Potentially Incendiary: Overhand Rights All-time Heavyweight Top 10

[Overhand_Right]

Never done a list before, but decided I finally would (slow day at work). Should point out that i've rated these guys at their best, NOT their overall careers or length of title reigns , quality of era etc.

Some of you old timers will probably be disgusted by my list. Even more so because I'm only in my early 20s so what the hell could I know?!!!? Since i'm only a young punk, feel free to school me.

1. MUHAMMAD ALI
Can't see how anyone could beat this guy, especially in the 60s. Under rated power too, besides concrete chin, quick thinker, superhuman desire to win.

2. LENNOX LEWIS
Again, i know it will piss you off, but at his best can't see how anyone can beat a 6'5'' 250ib super skilled boxer with lethal kayo power in both hands, long jab, good artillery of punches, very clever boxer.

3. EVANDER HOLYFIELD
Unbelievable warrior spirit, will to win, fight to the death, can mix it up with anyone. Underated power & chin, plus skills, speed, every quality except size in abundance. Think he could out-gut almost any past champ in the trenches.

4. GEORGE FOREMAN (1970s model)
Huge frame, possibly hardest puncher ever, can't see many past champs surviving with this wrecking machine coming forward. None too clever & could run out of gas late, but most would never survive that far.

5. SMOKIN JOE FRAZIER
Like an animal coming forward, always gets up, same qualities as Holyfield, will fight to the death. Power & workrate would overwhelm majority of past greats IMO.

6. LARRY HOLMES
Good all round skills, big heart, under rated power. Desire to win is best quality, will fight tooth & nail to the end, obviously the jab.

7. IRON MIKE TYSON
Speed, bob & weave style, combination punching, one punch power, could fight 12 rds at a pace. Very difficult to beat unless your very big with even bigger balls and cool under fire.

8. SONNY LISTON
Huge strong guy, near impossible to negate jab, kayo power, skills, solid chin. Rated lower because questions over heart. Few in history could survive long enough to be able to test it.

9. RIDDICK BOWE
Probably most controversial choice. 6'5'' 235ibs, a huge guy but with major skills, brawling ability, power, jab, overhwhelm just about anybody on the inside. Difficult to grade chin, but for a brief time was a fighting machine. Difficult to picture many guys being able to handle Bowe at his best.

10. JOE LOUIS
Great jab & combination punching, lethal knockout power, but a lot of big guys on this list and Joe did go down a lot (although always got up). Has a punchers chane against any of the above except Ali.

AWOL: Rocky Marciano, very tough & very strong but sorry guys just too small and crude to beat any of these guys. Dempsey ditto, style of fighting just far too crude and sloppy, too small to live with big heavies who were GREAT. Jack Johnson very similar, smart guy but his holding style i doubt would work over 12 rd fights with guys of this quality. Too outdated. John L Sullivan et al, again guys who were fighting a million years ago, cannot see them surviving against these big advanced modern heavies. Be realistic.

I AWAIT YOUR WRATH...

[kikibalt]

Is this a joke?

[OMG65]

Lennox Lewis # 2?
How many alltime great heavies in their primes (and champion at the time) get 1 punch kayoed 2 times in their career by mediocre fighters?

[kikibalt]

Shit, this is funny, now I don't have to see the late night shows.

[mike casey]

I admire you for having a go, but once again there is the obsession here with anything BIG.

Dempsey crude and sloppy? How much time have you really taken to study him or familiarise yourself with what the great managers and trainers said about him? Did you just watch that same old herky-jerky Willard film and base your judgement on that? Dempsey would have decimated Frazier for starters.

Louis too small? He half murdered giants of men.

Jack Johnson a 'smart guy'? - yes, he was a bit. Smarter than most fighters ever dream of being.

Ali at number one I can live with in my more giving moods. But I would respectfully suggest that it's the author that goes AWOL thereafter.

Are you planning to do any more of these?

[GorDoom]

Any list is just one man's opinion. Everybody has a right to his opinion right or wrong .... Getting "incendiary" over any list is ridiculous. I don't agree with many things on this list but so what?

