May 1973 ~ 'Heavyweight Rankings'

May 1973

World Champion
*** George Foreman

#1 - Joe Frazier
#2 - Ken Norton
#3 - Muhammad Ali
#4 - Ernie Terrell
#5 - Jimmy Ellis
#6 - Jerry Quarry
#7 - Ron Lyle
#8 - Oscar Bonavena
#9 - Jose 'King' Roman
#10 - Joe Bugner
#11 - Gregorio Peralta
#12 - Mac Foster
#13 - Jose Luis Garcia
#14 - Earnie Shavers
#15 - Giuseppe 'Bepi' Ros
#16 - Randy Neumann
#17 - 'Irish Pat' Duncan
#18 - Larry Middleton
#19 - Danny McAlinden
#20 - Chuck Wepner
#21 - Terry Hinke
#22 - Ron Stander
#23 - Wendell 'Fig' Newton
#24 - Jack O'Halloran
#25 - Henry Clark
#26 - Alvin 'Blue' Lewis
#27 - Boone Kirkman
#28 - Mario Baruzzi
#29 - Rudi Lubbers
#30 - Miguel Angel Paez

May 1, 1973

Earnie Shavers

Earnie {Age; 27 years, 8 months}

Had an impressive record of > 43-2-0 with {42 KO's}.

But the log was loaded up with many 'Third-Rate' fighters, and smallish
Heavyweights.

The best opponents on Earnie's list were >

* Augst 26, 1972 ......... W Dec 10 .... Vicente Rondon ~ 37-7-1 {21 KO's} ~ 191 lbs.
* September 22, 1971 .. KO 5 ........... 'Irish Pat' Duncan ~ 19-3-1 {15 KO's} ~ 203 lbs.
* June 10, 1971 ........... KO 10 ......... Chuck Leslie ~ 35-21-6 {7 KO's} ~ 185 lbs.
* March 3, 1971 ........... KO 1 ........... Steve 'Iceman' Carter ~ 14-2-0 {7 KO's} ~ 199 lbs.


Jimmy Ellis >
"I have seen Earnie fight 3-Times. I am not impressed. He has no clue on how to box.
If I ever got in the Ring with him, I'd box his ears off."

Bugner was a waste of space and time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

May 1973

World Champion
*** George Foreman

#1 - Joe Frazier
#2 - Ken Norton
#3 - Muhammad Ali
#4 - Ernie Terrell
#5 - Jimmy Ellis
#6 - Jerry Quarry
#7 - Ron Lyle
#8 - Oscar Bonavena
#9 - Jose 'King' Roman
#10 - Joe Bugner
#11 - Gregorio Peralta
#12 - Mac Foster
#13 - Jose Luis Garcia
#14 - Earnie Shavers
#15 - Giuseppe 'Bepi' Ros
#16 - Randy Neumann
#17 - 'Irish Pat' Duncan
#18 - Larry Middleton
#19 - Danny McAlinden
#20 - Chuck Wepner
#21 - Terry Hinke
#22 - Ron Stander
#23 - Wendell 'Fig' Newton
#24 - Jack O'Halloran
#25 - Henry Clark
#26 - Alvin 'Blue' Lewis
#27 - Boone Kirkman
#28 - Mario Baruzzi
#29 - Rudi Lubbers
#30 - Miguel Angel Paez

---

Joe Bugner warrants a #10 position in May 1973

Joe Bugner one tough somavabitch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Joe Bugner one tough somavabitch

---

Lazy good for nothing slob who did not realise his talent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Joe Bugner one tough somavabitch

---

Lazy good for nothing slob who did not realise his talent.

---

Joe Bugner

A very good Heavyweight, who never over-achieved.

A survivor.

Nobody wanted to fight Earnie Shavers

'Irish' Jerry Quarry originally signed a fight contract in {May 1973} to face Earnie Shavers
@ Madison Square Garden on June 18th.

But, Jerry got a 'stomach flu' and pulled out.

Burl Charity {Trainer for Earnie Shavers}

"We had signed to face '4' previous World Ranked fighters, and they all bowed out for
one reason or another."

