Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmbtandy
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rene69
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
1. Joe Louis
2. Rocky Marciano
3. Muhamed Ali
Ali would have schooled and humiliated both Marciano & Louis.
It was a different era, Valuev would probably have beaten Marciano with his 1'3" height advantage and 123lb weight advantage, does that mean he should be remembered as a great, I think not. Ali is up there with the greats, I just think he convinced more people he was the best, rather than actually being the best
He did a lot of talking but he did it in the ring too.
This list does all the talking that is needed to convinced, Sonny Liston, Floyd Patterson, Ernie Terrell, Joe Frazier, Jerry Quarry, Ken Norton, George Foreman, Ernie Shavers, Ron Lyle and there's more to that. Oh and he got stripped of 3 years of his prime and still racked up more quality wins then any heavyweight ever. It's truly extraordinary.
I think you have a better case of calling Larry Holmes as greater then Ali, Holmes got to 48-0 and then was robbed of 49-0.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
I think Ali is the greatest, not just because of his in ring performances but as a man himself, havnt seen charm and inteligence in boxers before and past him. He beat fighters with twice his punching power with just sheer inteligence and knowledge of the game. He also made the biggest impact in boxing history with some legendary fights and he totally changed the playing field with his movement and boxing skills whilst other boxers around that time were one dimensional sluggers.
All i know is when im old and gray when my kids and grandkids asks me about boxing, the Ali tapes are going in.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Neither did Sven Ottke
Well yes but Svenn also didn't fight the quality guys Rocky fought: Louis, Walcott, Charles, Layne, and LaStarza and Rocky wasn't a favorite much of the time.
Everyone gets on me because I seemingly diss him by ranking him 3rd I'm not going to post on here and get berated because I don't go along with whatever is TAUGHT to say...I'm not saying Ali isn't great but I get treated like I am because I put him 3rd...get a fucking grip people.
I rated him third and it's not changing so GET OVER IT
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
...and Ali could have flown a rocketship to the moon too...doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about.
And no Ali wouldn't have had an easy time with either of those fighters even in HYPOTHETICAL fights. Joe Louis 25 title defenses, Rocky Marciano 49-0-0....what concrete evidence do you present on Ali's behalf???
I'm talking in mythical matchups 1st
1st of all...Louis & Marciano never dealt with someone like Ali ever in their careers. And forget Ezzard Charles because he wasn't even in the same league as Ali. Both Louis & MArciano were flat footed stationary fighters with the style that Ali would dance circles around and hit at will before they had time to set their flat footed feet. Louis would not outbox Ali and Marciano would not come close to ko'ing the iron jawed ali. Most people think of Ali is this safety style 1st fighter, especially the younger generation. But Ali was a warrior who liked to fight and had the heart, will and chin along with god given natural athleticism that way surpassed Those two other guys.
If you want to go by ring records and defenses then you have a gripe...i guess.
But the fact of the matter is... They didn't call most of Louis's defences "bums of the month " for nothing. And most of Marciano's opponents were "bums", and the fact that he fought them sometimes more than once to pad his record.
Ali fought the best of the best and beat them all. MAny of Ali's opponents are now Hall Of famers themselves.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
....you don't want to debate me on this...I'm giving you a chance to let it go so I don't unload on you and rip your arguement to shreds
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
....you don't want to debate me on this...I'm giving you a chance to let it go so I don't unload on you and rip your arguement to shreds
LOL!! ok.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Neither did Sven Ottke
Well yes but Svenn also didn't fight the quality guys Rocky fought: Louis, Walcott, Charles, Layne, and LaStarza and Rocky wasn't a favorite much of the time.
Everyone gets on me because I seemingly diss him by ranking him 3rd I'm not going to post on here and get berated because I don't go along with whatever is TAUGHT to say...I'm not saying Ali isn't great but I get treated like I am because I put him 3rd...get a fucking grip people.