It's just boxing ....

No gaskets need to be blown.

GorDoom

[hawk5ins]

You aren't going to get any wrath from moi, because I'm sure my top 10 heavy list would get a bunch of belly laughs as well.

Like other's here, I have some clear disagreements with your list. But that's why these are OUR lists. It's OUR opinions.

It seems TO ME, and correct me if I'm off base here, but the list is driven from a head to head or who beats who perspective.

Folks, let's criticize Lennox Lewis all you want, And I don't have him in my top 10 either, (#11 or 12 thank you), but if He does play it conservative and he fights with his head on straight (IE Focused) he is going to be bear for most heavies to beat.

Yes, his size IS a factor. But ONLY becuase it is combined with talent. Joe Louis did slay giants. But No giants with half of Lewis's talent.

Agian, I don't agree with you Overhand, but I can see where you are coming from.

I actually have MORE of an issue with Bowe being in the top 10 than Lewis being #2. My reason? His entire career is essentially based off of 1 fight with Evander Holyfield in which Evander, midway through the second round, fought the dumbest strategic fight of his entire career. If you look at the game plan Evander used in the first and through the second, up until he got upset with Bowe hitting him during the ref's call for a break, and then Evander lost his cool and his senses, he was handling Bowe pretty easy.

And this wasn't a case of Bowe simply taking over. Evander CHANGED what he was doing and doing effectively. Personally, I have never been so frustrated with a fighter than I was with Evander on that night. It was maddening.

So FOR me, based on one careeer night performance, whihc I feel was aided by Evander's stupidity, I can't see Bowe cracking the top 10.

Just my opinion. I could be wrong.

Hawk

[PeteLeo]

So, let me get this straight: if a guy fought in the 80's or 90's he automatically goes to the head of the class, is that it?

Jack and Joe must be enjoying a good chuckle right about now. PeteLeo.

[StingerKarl]

I think for many of us when we think about the overhand right in the heavyweight division, Ken Norton comes to mind first.
His may not have been the best, but it was the most showy and dramatic.
Earnie Shavers winged many f them as well, but it is Norton's destruction of Bobick with that punch that is embedded in my mind when I think about that particular shot.
Ken would feint you to the body and jab often right before he winged it, a move that was taught him by Bossman Jones.
He hit Holmes some haymakers as well, but Larry took them.
I seldom remember Ali throwing overhand rights to be honest with you folks.
If he did, who were they against?
Perhaps some semi-overhands vs Cleveland Williams where he'd jab to the body first, but they were moreso down the pipe.
Maybe vs Mildenberger?
But he didn't have much steam on them as far as I can recall.
Maxie Baer was the most murderous overhand right hitter ever in the division, but he would miss as many or more than he would land of them.
Like Bucket said; to each his own.
Karl

[HE Grant]

If the last few years and James Toney in particular have taught me in the past few years it's that man have we blown size out of proportion. Yes it deos matter in some match ups but to generalize based on it is way off...

I like the fact you tried a list ... I just think your scope of history is limited to the 1960's to the present and there is much more to the history of the game.

[hagler04]

2. LENNOX LEWIS
Again, i know it will piss you off, but at his best can't see how anyone can beat a 6'5'' 250ib super skilled boxer with lethal kayo power in both hands, long jab, good artillery of punches, very clever boxer.


...

You should email Oliver McCall and Ray Mercer . . . .

[JBS]

These things are all a matter of opinon. But I find it curious that you rank Holyfield over both Foreman and Holmes, when a young Evander fought and had trouble with both of them when they were well past thier best.

I always viewed the Holyfield/Foreman and Holyfield/Holmes fights as bouts that illustrated just how good Foreman and Holmes were in their primes in comparison to that current crop of heavies during Evander's time. Evander was a young and peak fighter when he fought them. Holmes and Foreman were in their 40s and both had long layoffs before their eventual comebacks. And he had a lot of trouble with both. In my opinon, particularly after those bouts, I rank foreman and Holmes well above Holyfield.

