Top ten heavyweight list on Yahoo

[Island_Warrior***]

I think Tyson could be replaced with Holyfield on that list. Not bad.

 

[lugubriousduck]

I have Tyson floating around the top 20. Not top 10.

 

[MongoFett]

For their era its probably joe for the greatest HW. But as for who would come out on top if all of them faught each other at their very best? I see Foreman beating every one of them if he fought smart. (in the Ali fight he was fighting angry/dumb and gassed out - in a rematch i think Foreman would have killed Ali)

 

[Fat Abbot]

How about comparable opponents, ie...who fought and defeated the tougher opponents. How about win/loss ratio, number of KO's, nature of losses etc etc.....

Follow up to the readers poll, with peoples opinions about the list.

http://sports.yahoo.com/box/news;_y...ug=ki-boxingmailbag040108&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

He destroyed Norton and a fading frazier impressively. His other 2 wins of note weren't that impressive.

Joe Louis's KO's of Baer and Schmelling were just as impressive as Foremans over Norton and vboth were just as good, if not slightly better fighters.

Destroying Frazsier was impressive, but Joe never beat a great puncher. Frazier is an easy style matchup for a Louis, Tyson, Liston or a Foreman. Joes KO over Walcott imo was more impressive since Jioe was not only past it at the time, but the fight was a bad style matchup for him. Walcott probably would have beaten Foreman.

Foreman couldn't deal with slick boxers, Walcott probably would have beaten him. So would a lot of good boxers. An old Goyo peralta nerrly decisioned George, the guy was lost if you stuck a jab in his face.

Foreman was too one dimensional to be number 2 on a who beats who scenario and way too unaccomplished to be near the top of the rankings,the only had 2 title defenses and only beat 3 fighters that were very good or better.

Tyson should definitely be ranked be ranked higher than Dempsey, Frazier and Tunney, Tyson accomplished more than Tunney by a mile, accomplished more than Dempsey and beast much better fighters than 2 of them did combined at hw. Frazier beat Ali which was nice, but so didn Nortobn and beyond that Tyson had a much longer title reign with a much better list of wins overall than Fraziers. Tyson did a lot more and beat way more very good fighters than Foeman did.

Tyson accomplished a lot in a short time, 10 wins in title fights, all 3 key titlebelts won in about a years time, the lineal title, 9 title defenses, 8 wins over past current or future world champs, youngest hw champion ever, KOing all but 4 of his opponents, becoming the undisputed hampion.. Doing all that in a careeer is amazing. Doing it in 3 years is what made him a phenom.

Top 10?

Louis
Holmes
Ali
Tyson
Marciano
Johnson
Dempsey
Charles
Liston
Lewis

the 11 spot is a toughy.....Tunney, Spinks, Holyfield, Foreman or Frazier. Take your pick. I'd take Spinks over all those guys except Frazier, plus he was much more versatile than any of these fighters apart from unney who Spinks had 25lbs on and hit much harder than. So probably him.

 

[Jerome_1]

He destroyed Norton and a fading frazier impressively. His other 2 wins of note weren't that impressive.

Joe Louis's KO's of Baer and Schmelling were just as impressive as Foremans over Norton and vboth were just as good, if not slightly better fighters.

Destroying Frazsier was impressive, but Joe never beat a great puncher. Frazier is an easy style matchup for a Louis, Tyson, Liston or a Foreman. Joes KO over Walcott imo was more impressive since Jioe was not only past it at the time, but the fight was a bad style matchup for him. Walcott probably would have beaten Foreman.

Foreman couldn't deal with slick boxers, Walcott probably would have beaten him. So would a lot of good boxers. An old Goyo peralta nerrly decisioned George, the guy was lost if you stuck a jab in his face.

Foreman was too one dimensional to be number 2 on a who beats who scenario and way too unaccomplished to be near the top of the rankings,the only had 2 title defenses and only beat 3 fighters that were very good or better.

Tyson should definitely be ranked be ranked higher than Dempsey, Frazier and Tunney, Tyson accomplished more than Tunney by a mile, accomplished more than Dempsey and beast much better fighters than 2 of them did combined at hw. Frazier beat Ali which was nice, but so didn Nortobn and beyond that Tyson had a much longer title reign with a much better list of wins overall than Fraziers. Tyson did a lot more and beat way more very good fighters than Foeman did.

Tyson accomplished a lot in a short time, 10 wins in title fights, all 3 key titlebelts won in about a years time, the lineal title, 9 title defenses, 8 wins over past current or future world champs, youngest hw champion ever, KOing all but 4 of his opponents, becoming the undisputed hampion.. Doing all that in a careeer is amazing. Doing it in 3 years is what made him a phenom.

Top 10?

Louis
Holmes
Ali
Tyson
Marciano
Johnson
Dempsey
Charles
Liston
Lewis

the 11 spot is a toughy.....Tunney, Spinks, Holyfield, Foreman or Frazier. Take your pick. I'd take Spinks over all those guys except Frazier, plus he was much more versatile than any of these fighters apart from unney who Spinks had 25lbs on and hit much harder than. So probably him.

