Impossible for these boxers to NOT be in the Top 10 All-Time:......

[Dark Lord Al]

Are we judging them on what them on historical impact ?? or on who would have beaten who ?

Because if its on who would have beat who , lots of those guys are way to small for the modern era.

[IamInuit]

Are we judging them on what them on historical impact ?? or on who would have beaten who ?

Because if its on who would have beat who , lots of those guys are way to small for the modern era.

That is a great question or two. Debatable but they fit. Those and a few others are why more then any other division I struggle or second guess any hev list I come up with beyond numeric order. Another rather large factor for me is who did they fight and when they fought them. Its for that reason alone that I do not rank Marciano or Holmes as high as most people.

I'm not sure that size difference played the same role as it does today and I think that its largely do to the combatants and the mentality of the day. Especially the original 8 era when fighting bigger men was common place. I guess what I'm saying is that the deer in the headlights look on the faces of most of Wlad opponents would most likely not be apparent on many of the faces of past heavyweights should they be in the same ring. Wlad or Lennox's size would not have intimidated the smaller heavyweights of other eras the way that it seems to do today. Just a different mind set totally.
Having said that intimidated or not you are right. Size would be a big factor but perhaps not as much as one might think.

Thanks for getting me thinking this early in the morning.

[Rantcatrat]

Are we judging them on what them on historical impact ?? or on who would have beaten who ?

Because if its on who would have beat who , lots of those guys are way to small for the modern era.

That is a great question or two. Debatable but they fit. Those and a few others are why more then any other division I struggle or second guess any hev list I come up with beyond numeric order. Another rather large factor for me is who did they fight and when they fought them. Its for that reason alone that I do not rank Marciano or Holmes as high as most people.

I'm not sure that size difference played the same role as it does today and I think that its largely do to the combatants and the mentality of the day. Especially the original 8 era when fighting bigger men was common place. I guess what I'm saying is that the deer in the headlights look on the faces of most of Wlad opponents would most likely not be apparent on many of the faces of past heavyweights should they be in the same ring. Wlad or Lennox's size would not have intimidated the smaller heavyweights of other eras the way that it seems to do today. Just a different mind set totally.
Having said that intimidated or not you are right. Size would be a big factor but perhaps not as much as one might think.

Thanks for getting me thinking this early in the morning.

Beat me to it.

[Master]

Tyson and Frasier need to be in there. I think Wlad has a better legacy than Vitali but see Vitali as the better fighter of the two at their peaks.

[THE THIRD MAN]

Peak Frazier from 1968-1972 is in the top 10 and so is peak Tyson from 1986-1989

No way Lewis is ahead of either of them.

[brocktonblockbust]

lets not forget Leon Spinks

[TysonBomb]

lets not forget Leon Spinks

Um Spinks is probably the WORST undisputed heavyweight champion ever.

Hashim Rahman would KO him ... hell maybe even John Ruiz.

[Master]

lets not forget Leon Spinks

No lets forget him. He became champ when better fighters did not.

[Rantcatrat]

Are we judging them on what them on historical impact ?? or on who would have beaten who ?

Because if its on who would have beat who , lots of those guys are way to small for the modern era.

Just to play devil's advocate, you do realize that there were plenty of big boxers back in the day. For example, Jess Willard awas 6'6, Buddy Baer was 6'7, Primo Carnera was 6'5 and Luis Firpo was 6'3. I'm not going to argue those guys would have beat Lennox Lewis and Vitali Klitschko. You know my point though.

[Beanflicker]

Just to play devil's advocate, you do realize that there were plenty of big boxers back in the day. For example, Jess Willard awas 6'6, Buddy Baer was 6'7, Primo Carnera was 6'5 and Luis Firpo was 6'3. I'm not going to argue those guys would have beat Lennox Lewis and Vitali Klitschko. You know my point though.

That's true, I don't think it's necessarily the size, it's the quality of today's modern athlete. A lot of those big guys back then were just bumbling oafs.

[brocktonblockbust]

LIston is definitely ranked in the Top 20 and Dempsey if not Top 10 HAS to be Top 11-13. I can see Frazier maybe in there sometimes but not all the time as his huge losses to Foreman really tarnish his image and his only real terrific fights were against Ali and Ellis.

[Master]

LIston is definitely ranked in the Top 20 and Dempsey if not Top 10 HAS to be Top 11-13. I can see Frazier maybe in there sometimes but not all the time as his huge losses to Foreman really tarnish his image and his only real terrific fights were against Ali and Ellis.

Foreman was a monster and style wise he would eat up a Frazier. Joe was a greater champion than George as he made more defences.

[Mr140]

How is Jack Demsey in the top ten when he ducked fighting black fighters his whole career. Holyfeild i rank above Tyson or Liston because he won back title and had better wins as well.