I also find it interesting that with the exception of Louis your top 10 consists only of fighters who were active post 1960s. But maybe you hold to the school of the thought that the modern day fighters were vastly superior than their predecesors. I never bought that line of thought myself; but who knows? It makes for entertaining debate. But of course is all hypothetical and just a matter of opinon.

[HE Grant]

My top ten in no particular order due to the A, B and C Theory ...

Ali
Johnson
Louis
Dempsey
Frazier
Liston
Lewis
Tyson
Holmes
Foreman

[Elmer Ray]

I always viewed the Holyfield/Foreman and Holyfield/Holmes fights as bouts that illustrated just how good Foreman and Holmes were in their primes in comparison to that current crop of heavies during Evander's time.

I TOTALLY AGREE. i mean at least marciano dominated and knocked out cold louis, and tyson knocked out holmes cold early, tunney dominated dempsey......but holyfield struggled vastly with foreman and holmes. the way holy struggled with these guys makes me totally believe holmes and foreman would have soundily beat holy in there primes.


also holmes at 46 nearly beat oliver mccall who knocked out a prime lennox lewis. at 44 soundily beat ray mercer. a prime lennox lewis was taken 10 dead even rounds with ray mercer.



a 45 year old holmes was doing better against lennox's opposition than lennox.

[thumper3852]

Maybe this was tongue in cheek, if it was then my comments can easily be seen in that light as well (and I hope they are).

I think for many of us when we think about the overhand right in the heavyweight division.................

CBZ tip # 1- Read and Reread b/4 posting a post

CBZ tip # 2- Avoid PUI- (posting under the influence)

Tip # 2 has always been a hard one to follow, although Tip # 1 can be a problem if you didn't follow Tip # 2.

[apollack]

As I see it, the biggest problem with doing these top ten lists is that there is no criteria. Also, you may look at one matchup and say fighter A beats fighter B and B beats C, and C beats D, but you might also think D beats A, which throws a money wrench into it all. Also, sometimes it is difficult to visualize the matchups because of the different eras and opponents, and the different sizes and body types. Also, lots of intangibles. Some of these you think if they fought four times it would be 2-2, so that also makes it difficult. I like to visualize these fights as fights to the finish. Very tough to do this and these are always open to debate (friendly I hope), but my list is:

MUHAMMAD ALI

JOE LOUIS

LARRY HOLMES

JOHN L. SULLIVAN

GEORGE FOREMAN

JOE FRAZIER

EVANDER HOLYFIELD

MIKE TYSON

ROCKY MARCIANO

JAMES J. JEFFRIES

LENNOX LEWIS

RIDDICK BOWE

JACK DEMPSEY

GENE TUNNEY

PETER JACKSON

JACK JOHNSON

SONNY LISTON

[StingerKarl]

Maybe this was tongue in cheek, if it was then my comments can easily be seen in that light as well (and I hope they are).



CBZ tip # 1- Read and Reread b/4 posting a post

CBZ tip # 2- Avoid PUI- (posting under the influence)

Tip # 2 has always been a hard one to follow, although Tip # 1 can be a problem if you didn't follow Tip # 2.

It seems you may be referring to me, my friend.
Whoever you are, I am a former fighter and contributing writer to this website and am presently working on a piece with one of the heavyweight champions for the CBZ in the near future.
Personal attacks are prohibited here, and I am asking Bucket to take note of this subject's inflammatory post here and now.
Karl

[HE Grant]

I'm in complete agreement with Elmer about JB's point reguarding how Foreman and Holmes lasted and remained competitive against Holyfield. It is a well made point.

[thumper3852]

It seems you may be referring to me, my friend.
Whoever you are, I am a former fighter and contributing writer to this website and am presently working on a piece with one of the heavyweight champions for the CBZ in the near future.
Personal attacks are prohibited here, and I am asking Bucket to take note of this subject's inflammatory post here and now.
Karl

My sincere apology for what I realize may appear to be a cheap shot at Karl;I honestly was only trying some humor here and I appreciate that it surely could be considered bad humor...I should have followed the imaginary tips.