Appreciate the time you took out for your explanation. I'm not as familiar with the heavyweight division before the Ali, Frazier and Norton era.

Why do you think the Louis victories over Baer and Schmelling were just as impressive than Foremans record against Frazier, and Norton?

Would you rank Frazier and Norton above Baer and Schmelling? Also Foreman destroyed Frazier twice and never lost to either of them.

You also said Foreman beat a fading Frazier, do you think Lennox Lewis beat a well past their primes Tyson and Holyfield?

 

[Hester65]

I don't see Foreman as top 3, more like top 6 or 7...

Joe Louis and Ali are 1-2, I like the Rock and Holmes at 3-4, 5-10 Forman, Frazier, Dempsey, Liston, Lewis...

 

[natural73192]

There is a thread about a boxing bracket with 8 of these guys in it.

 

[mschatz]

Fat Abbot, I agree with Tyson possibly accomplishing more than Tunney, but Dempsey? C'mon on...

 

[Sir. Crocodile**]

He destroyed Norton and a fading frazier impressively. His other 2 wins of note weren't that impressive.

Joe Louis's KO's of Baer and Schmelling were just as impressive as Foremans over Norton and vboth were just as good, if not slightly better fighters.

Destroying Frazsier was impressive, but Joe never beat a great puncher. Frazier is an easy style matchup for a Louis, Tyson, Liston or a Foreman. Joes KO over Walcott imo was more impressive since Jioe was not only past it at the time, but the fight was a bad style matchup for him. Walcott probably would have beaten Foreman.

Foreman couldn't deal with slick boxers, Walcott probably would have beaten him. So would a lot of good boxers. An old Goyo peralta nerrly decisioned George, the guy was lost if you stuck a jab in his face.

Foreman was too one dimensional to be number 2 on a who beats who scenario and way too unaccomplished to be near the top of the rankings,the only had 2 title defenses and only beat 3 fighters that were very good or better.

Tyson should definitely be ranked be ranked higher than Dempsey, Frazier and Tunney, Tyson accomplished more than Tunney by a mile, accomplished more than Dempsey and beast much better fighters than 2 of them did combined at hw. Frazier beat Ali which was nice, but so didn Nortobn and beyond that Tyson had a much longer title reign with a much better list of wins overall than Fraziers. Tyson did a lot more and beat way more very good fighters than Foeman did.

Tyson accomplished a lot in a short time, 10 wins in title fights, all 3 key titlebelts won in about a years time, the lineal title, 9 title defenses, 8 wins over past current or future world champs, youngest hw champion ever, KOing all but 4 of his opponents, becoming the undisputed hampion.. Doing all that in a careeer is amazing. Doing it in 3 years is what made him a phenom.

Top 10?

Louis
Holmes
Ali
Tyson
Marciano
Johnson
Dempsey
Charles
Liston
Lewis

the 11 spot is a toughy.....Tunney, Spinks, Holyfield, Foreman or Frazier. Take your pick. I'd take Spinks over all those guys except Frazier, plus he was much more versatile than any of these fighters apart from unney who Spinks had 25lbs on and hit much harder than. So probably him.

Great post and I agree, Tyson doesnt get enough credit. Being the youngest HW champion ever is a feat of it's own. And I pretty much agree with your list. Except I would have ALI ahead of Holmes

 

[Bonos]

1/2. Muhammad Ali
1/2. Joe Louis
3. Larry Holmes
4. George Foreman
5. Rocky Marciano
6. Lennox Lewis
7. Jack Johnson
8. Joe Frazier
9. Evander Holyfield
10. Jack Dempsey (but can be as low as 13th)


Mike Tyson
Sonny Liston
Gene Tunney
James J. Jeffries
Ezzard Charles

 

[vegasmoose]

After all these years of seeing Ali at the top of pretty much every top 10 list, I still don't see it.

Top 10 sure. #1? No.

IMO lennox lewis should be #1 some might not agree but its all opinions anyways

 

[Seano]

IMO lennox lewis should be #1 some might not agree but its all opinions anyways

Lewis fought after 1975 so you aren't allowed to count him as a top HW.

A case could be made. He did beat every opponent he ever fought. He did beat Tyson and Holyfield. He was the last true HW champion.

 

[KORUPT xLOxx]

Somebody said they can't see Ali being no. 1 well I just can't see Joe Louis being no.1 myself (sorry bomber lol) Just tell me what all time greats he beat that were in there prime? Schemeling (reach) Conn (wrong weight class) Baer (not an all time great in my book). Walcott was one if not the best victory over a top fighter. First fight he lost imo and the second one obviously a KO. However, beating those fighers imo can never put him past Ali with his Liston, Foreman, Frazier, Norton, Patterson etc. Granted Joe deserves a lot of credit for defending his belt time after time and certainly that is why I believe he's no. 2-3. Number 1 though I just don't see it.