"Before Jerry Quarry, we had signed to fight George Chuvalo. But he pulled out 'twice'.
We also had deals with Mac Foster and Ernie Terrell. And they too, backed out."

http://img2.newspapers.com/img/thumb....jpg?cs=604800

the top 10 is pretty durable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

the top 10 is pretty durable.

---

How about the fighters who were just outside the Top 30

* Roy 'Tiger' Williams
* Richard Dunn
* Jeff 'Candy Slim' Merrit
* Pedro Lovell
* Alfredo Mongol Ortiz
* Bunny Johnson
* Jan Lubbers
* Les Stevens


Not a bad group.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

the top 10 is pretty durable.

---

How about the fighters who were just outside the Top 30

* Roy 'Tiger' Williams
* Richard Dunn
* Jeff 'Candy Slim' Merrit
* Pedro Lovell
* Alfredo Mongol Ortiz
* Bunny Johnson
* Jan Lubbers
* Les Stevens


Not a bad group.

---

True! But admit I am familiar with these names more so through boxing forums where members who know the 70's fighters well-have brought these names up and not so much me watching them.

May 1973

Nice to see 'good guy' Ernie Terrell back in the picture.

There was 'chatter' that Ernie would get a Title opportunity at
new Champion - George Foreman.

http://img2.newspapers.com/img/thumb....jpg?cs=604800

May 1973

WBA......................................... Ring Magazine
*** George Foreman .................. George Foreman

#1 - Ken Norton ......................... Joe Frazier
#2 - Muhammad Ali .................... Ken Norton
#3 - Joe Frazier .......................... Muhammad Ali
#4 - Jimmy Ellis .......................... Ernie Terrell
#5 - Jerry Quarry ........................ Jimmy Ellis
#6 - Ron Lyle ............................. Jerry Quarry
#7 - Larry Middleton ................... Ron Lyle
#8 - Jose Luis Garcia .................. Oscar Bonavena
#9 - Joe Bugner ......................... Jose 'King' Roman
#10 Oscar Bonavena .................. Joe Bugner

Dunn was not good at all at the world level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Dunn was not good at all at the world level.

---

Richard Dunn

A 'scrappy' southpaw.

'King Richard' had pretty decent hand-speed and was always in shape.
His awkwardness was a benefit, as he threw punches from every angle.

Far from a good puncher, but he could get your attention at times.

Weakness, was obvious the lack-of-a-chin, and his defense was porous
at times.

He did have about '10' quality wins during his career.

@Bill Paxtom

How about we make another comparison like it's NEVER been made before (by OTNB or "nostalgic" posters to put it nicely)...

Take a look at this snapshot of rankings from 1973..

And then compare it to any snapshot of the Lewis or the Klitschko eras or the current era at ANY time...

The champ was less than 220lbs and a plodding slugger,

A defenceless punchbag Ali was ranked 4th with zero punch of his own.

A 1D poor mans version of Chisora was ranked.

A chinny superheavyweight featherfist bum buster+cruiser-cruncher was ranked,

And a host of other doubtful opponents...

I wonder how that'd fare against todays top rankings ;)

;D

There you go again degrading Foreman as a plodder and Ali as just a punch bag.

You think today's fighters are superior because of their weight.

You are wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

There you go again degrading Foreman as a plodder and Ali as just a punch bag.

You think today's fighters are superior because of their weight.

You are wrong.

---

No I don't, I consider Foreman inferior to todays plodder sluggers, because he was a far lighter, less powerful, slower and less skilled and less defended version of them and he proved himself against far smaller and worse opponents.

I consider Ali inferior to todays skilful opponents because Ali had no punch by comparison and could not defend himself against a punch either, where as today's skilled oppoennts can bend around shots and not get hit often and can counter far quicker.

I consider both inferior to the champ, because of BOTH reasons combined.

They were both smaller, less athletic and less skilled than the average Klitschko opponents overall, let alone Klitschko himself!