I rated him third and it's not changing so
GET OVER IT
It just seems that you rank Marciano so highly based on 2 things. One is he's undefeated. And two (don't take this the wrong way, but I know you are) he's white. I mean Marciano is top 5. But to rank him ahead of Ali is as Tyson would say ludicrous. Ali beat the better fighters. And had a greater impact in boxing. That can't be argued. And like you I couldn't stand the man. Fukk Ali. He's a racist bittch. But he was a great fighter. Greater than Marciano.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Where does him being white have anything to do with him being #2? Rocky NEVER LOST ....IF Ali never lost I'd have him up there but he did lose and he didn't successfully defend his title as many times as Louis. Simple facts and simple reasons and those can't be argued with. If Tyson never lost he'd be up there too but he did lose and he lost to someone who wasn't great and who wasn't supposed to beat him either.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Where does him being white have anything to do with him being #2? Rocky NEVER LOST ....IF Ali never lost I'd have him up there but he did lose and he didn't successfully defend his title as many times as Louis. Simple facts and simple reasons and those can't be argued with. If Tyson never lost he'd be up there too but he did lose and he lost to someone who wasn't great and who wasn't supposed to beat him either.
Geezz...is that how you rate fighters?( by the least losses) That's pretty damn shallow for being a boxing fan. The truely great fighters are the ones that deal with adversity and can comeback.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Where does him being white have anything to do with him being #2? Rocky NEVER LOST ....IF Ali never lost I'd have him up there but he did lose and he didn't successfully defend his title as many times as Louis. Simple facts and simple reasons and those can't be argued with. If Tyson never lost he'd be up there too but he did lose and he lost to someone who wasn't great and who wasn't supposed to beat him either.
Louis lost 3 times. Why don't you rank Marciano over him?
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Where does him being white have anything to do with him being #2? Rocky NEVER LOST ....IF Ali never lost I'd have him up there but he did lose and he didn't successfully defend his title as many times as Louis. Simple facts and simple reasons and those can't be argued with. If Tyson never lost he'd be up there too but he did lose and he lost to someone who wasn't great and who wasn't supposed to beat him either.
If you want to put it like that, then Joe Calza should be ahead of Rocky. Jc's made the most title defences in any weight division and and has never lost and has fought quality opposition. How many defences did rocky make and how many has jc made, unbeated in 11 years. So your argument is based on rubbish and no i dont think JC is anywhere near the top 10 p4p figheters ever.
To put it plainly, rocky nowhere near made as much of a impact like ali did, and like i said earlier when im old and gray and my kids and grandkids asks me about boxing, the Ali tapes are going in.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Where does him being white have anything to do with him being #2? Rocky NEVER LOST ....IF Ali never lost I'd have him up there but he did lose and he didn't successfully defend his title as many times as Louis. Simple facts and simple reasons and those can't be argued with. If Tyson never lost he'd be up there too but he did lose and he lost to someone who wasn't great and who wasn't supposed to beat him either.
Lyle bro,Luv you lung time but Numbers can be overrated as far as A fighters record.Sometimes a fighter really experiences how great or not so great they are AFTER a loss.As for the Hypothetical....I respect Marciano but Just Me...I think Ali would have out sped & skilled him and boxed his ears off.
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Ali reigned in the greatest HW era of all time, When he started in the early 1960's the level of competition was about the same as it was during the reign of Marciano with the exception of Charles and Joe Walcott,
Ali beat Liston...A man still considered one of the mos feared fighters of all time....(Lets avoid the whole fix in the second and mob ties bullshit that usually follows shall we)...He beat Frazier....(Lets not start saying well Joe was smaller then todays guys and would have lost in the 90's)....He beat a vicious George Foreman.....
Ali beat every contender and then some there was to fight...Something I don't think anyone else can say with the exception of Louis...and Lewis...
The contenders back then were more skilled then most champions are today....
Ali reinvented himself no less then 3 times...
He went from lighting quick kid who had the reflexes of a lightweight in the early parts.....
He became a fighter that used the mental game to get into fighters heads...Used flash and was the master of dirty fighting...yes ALI was dirty (and I am a fan)...On his best day Bernard Hopkins who prides himself on such things is not a tenth as ring savvy as Ali was...Ali hit and held, hit behind the head, hit after the bell....but it worked for him
He became a fighter that used his tremendous chin to actually let guys punch themselves out.....
Two of his 5 losses were waayyy past his best..Berbick and Spinks)...Rumor still circulates to the fact he lost the Spinks bout on purpose so he could regain the title one last time and be the first man to hold the title 3 times...knowing he was winding down and it was possibly his Last chance to really accomplish anything....Even his loss to Homes was past his best....
(Though that is in no way a dig at Holmes Larry was a great champion in his own right)....