Again my apology to Karl, I honestly intended no disrespect.

[KOJOE90]

These top 10 lists make my head hurt so that's why I rarely try and put one together. However I will throw my opinion in with the rest of you today.

This top ten is done on a who beats who in their prime as in if all the Heavyweights could step into a time machine and all fight each other who would come out on top in a league type situation.

Ali
Louis
Holmes
Foreman
Liston
Frazier
Lewis
Dempsey
Holyfield
Tyson.

Having said that I feel Marciano, Langford, Johnson, Bowe, Wills could on a given night beat some in 'my' top ten, hence these lists make my head hurt.

And I am already thinking of swapping Holyfield and Dempsey around.

[mike]

right now i have sullivan 7h, right behind jeffries. maybe after the book-its goes up a bit. thanks

[Cojimar 1945]

Losing twice to a guy who got thrashed twice by Golota seems rather embarresing.

[apollack]

Styles make fights. Keep in mind also, Bowe won both those fights. There is a reason for that. Bottom line is a win is a win, and Bowe's mental and physical strengths kept him in those fights and made Golota fold mentally. That says as much for Bowe as it does for Golota. Remember, Riddick only lost once in his career, and even that loss was real close/controversial. However, based on his overall body of work, I have him behind Evander, even though head to head I think he beats Evander more often than he loses to him. Evander simply took on the better quality of opposition and proved more overall. I can never really forgive Bowe for not taking on Lewis.

[Overhand_Right]

Hey guys, monday morning back to work for me. Glad to see my list amused you/raised some bile, thats how it was intended. Let me defend myself!!!

Jack frickin Dempsey. I love his story, and he was great at the time. But i watch his title fights and i am amazed by just how crude & sloppy his fights are. Yes he could punch hard, but the slapping, mauling, running around style doesnt even qualify as being called amateurish. The fight with Tommy Gibbons is one of the worst looking fights I have ever seen. Also the guy weighed less than 190. Im sorry old timers but i respectfully believe you are deluding yourselves if you think this guy is going to survive against anyone on my top 10.

Jack Johnson same thing. His style of fighting is pre-historic. I love the guy, find him a fascinating figure and believe he was great at his time, but his style of fighting is just way too ancient to be effective against modern advanced heavyweights. Look at Riddick Bowe punching through Holyfield and then try picture Papa Jack just trying to get inside that jab and hold him for long periods, laughing into the crowd as Bowe drilled him with uppercuts... (Im aware a lot of you are probably spitting in disgust right now)

I know the majority of the heavyweights are 1960s onwards. These are guys with more advanced, modern styles. Boxing has improved, technique has improved, fitness and training has improved, and watching these old films of small, crude heavies like Marciano & Dempsey et al only show me how far the sport has advanced since those days.

A few other points. I rated these guys AT THEIR BEST. Unsurprisingly someone mentioned 'Oh Lewis got knocked out by two bums'. Anyone think Lewis was at his best those nights? How come no one questions the McCall stoppage? And how come you disregard the rematches.

As for Holmes & Foreman made Holyfield look bad so they automatically beat him in their youth. Were those fights close? Was Holyfield ever remotely close to losing? Did he or did he not win lopsided unanimous decisions over both? He certainly did. Holmes fought a spoiler fight. Hes a clever old man who wanted to survive, unless your a big puncher, Holmes in that frame of mind will look anyone look bad (or actually, make the fight dull. Holyfield beat Holmes up, unlike Mercer). Holyfield/Foreman. How many times was Holy 'out'? Zero. How many times did Holy have Foreman on the brink of a kayo? THREE times!! Holy boxed a safe, intelligent fight and beat the fat man fair & square yet this is used against him? Foreman of the 70s would not have boxed a controlled fight like the old man did that night either, BTW.

