heads and rankings are mutually exclusive are they, Wlad most probably makes mincemeat of Dempsey and Marciano but is behind both.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Herman Jaeger wrote:You are full blown mate

Wlad's generation better than that quartet of negro heavyweights you're so clueless I honestly couldn't be bothered arguing with you

You come out with statements and have nothing to back them up with then start being antagonistic when you realise you can't quantify or argue your point.

You are full blown mate that's all I've got to say don't start thinking Langford wasn't a force at heavy either not a top ten heavy but would beat a lot of good men at the weight

You have no substance to your argument then, I may as well say that Robinson beats Dempsey easily and leave it at that then get the hump when anybody questions how or why I came to that conclusion.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

AdamT wrote:Well if size matters, then why is Louis even in second spot? Lewis would take his head of, as would Bowe and Tyson etc, etc.

Head to heads and rankings are mutually exclusive are they, Wlad most probably makes mincemeat of Dempsey and Marciano but is behind both.

Wlad can beat the boxers by virtue of his size i.e. Charles and Walcott but the punchers of the caliber of Dempsey and Marciano put the sh1ts up Wlad even before the opening bell they know and he knows about his chin smash his ribs up and the arms will drop

Herman Jaeger wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

AdamT wrote:Well if size matters, then why is Louis even in second spot? Lewis would take his head of, as would Bowe and Tyson etc, etc.

Head to heads and rankings are mutually exclusive are they, Wlad most probably makes mincemeat of Dempsey and Marciano but is behind both.

Wlad can beat the boxers by virtue of his size i.e. Charles and Walcott but the punchers of the calibration of Dempsey and Marciano put the sh1ts up Wlad even before the opening bell they know and he knows about his chin smash his ribs up and the arms will drop

I doubt he's worried by anyone he outweighs by over 50lbs to be honest, neither of them would get past his jab.

Dempsey would weave his way inside Wlad with aplomb that's what he was known for being able to get inside he was devastating at it obsession with weight again it's the heavyweight division mate optimum is about the 220-225 mark above that and speed and sharpness are lost forfeited

Dempsey would not beat a big athletic Wlad. No way Jose!!

Herman Jaeger wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

AdamT wrote:Well if size matters, then why is Louis even in second spot? Lewis would take his head of, as would Bowe and Tyson etc, etc.

Head to heads and rankings are mutually exclusive are they, Wlad most probably makes mincemeat of Dempsey and Marciano but is behind both.

Wlad can beat the boxers by virtue of his size i.e. Charles and Walcott but the punchers of the caliber of Dempsey and Marciano put the sh1ts up Wlad even before the opening bell they know and he knows about his chin smash his ribs up and the arms will drop

There's not a single fighter who has been able to successfully target Wlad's ribcage despite your obvious and sensible theory. As Hammers says, most have failed to get past the jab, those that have managed to get inside get grabbed or leaned on to stop them working. It's a sound enough theory, Herman but not one that anyone's been able to employ with any success and I'd wager that both Dempsey and Marciano would find it just as difficult as anyone Wlad's faced to date.

Dempsey would be about 215-220 in today's money he does a Willard on Wlad imo

AdamT wrote:Dempsey would not beat a big athletic Wlad. No way Jose!!

It wouldn't even be a contest but his uncontrolled aggression would apparently see him get past that jab with ease, suppose he does the same to Lennox Lewis too.

No one's employed it Dave because he's fought such garbage never fought a smallish dynamite puncher either to prove the theory

Herman Jaeger wrote:Dempsey would be about 215-220 in today's money he does a Willard on Wlad imo

He's not the Jack Dempsey we know then is he and thus becomes an unquantifiable variable.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

AdamT wrote:Dempsey would not beat a big athletic Wlad. No way Jose!!

It wouldn't even be a contest but his uncontrolled aggression would apparently see him get past that jab with ease, suppose he does the same to Lennox Lewis too.

Can't see many referees allowing Dempsey to play fast and loose with the rules either which again swings the contest in Wlad's favour

Some serious under rating of Dempsey going on today the man was dynamite

He was dynamite in his time, it is no longer the 1920's, Fitzsimmons was a freak of nature in the 1890's but wouldn't stand a chance in todays boxing.

Herman Jaeger wrote:Some serious under rating of Dempsey going on today the man was dynamite

Not underrating him. A 190lb heavy is not going to beat Wlad. If Dempsey were around now, maybe he would be bigger and better. We don't know, so can only judge them on what size they were.

Herman Jaeger wrote:No one's employed it Dave because he's fought such garbage never fought a smallish dynamite puncher either to prove the theory

Wlad never fought a small dynamite puncher because they and their team knew they had no way of winning. Tua couldn't get near Lewis and Dempsey wouldn't anywhere near a defensively sound Wlad.

If we're downplaying Wlads opposition then who exactly did Dempsey beat for such high praise?

Dempsey was a product of his time.....Louis/Charles/Marciano were a product of theirs.......

All lose to Wlad........

Liston onwards the heavy division is a more level playing field with today....

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Dempsey was a product of his time.....Louis/Charles/Marciano were a product of theirs.......

All lose to Wlad........

Liston onwards the heavy division is a more level playing field with today....

Smart quote, but I still think the biggest guys today have a size advantage.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one when Dempsey takes out Wlad in two rounds I'd love to see the look on your faces. Awe shock bewilderment at your own stupidity see you lot in heaven

Herman Jaeger wrote:We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one when Dempsey takes out Wlad in two rounds I'd love to see the look on your faces. Awe shock bewilderment at your own stupidity see you lot in heaven

Behave yourself.......

Herman Jaeger wrote:We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one when Dempsey takes out Wlad in two rounds I'd love to see the look on your faces. Awe shock bewilderment at your own stupidity see you lot in heaven

Dempsey would struggle with Roy Jones at Heavyweight, never mind a giant. This isn't Jess Willard. 6'6 athletic specimen, with a great defence and jab. The fact he is scared of getting hit, makes it even more unlikely wee Jack can even hit him.

Herman Jaeger wrote:We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one when Dempsey takes out Wlad in two rounds I'd love to see the look on your faces. Awe shock bewilderment at your own stupidity see you lot in heaven

Classy as always, it's remarkable that you call others clueless.

When puncher and chin collide the chin comes off second best Wlad beaten by Dempsey before he even steps between the ropes Wlad can protect his chin against a lesser puncher but not against one of the game's greatest ever hitters

But Dempsey wouldn't be the puncher. Wlad would!

It's a different time. Punchers now, most likely hit a lot harder than 80-100 years ago.

Wlad would just grab and lean on him. Bully him with the jab. Dempsey was most likely better for his time, but it's absurd to think he could beat the monster heavyweights now. It's like a different division.

As for Marciano he'd make a butcher's block out of Wlad's body even Derrick who's not a massive puncher had his brother on the back foot with the right hand downstairs

Herman are you trolling??

AdamT wrote:But Dempsey wouldn't be the puncher. Wlad would!

It's a different time. Punchers now, most likely hit a lot harder than 80-100 years ago.

Wlad would just grab and lean on him. Bully him with the jab. Dempsey was most likely better for his time, but it's absurd to think he could beat the monster heavyweights now. It's like a different division.

I'm starting to think Herman is a comedy account.

Wlad is one of a select few Heavweight champions to have 50 KO's to his name but we won't bother to acknowledge his power, jab or anything else.