There is no shame in losing a bout to Ken Norton...Ken was a hard guy to fight and he had an odd style that was hard to adjust to...His other loss during his prime years was to Frazier a widely recognized top 10 all time HW....A loss that had to do with as much to atrition as Fraziers skill
He was never beaten in his prime handily....Also Ali lost 3 of his best years so in is return to the ring after exile was an Ali who had lost some of his youth...and just because a fighter gets knocked down does not take away from his skill......Sorry to break the news to some of the guys out there who seem to use that against many fighters throughout these boards....
Ali may have or may have not been the best HW of all time thus far...He is No less then second...He certainly fought better men in their prime then Louis or Marciano....Louis was KO'd flat in his prime years and Marciano had a great chin, stamina and will power but could not box for shit!...Fact not opinion...
It was Ali being able to reinvent himself so often, the fact Ali turned this sport into the mass publics eye, the fact Ali invented the mind game, the mega fights, the way he brought it all together at once when need be that made him the Greatest....There was more to it then skill alone.....
Anyone who questions Ali in even the slightest or feels he was not as good as made out to be...knows nothing about the sport of boxing
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Ali reigned in the greatest HW era of all time, When he started in the early 1960's the level of competition was about the same as it was during the reign of Marciano with the exception of Charles and Joe Walcott,
Ali beat Liston...A man still considered one of the mos feared fighters of all time....(Lets avoid the whole fix in the second and mob tie bullshit that follows shall we)...He beat Frazier....(Lets not start saying well Joe was smaller then todays guys and would have lost in the 90's)....He beat a vicious George Foreman.....
Al beat every contender and then some there was to fight...Something I don't think anyone else can say with the exception of Louis...and Lewis...
The contenders back then were more skilled then most champions are today....
Ali reinvented himself no less then 3 times...
He went from lighting quick kid who had the reflexes of a lightweight in the early parts.....
He became a fighter that used the mental game to get into fighters heads...Used flash and was the master of dirty fighting...yes ALI was dirty (and I am a fan)...On his best day Bernard Hopkins who prides himself on such things is not a tenth as ring savvy as Ali was...Ali hit and held, hit behind the head, hit after the bell....but it worked for him
He became a fighter that used his tremendous chin to actually let guys punch themselves out.....
Two of his 5 losses were waayyy past his best..Berbick and Spinks)...Rumor still circulates to the fact he lost the Spinks bout on purpose so he could regain the title one last time and be the first man to hold the title 3 times...knowing he was winding down and it was possibly his Last chance to really accomplish anything....Even his loss to Homes was past his best....
(Though that is in no way a dig at Holmes Larry was a great champion in his own right)....
There is no shame in losing a bout to Ken Norton...Ken was a hard guy to fight and he had an odd style that was hard to adjust to...His other loss was to Frazier....
He was never beaten in his prime...and just because a fighter gets knocked down does not take away from his skill......Sorry to break the news to some of the guys out there who seem to use that against many fighters throughout these boards....
Ali may have or may have not been the best HW of all time thus far...He is No less then second...He certainly fought better men in their prime then Louis or Marciano....Louis was KO'd flat in his prime years and Marciano had a great chin, stamina and will power but could not box for shit!...Fact not opinion...
It was Ali being able to reinvent himself so often, the fact Ali turned this sport into the mass publics eye, the fact Ali invented the mind game, the mega fights, the way he brought it all together at once when need be that made him the Greatest....There was more to it then skill alone.....
Anyone who questions Ali in even the slightest or feels he was not as good as made out to be...knows nothing about the sport of boxing
Touche!!
Re: Was Muhammad Ali really the best
Ali's era was the most exiting in Heavyweight history, Foreman knocked out Frazier and Norton, Ali knocked out Foreman, Frazier beat Ali, Norton beat Ali, Young beat Foreman, Holmes beat Norton and Ali. Liston beat Patterson and Ali beat Liston. Ali was the most outspoken and loudest, and drew more media attention than anyone else but again the best I question it. Foreman fought over 28 years and lost the same amount of fights as Ali, Holmes went 48-0, I think a list of the top 5 can be made but no one can argue that a certain fighter can be labeled as the best. Johnson was the greatest of his era, Marciano of his, Louis of his, Ali of his, Holmes of his and Tyson of his. The argument can go on forever.... In Ali's era you could say it was the best batch of talent, or you could say there was a lot of well matched great fighters, depending on their styles they beat each other and created the most memorable entertainment. Regarding the comment of anyone doubting Ali being the best doesn't know anything about boxing, is just ignorant.