I stand by my list. Im sorry all you guys yearn for that old Golden Era & have such a distaste for the heavies of the 80s and 90s but like it or not these werent just big lumbering stiffs they had size, power, modern skills etc... Im not looking at those pre-WW2 films with rose tinted spectacles. Those guys provided you with a lot of great times/memories im sure, but they would be too small, too unskilled, too crude for my top 10 guys IMO. And bumping off a Jess Willard, Abe Simon or Two Ton Tony is not comparable to mixing it up with Bowe or Lewis!!!

[hawk5ins]

On this comment: "Holyfield beat Holmes up," can you elaborate a bit further?

I had Evander winning the bout 7-4-1 or 8-4. Holmes did fight kindof a Spoiler bout as you stated. And he made Evander look bad on multiple occasions. I didn't see Evander dominate the bout, but I do agree he clearly won. But I disagree that he Beat Larry up.

Holmes puked at the end of 12 rounds. I'm not sure that is akin to being beaten up.

Hawk

[Sharkey]

O-Right

From what I read, those who disagree with your exclusion of heavies pre-1960 or so did not do so by saying modern heavyweights have regressed and in general are not so much primitive as deficient as a class..or woefully over-muscled with no stamina. Film doesn't make the moderns look so hot, but Ali-impressions can mask that. You know, hands low, bend at the waist, extend left hand with open glove.

I don't read them saying that. Perhaps there were some claiming Bowe had no defense, or Lewis was incapable of consistancy until his comp was barely warm, or that Holyfield was a volume puncher with little power and pretty much zero finesse..who won the two biggest bouts in his career because he actually threw left hooks.at a guy totally unprepared (though he had been here before) to deal with an opponent who used leverage and threw straight-ish shots..a novel invention of the 1990's. Anyway.

Lennox Lewis' ranking explanation reads to me like a middle-east peace proposal. We want to believe it, but we know better and it is full of if's and ignores so many of the potential players in the process. However, if we focus on Lennox, I agree he is tough to beat. BUT If Lewis can be said to be a tough bout for any heavyweight ever, I think the flip must be he potentially gets whacked by anyone who might actually have some handspeed and the arm angles necessary to throw a punch over Lewis' awkward jab. Too harsh? Perhaps. But the rosy view is too nice.

His positives are mirrored by many negatives. Unless the potential foe from history is deemed in the short bio to be by default already in trouble by entering the ring with Lewis.

But on the whole the dissent has not relied upon generalities dependent on who or what is saying them. Frazier is an animal. However to me he is like a badger whereas Dempsey is like a shark. Badgers may scare some more than sharks...but not me. Sharks are primitive animals. Especially compared to badgers.

Riddick Bowe could belong here, but so could many guys like him. Bowe at his best was who exactly. Unless we want to grade Pierre Coetzer as evolved compared to Louis or Dempsey or Schmeling or whomever, it wouldn't be that Bowe. Maybe it was Holyfield I Bowe. His best then was beating Evander that night, getting edged in fight 2 while his best but not trained..then........what? It all of course can be wiped away by citing that what we saw in the title-win ought to in normal course have been improved upon. We can then speculate that at 6'5" 235 he would have been tough for anyone. And I agree. Jack Sharkey at 203 would have been tough for anyone too. Find a slot for him on this list, because at his best (Schmeling I, Loughran KO) he was about as good a fighter at making you fight his fight that there was. His losses mean only Sharkey not at his best. The list is at best, and not most often..I assume.

Dempsey's bout with Gibbons pit Dempsey against a tremendous boxer, who could make one look bad. Evander for example had a real hum-dinger against Vaughn Bean where if they didn't look primitve, they looked well near clueless. Evander fights a guy in Moorer with a lead right and gets turned into a pumpkin. the same guy who after he won the title was declared by many as on par with the 80's boys of Thomas, Spoon et al..aka mediocre. The immortal Alex Stewart renders Evander gun-shy in fight 2...where neither fighter seemed to know what a combination or 'effective infighting' was. Holyfield regresses and unlearns the modern skills.