I do not mean that they were all 3 of these at once. Foreman might be stronger than some opponents and Ali might be faster or more skilled than some opponents. But the TOTAL PACKAGE of Foreman and Ali was generally LESS than the TOTAL PACKAGE of the average Klitschko opponent (let alone Klitchko himself, again).

My position was quickly summed up by this...

If we took Mormeck from the Klitschko fight, HW Mormeck. Multiple champ, 217lbs, ripped and athletic and strong, 6'1". Good record against modern opponents (which would have been considered HW in Ali's/Foreman's times)--- And Ali and Foreman fought him... And they WON! Then Jean MArc Mormeck, would have been considered the BEST opponent they had ever faced! And he would be held in TESTAMENT to the greatness of the golden era and a proof of the superiority of times past and people would use him as an example of the quality of Ali/Foreman's opponents and laugh how the current era does not produce such fine specimens as Mormeck anymore.

He was more athletic, probably stronger, powerful, faster, more skilled, than basically any opponent either of the 2 (in the 70's) ever faced! And had a better title performance than any of the 2 ever did beat!

But against Wladimir, he was the worst mismatched opponent in recent memory! Despite being the same weight and ripped nearly as prime George Foreman, and bigger than Ali, Frazier and Norton except more skilled and athletic than any, Mormeck was considered grossly undersized and unable to compete.

You can compare the greatness of Ali and Foreman if you like but you cannot compare such shocking boxers (as they would be described these days) to modern professional HW boxers in a direct sense. It's comparing apples to oranges, they don't add up.

Jose 'King' Roman

In 1973, was proclaimed to have the 'fastest hands' in the Heavyweight Division.

Al Braveram said so............... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

There you go again degrading Foreman as a plodder and Ali as just a punch bag.

You think today's fighters are superior because of their weight.

You are wrong.

---

No I don't, I consider Foreman inferior to todays plodder sluggers, because he was a far lighter, less powerful, slower and less skilled and less defended version of them and he proved himself against far smaller and worse opponents.

I consider Ali inferior to todays skilful opponents because Ali had no punch by comparison and could not defend himself against a punch either, where as today's skilled oppoennts can bend around shots and not get hit often and can counter far quicker.

I consider both inferior to the champ, because of BOTH reasons combined.

They were both smaller, less athletic and less skilled than the average Klitschko opponents overall, let alone Klitschko himself!

I do not mean that they were all 3 of these at once. Foreman might be stronger than some opponents and Ali might be faster or more skilled than some opponents. But the TOTAL PACKAGE of Foreman and Ali was generally LESS than the TOTAL PACKAGE of the average Klitschko opponent (let alone Klitchko himself, again).

---

Today's heavyweights are not more athletic, just because they weigh more. In fact a lot of them have poor technical skills that they should take up another profession.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Jose 'King' Roman

In 1973, was proclaimed to have the 'fastest hands' in the Heavyweight Division.

Al Braveram said so............... ;)

---

@Master

CASE IN POINT..

Here is the fight Foreman vs Roman...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRHeelzr2-Q

This is a SHOCKING display of skills from Foreman, all I see is a big bully winging shots wide left and right with no regard for anything else until his mismatched opponent fell over because he was so weak he couldn't do anything about it.

And look how Paxtom pumps up Roman, as if this guy, that we can clearly see is not in ANY way comparable to even the smaller boxers with exceptional qualities (like Cunningham, Haye, Mormeck, Chambers, Byrd etc) let alone the real big boys like Povetkin, Pulev, Stiverne, Arreola, and so on!

Today Jennings is considered a little guy!

For Christ sake this is what passed for a TITLE fight in the 70's!

What a sick joke!

IRony, you do get it yourself right! :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

There you go again degrading Foreman as a plodder and Ali as just a punch bag.

You think today's fighters are superior because of their weight.

You are wrong.

---

No I don't, I consider Foreman inferior to todays plodder sluggers, because he was a far lighter, less powerful, slower and less skilled and less defended version of them and he proved himself against far smaller and worse opponents.

I consider Ali inferior to todays skilful opponents because Ali had no punch by comparison and could not defend himself against a punch either, where as today's skilled oppoennts can bend around shots and not get hit often and can counter far quicker.

I consider both inferior to the champ, because of BOTH reasons combined.

They were both smaller, less athletic and less skilled than the average Klitschko opponents overall, let alone Klitschko himself!

I do not mean that they were all 3 of these at once. Foreman might be stronger than some opponents and Ali might be faster or more skilled than some opponents. But the TOTAL PACKAGE of Foreman and Ali was generally LESS than the TOTAL PACKAGE of the average Klitschko opponent (let alone Klitchko himself, again).

---

Today's heavyweights are not more athletic, just because they weigh more. In fact a lot of them have poor technical skills that they should take up another profession.

---

This is where exact clarity is needed and exactly where nostalgic fans overlook it..

There are sluggers with less skills, and skilled fighters of lower calibre in all eras. The champs of all eras have generally combined both features accounting for their success.

At HW you can be a chubby or an athletic boxer, both types can be successful at HW and always have been! It's boxing, not running!

The ATLETIC boxers today are more athletic than the ATHLETIC boxers of yesterday.

There are skilled boxers in every era and less skilled ones which make up for lack of skills with other qualities in every era, today and yesterday.

The SKILLED boxers today are more skilled than the SKILLED boxers of yesterday!

The problem with you is you like to make inappropriate comparisons like prime athletic Muhammad Ali to Chris Arreola in terms of athleticiem, where the correct comparison would be David Haye. (who is more athletic by far).

You also would try to compare the skills of Kenny Norton to those of say Lucas Browne, where the correct comparison would be to someone like say, Bryant Jennings.

If you want to make a comparison in size, you should compare someone like Frazier to Povetkin or Stiverne (who are also better skilled)

Of course the simplest comparison is champ to champ. Klitschko is bigger (by far), more athletic (by far) and more skilled (by so far it's beyond a joke).

I look at the total quality, the big picture. You seem only be able to focus on a single attribute at a time.

Easy 'Der Max'

Dick Sadder {Manager for George Foreman} had to choose Big George's
1st Title defense opponent.

* Larry Middleton
* Jeff 'Candy Slim' Merrit
* Jose 'King' Roman

Foreman was a gold medal Olympian so he had pedigree boxing skills. He was very powerful and so clubbed these fighters to win his matches. I am sure George would agree she should have developed his boxing skills particularly his jab, which he did in his comeback 20 years later. I think had he developed his skills and composure he would have beaten Ali.

Haye may be more athletic than Ali, he certainly was not as skilled.

Also remember Ali's peak was never seen. Anything he did after the comeback was a bonus as he lost his reflexes and had to use his durability won win fights. That is why he is no amazing.

George Foreman in that Roman fight really showed his greatness. What a final finishing uppercut to knock the slick Roman's ass right the fuck OUT. Roman was down for 35 seconds before he could even get into a sitting position. WHAT BRUTE FORCE!! FOREMAN HIT HARDER WITH ONE HAND THAN BOTH KLITSCHKO'S TOGETHER, PLUS ADD IN DAVID FEATHER-FIST HAYE'S POWER

Jose 'King' Roman

A hell of a good Puerto Rican Heavyweight.

May 1973

Age.......... 26 years, 6 months
Height ..... 5' 10"
Reach ..... 72"
Weight .... 196 lbs.

Record..... 43-7-1 {21 KO's}

Very fast-handed, and a good mover.

Jose was on a tear, and had gone {22-1-0} since August 1969 {3 years, 9 months}.

I would not have wanted to tangle with him.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608...d=1.9&rs=0&p=0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Foreman was a gold medal Olympian so he had pedigree boxing skills. He was very powerful and so clubbed these fighters to win his matches. I am sure George would agree she should have developed his boxing skills particularly his jab, which he did in his comeback 20 years later. I think had he developed his skills and composure he would have beaten Ali.

Haye may be more athletic than Ali, he certainly was not as skilled.

Also remember Ali's peak was never seen. Anything he did after the comeback was a bonus as he lost his reflexes and had to use his durability won win fights. That is why he is no amazing.