Lewis' bout against Zeljko Mavrovic saw a big man (Lewis) totally unable to dominate a scrappy novice who was there to be hit. This of course does not render Lennox to be labeled in history as a man whose jab was mere muscle memory of his times reaching for a jar of jelly on a shelf...does it? If we ignore McCall's prowess, what do we say about Lennox Lewis who was whacked out while throwing his own right hand with the technique of a carnival bean-bag toss? Or the guy praised as contented to retreat for 12 rounds against Tua..where film in 2040 will show him off-balance against a midget. Who is the guy unable to fight out of a clinch (or cause clinches to not happen..despite that 'awesome jab') against Henry Akinwande..and touching down (unofficially) to-boot.

I didn't mention the loss to Rahman or looking like he forgot he was tall against minor league non-primitve animal (coyote) Ray Mercer.

If we recall Tua was a bomber, then Lewis gets points for winning. McCall was a concentration thing, or one of those flukes. Plus in the rematch he mauled McCall. Then the tape rolls and McCall has substance-abuse/mental deterioration. And it is Oliver McCall we are speaking of. A man more Lou Nova than Larry Holmes.

But I am focusing not just on the fighter but his foe. So. What say you of Gibbons?!

Frazier is much less impressive than Louis with "power and workrate". Unless you figure the 30 odd wins he had and tally the opponents. Which brings us to Mike Tyson: primitive. It wasn't that his foes had primitive skills. He was wrong there. It was that Tyson's reflexes and hand speed and power (things which were with us from berry-gatherers to Mastodon hunters to D'Amato) were overwhelming. Joe Frazier fought 2 men better than Larry Holmes EVER faced...so how does Larry get near Joe Frazier by consistantly beating men who in Dempsey's time (or Louis') would have been deemed formidable only by backward looking individuals who also would then label them as, by virtue of when they fought, as primitive. It isn't like Weaver, Spoon and Norton for example were technique-ofiles.

Which brings us to Louis and Dempsey. Primitive film? Shorts? Socio-conditions? Yep. Skills?! What are they. The county fair is short many a judge to determine who wins the 'boxing skills' blue ribbon.

Inciendiary? Nah. I count myself among the few (many) that rank ranking fighters in a fantasy perspective just above shopping for belts and just below checking lunar guides for optimum fishing conditions on the list of "things to get worked up about". So I am not attacking your list.

I don't agree with your assessments on why they are ranked where they are, or how some names even got on the list... I think had you posted your list without the explanations you wouldn't have been more or less correct.

[Overhand_Right]

Sharkey, nice post, verbose as always. We're at different sides of the fence here though. "Tommy Gibbons, a master boxer". Since I wasn't around in the 20s, I can only judge the guy by what I see on film. If running around with your back to an opponent, a few clumsy jabs and jumping in to grab is master boxing, you should check out some Matt Skelton fights. Gibbons makes him look like Sugar Ray. The maul with Dempsey is crude school yard fighting. Sorry if this is sacriligious. I don't know why I'm the only one who isn't amazed by these sloppy fights between 190- 200 pounders.

Now Joe Louis, theres a guy who I can see fights in a measured manner & is capable of throwing fast combinations & that seem to have spectacular effect no matter the size of the opponent.

Johnson, Dempsey, Sharkey, et al I just don't see their old fashioned style of fighting holding up against subsequent generations. Too much rushing in, too much crude flailing... We can take any heavyweight champ in history and pick them apart for their less than impressive nights. You claim Lewis retreated for 12 rds v Tua. For a guy running, he sure as hell made a bloody mess of Tuas face. You dont think Lewis dominated Mavrovic. He did on the copy of the fight I have.

Hey ho....

[Sharkey]

I try.

The guy in the other corner makes a fight a fight..and obviously colors the action. Pea Whitaker didn't look so good against Hurtado or Rivera. Still I think we can conclude he was a master..and Hurtado and Rivera were pretty good themselves. Tito looked like dog food against Oscar, who himself seemingly was operated by remote control after round 9 when his stamina and heart and courage evaporated. Or, Tito was dried out at 147 and Oscar felt something from some punches that made him bike his way to a win. Or Tito was a slug with a primitve offense and virtually no defense and Oscar was a flash-no substance guy that struggled against even cruder Quartey and was unable to figure out how to deal with a Pernell Whitaker that presented him the daunting challenge of defense mixed with a few timed pitty pat shots.