---

No version of Muhammad Ali ever came remotely close to having 1/5th the skills of David Haye, let's get that straight.

David Haye is possibly the fastest boxer with the fastest reflexes ever to box at HW. He finds his mark really often against longer ranged fighters and he barely ever gets hit in his fights he is so elusive. And he delivers outstanding shots of his own and has the agility of a cat.

What skills did Muhammad Ali have? He basically did a merry go round of his opponents and sliped them a couple of windmakers here and there and then ran away. And everytime he was cornered or he stayed in the pocket too long he got walloped by the slowest of shots. And this is the PRIME Ali!

The issue with your statement about Muhammad, is that PRIOR to his second career, Muhammad Ali NEVER FOUGHT A DECENT OPPONENT!

His best "win" would have been against Liston, a gift retirement which was otherwise even on the cards, and a rematch which was almost certainly a dive, strange circumstances surrounded which as well. So Ali 1st career never convincingly beat his best opponent.

Also he is credited with his apparently only proper KO win at this time, against Big Cat Williams, an opponent which could not even spar or train properly, had been gunshot the year prior and had large amount of his intestines and abdominal+pelvic organs removed and had a visibly atrophied leg and walked with a limp!

Unbelievable!

OBVIOUSLY Muhammad Ali 2 was better because he was heavier, stronger, more durable and more experienced than Muhammad Ali 1! How could it really be otherwise!

And just because Ali and Foreman didn't/couldn't fight during their physical primes (allegedly) does not mean they would have been better than David Haye or Wladimir Klitschko!

Jack 'The Giant' O'Halloran

Talks about 'mass' > 6' 6" @ 235 lbs.

May 1973 > 32-16-2 {16 KO's}

'Jack the Giant' was riding a hot streak by going 8-1-0 {5 KO's} over the
previous 11-Months.

Jack {Age; 30 years, 1 month} was also the reigning California State Heavyweight
Champion.

Jack, who was ranked at #24, was seeking a bout with #12 ranked - Mac Foster.

Thanks for this, Bill. You made me go search for old fights. Found this one with Foreman SAVAGING Jose Roman in one round. SAVAGE! lolol....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRHeelzr2-Q

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

George Foreman in that Roman fight really showed his greatness. What a final finishing uppercut to knock the slick Roman's ass right the fuck OUT. Roman was down for 35 seconds before he could even get into a sitting position. WHAT BRUTE FORCE!! FOREMAN HIT HARDER WITH ONE HAND THAN BOTH KLITSCHKO'S TOGETHER, PLUS ADD IN DAVID FEATHER-FIST HAYE'S POWER

---

LOL PPPLEASE!

;D

Ken Norton, Joe Roman and Joe Frazier...

What a TESTING run a HW champion. Overmatched chinny featherfists, flogged out by nothing more than a much stronger man walloping them left and right with no recourse to anything else whatsoever.

What is among the saddest things I've ever seen in boxing, @brocktonblockbust sees an awesome display.

I wonder if Foreman could have done it like that against Haye or Klitschko's opponents?

Yes Davey boy or Wladdy cake would have no answer for a 6'3", 220lber standing stationary in the pocket winging left, right, left, right, nice and wide for all to see.

There might be time for a cup of coffee inbetween counters LOL

Joe Roman didn't look all that slick here to me.

"Defense" must have taken a different meaning back then.

Jose Roman... The Chris Byrd of the 70's ey haha :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Joe Roman didn't look all that slick here to me.

"Defense" must have taken a different meaning back then.

Jose Roman... The Chris Byrd of the 70's ey haha :cool:

---

__________________________________________________ _____________

Jose 'King' Roman didn't win all those bouts on defense alone.

The man could box. He spanked {World-ranked} Jose Manuel Urtain pretty good.

Triple left-jabs, then a quick right-hook.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Joe Roman didn't look all that slick here to me.

"Defense" must have taken a different meaning back then.