Gibbons was either a really good fighter and so was Dempsey and Dempsey made him "run" and act defensively..or they both kinda stunk...and so did everyone else from back then comparatively. Or he didn't run and was a hard hitting fighter with excellent defensive skills against a faster and probably better guy who blunted Tommy's O and Gibbons went into survival mode.

Or both had pet dinosaurs.

[Mr E]

Never done a list before, but decided I finally would (slow day at work). Should point out that i've rated these guys at their best, NOT their overall careers or length of title reigns , quality of era etc.

Some of you old timers will probably be disgusted by my list. Even more so because I'm only in my early 20s so what the hell could I know?!!!? Since i'm only a young punk, feel free to school me.

1. MUHAMMAD ALI
Can't see how anyone could beat this guy, especially in the 60s. Under rated power too, besides concrete chin, quick thinker, superhuman desire to win.

2. LENNOX LEWIS
Again, i know it will piss you off, but at his best can't see how anyone can beat a 6'5'' 250ib super skilled boxer with lethal kayo power in both hands, long jab, good artillery of punches, very clever boxer.

3. EVANDER HOLYFIELD
Unbelievable warrior spirit, will to win, fight to the death, can mix it up with anyone. Underated power & chin, plus skills, speed, every quality except size in abundance. Think he could out-gut almost any past champ in the trenches.

4. GEORGE FOREMAN (1970s model)
Huge frame, possibly hardest puncher ever, can't see many past champs surviving with this wrecking machine coming forward. None too clever & could run out of gas late, but most would never survive that far.

5. SMOKIN JOE FRAZIER
Like an animal coming forward, always gets up, same qualities as Holyfield, will fight to the death. Power & workrate would overwhelm majority of past greats IMO.

6. LARRY HOLMES
Good all round skills, big heart, under rated power. Desire to win is best quality, will fight tooth & nail to the end, obviously the jab.

7. IRON MIKE TYSON
Speed, bob & weave style, combination punching, one punch power, could fight 12 rds at a pace. Very difficult to beat unless your very big with even bigger balls and cool under fire.

8. SONNY LISTON
Huge strong guy, near impossible to negate jab, kayo power, skills, solid chin. Rated lower because questions over heart. Few in history could survive long enough to be able to test it.

9. RIDDICK BOWE
Probably most controversial choice. 6'5'' 235ibs, a huge guy but with major skills, brawling ability, power, jab, overhwhelm just about anybody on the inside. Difficult to grade chin, but for a brief time was a fighting machine. Difficult to picture many guys being able to handle Bowe at his best.

10. JOE LOUIS
Great jab & combination punching, lethal knockout power, but a lot of big guys on this list and Joe did go down a lot (although always got up). Has a punchers chane against any of the above except Ali.

AWOL: Rocky Marciano, very tough & very strong but sorry guys just too small and crude to beat any of these guys. Dempsey ditto, style of fighting just far too crude and sloppy, too small to live with big heavies who were GREAT. Jack Johnson very similar, smart guy but his holding style i doubt would work over 12 rd fights with guys of this quality. Too outdated. John L Sullivan et al, again guys who were fighting a million years ago, cannot see them surviving against these big advanced modern heavies. Be realistic.

I AWAIT YOUR WRATH...

I don't view this as a joke at all. In fact, I think it is a very reasonable approach to take to say that humans are getting not just bigger but stronger, faster, more durable and better coordinated in ALL endeavors and that the 10 best of all-time in every sport are the 10 best right now.

Now, I don't personally subscribe to that opinion (IMO, the top 3 heavyweights of all-time are 1-Ali, 2-Dempsey, 3-Louis), but I do respect it.

[PeteLeo]

I'm still trying to find evidence of Dempsey ever throwing a blow that could be described as a "slap." From all I've seen, his weakest swat would hospitalize 9/10ths of all the heavies to ever lace on a glove.

And he'd kill Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield, etc. PeteLeo.