Jose Roman... The Chris Byrd of the 70's ey haha :cool:

---

__________________________________________________ _____________

Jose 'King' Roman didn't win all those bouts on defense alone.

The man could box. He spanked {World-ranked} Jose Manuel Urtain pretty good.

Triple left-jabs, then a quick right-hook.

---

Jose Urtain 56-11 (decent opponent for the day)...

How many of his opponents were cruisers?

How many of his opponents were bummy?

There is an even quicker assessment that can be made...

Jose Roman... 53-27... Bummy record himself!

Foreman stages one of his 3 title defences against a bummy boxer, a massively out-talled and out-weighed one = proof of greatness for the OTNB's (look how Foreman handles him with ease!) :rolleyes:

I wonder if Foreman were he champion today, would be ALLOWED to defend against someone like Roman! Kind of doubtful is what I'd say!

Jose 'King' Roman

"Quality Wins"

* March 15, 1969 ........ W Dec 10 ..... Jack O'Halloran ~ 16-1-1
* June 6, 1969 ............ W Dec 10 ..... Chuck Wepner ~ 18-3-2
* May 25, 1970 ........... W Dec 10 ..... Jack O'Halloran ~ 19-7-2
* October 26, 1970 ..... W Dec 10 ...... Manuel Ramos ~ 27-13-3
* April 3, 1972 ............ W Dec 10 ...... Jose Manuel Urtain ~ 39-3-2
* November 21, 1972 .. W Dec 10 ..... Terry Daniels ~ 32-8-1

Jose's record was 43-7-1 before he faced George Foreman.

You can't register '43-wins' if you're a bad fighter.

Long Live 'King' Roman.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608...d=1.9&rs=0&p=0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Jose 'King' Roman

"Quality Wins"

* March 15, 1969 ........ W Dec 10 ..... Jack O'Halloran ~ 16-1-1
* June 6, 1969 ............ W Dec 10 ..... Chuck Wepner ~ 18-3-2
* May 25, 1970 ........... W Dec 10 ..... Jack O'Halloran ~ 19-7-2
* October 26, 1970 ..... W Dec 10 ...... Manuel Ramos ~ 27-13-3
* April 3, 1972 ............ W Dec 10 ...... Jose Manuel Urtain ~ 39-3-2
* November 21, 1972 .. W Dec 10 ..... Terry Daniels ~ 32-8-1

Jose's record was 43-7-1 before he faced George Foreman.

You can't register '43-wins' if you're a bad fighter.

Long Live 'King' Roman.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608...d=1.9&rs=0&p=0

---

Yeah I have no problem with Roman either.

It took a lot of guts to go up against Big George after he just whacked out Frazier.

But in terms of Foreman, this can only spell "cherry-pick"

Foreman's record sans Norton and Frazier, who are ONLY famous because they fought Ali, is devoid of great quality (1st half career).

Lyle was good win but that was pretty even slug fest until the end.

Manager - Dick Saddler on selecting Jose 'King Roman as George Foreman's
1st Tilte Defense.

"Everyone is entitled to one free choice out of the Candy Dish."

"The experts are saying that Jose is an 'unknown'. That is a lie. His Mother knows him."

"Look, he's got '43' wins. They may not all be pretty, but a win is a win."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Manager - Dick Saddler on selecting Jose 'King Roman as George Foreman's
1st Tilte Defense.

"Everyone is entitled to one free choice out of the Candy Dish."

"The experts are saying that Jose is an 'unknown'. That is a lie. His Mother knows him."

"Look, he's got '43' wins. They may not all be pretty, but a win is a win."

---

Cherry Pick ;)

Larry Middleton ~ #18 Ring Magazine ~ #7 WBA

Manager - Mack Lewis was clammoring for a chance to pit his Baltimore fighter
against George Foreman.

Larry Middleton was a 'lanky' 6' 5" 208 lb. 'boxer/mover' with a snappy left-jab and
a decent right-cross.

Larry {Age; 31 years, 3 months} had an impressive record of 23-3-1 {14 KO's},
and was avoided as a Title Challenger by Smokin' Joe Frazier in 1972.