Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Yet again you didn't answer my question about the boxers i listed you seem to avoid it. Also how can i have Wlad as the best when he has not even faced the best fighter in his generation. Talk about these huge heavyweights but Tyson and Holyfeild did just fine there the same size as Ali. Also Foreman and Larry are bout the same size to actually the only really good big guys were Lewis, Bowe, and the brothers and best of them was Lewis who had a hard time with McCall and rematch he was having a break down and on drugs only real reason i felt Lewis won. Then Evander a old one at that gave Lewis a good run none of these guys a are super heavyweights yet they seem to do ok. I just don't get why your talking about Ali early career at least he didn't get iced as many times as Wlad did and fought the best that was there.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Ok let's try and untangle this mess you have created for me to solve 140...
There's a lot so let me do my best and we'll get there in the end.
For a start I hold Tyson and Holyfield up there with the greatest as well. They are 2 of my favourites. Of my top 6, Wladimir, Vitali, Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield and Tyson, I think there are precious few fighters who could beat them many times out of 10. Before we consider other 2nd tier champs from their generation youi have picked on or their conquerers, let's compare champs to champs and see where Muhammad rates against them. It seems to me the only fighter whom Muhammad stands good chances to beat is Holyfield.
Because Holyfield did not have the punch to put Ali away easily and Ali had the range+speed advantage over Holyfield. Holyfield had the chin to survive though and even though I still tip Holy to win either by KO or by UD (I personally think he is a better trained and fundamentally better skilled boxer) I admit that Muhammad has a stylistic possibility here, it would be a good match. This assumes a 74 Ali f course for me.
Of the remaining 5 top dogs of the modern era I see no way shape or form that Ali could survive let alone succeed.
But they all suffered losses to lesser opponents. Well my first answer to that is that it is HW boxing. Anything can happen. Does it mean that Sander's, Brewster or Puritty are better than Wlad? No. That Rahman or McCall are better than Lewis? No. Vitali hasn't really suffered what could be considered a clear loss ever, Lewis vs Vitali is imo an entirely even prospect and Byrd should send him a present in the mail for the gift. Was Buster, Williams, McBride really better than Tyson? No. Bowe has a single loss to only Holyfield anyway which was not as convincing as his victories ad his struggles with Golota were due to his blimpness and lack of training.
One of the uniting features about all of these clear losses, and this is key, is that they were either highly skilled boxers anyway or with good unique attributes, sometimes with good records too but most importantly all of them had a big punch and were capable of causing an upset at anytime!!
And this is key, you asked if they could why not Muhammad? Because Muhammad is a featherfist, one of the most punch weak champs of all time and he did not have the firepower to cause an upset pure and simple like any of their conquerers did!
Turn to Ali,
It is not clear that Berbick, Holmes, Spinks, Norton or Frazier are worse than Ali likw the above fighters of mine. To the contrary, some argue that Frazier or Norton should have won 2 out of 3 of their fights! Some argue Spinks should have won again too. I would say Holmes was much better than Ali and Berbick well I'll even giv you Ali was shot so who knows!
The worst part though is that none of those opponents were big punchers, they were all featherfists compared with the modern era!! These guys did not "UPSET" Ali, they in fact OUTBOXED him! With the exception of the extraordinary effort of Buster Douglas, none of the 5 boxers mentioned of mine were ever "OUT-BOXED!" Excepet by each other!
And the plot thickens with Ali...
It turns out that if Ali was not gifted in a lot of his fights he in fact would have lost several more. The Young fight, the Cooper fight, maybe even one of the Liston fights.
About the only difficult oppoennt Ali faced by modern standards, Foreman, Ali succeeded in much the same fashion as Puritty did against Wlad and Ali ducked Foreman for the rest of his life!
LAter we'll look at some other Wlad+Vitali+Lewis opponents that you have rubbished as lacklustre and we'll see if we can once again adjust fantasy, to the comparitive truth of the matter.
In short what you think of as a "bum" in this era, could be HW champ or contender in a previous.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Ali had a 61 percent knock out rate which is not bad still the only man to knock Foreman out. Also Ali was never Knocked out cold either not once in his career. Only stoppage was when he was 38 years old and it was a corner stoppage to Holmes and he was gone by then. Do i think Ali could knock out a gassed Wald yea do i think he could out box Tyson well buster did do i think he could out box Lewis Mercer did. Holyfeild is my favorite fighter and that fight would look like shit if it happened. I don't know why you think Ali would get blasted out when he never has before and fought for some time. People fighting today would be champ maybe in the 50s and back but the craft has gone down a lot in the heavyweights. Admek is in the top ten and he could not fucking cut it at lhw tell me the era is strong come on now.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Also look at how well Holmes did in the 90's and he was pretty much a mold for Ali. He should got the nod and the belt off McCall a man who knocked Lewis out. Hell he also beat Mercer with ease a guy Lewis got gift against pretty much. My how the times now are so much better its crazy right.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Let's look at this era in more detail. Byrd and Ruiz were champions for crying out loud. Even James Toney a big fat MW did very well as HW. In fact I thought he won the first Peter fight. So do people think Ali would not do well against this bunch? In this era only Holyfield and Lennox Lewis where really good fighters. Let's face facts. Wlad has never been tested in his career. Could he win a very hard fight when he need to dig down deep to pull out a win? I doubt it. Ali did, so did Holyfield and Lewis. Heart chin and ring smarts are major factors in boxing. I don't see anyone today that has that. Anyone who is willing to walk through fire in order to win. I see good but not great.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Add Roy Jones to the list beating ruiz. All you need is a ref that will not allow holding and Wlad would not be as effective with someone with speed. :)
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Ali had a 61 percent knock out rate which is not bad still the only man to knock Foreman out. Also Ali was never Knocked out cold either not once in his career. Only stoppage was when he was 38 years old and it was a corner stoppage to Holmes and he was gone by then. Do i think Ali could knock out a gassed Wald yea do i think he could out box Tyson well buster did do i think he could out box Lewis Mercer did. Holyfeild is my favorite fighter and that fight would look like shit if it happened. I don't know why you think Ali would get blasted out when he never has before and fought for some time. People fighting today would be champ maybe in the 50s and back but the craft has gone down a lot in the heavyweights. Admek is in the top ten and he could not fucking cut it at lhw tell me the era is strong come on now.
See this is where you guys misinterpret the records. "61% KO ratio" is his old time standard record.
If you calculate his KO% against what we would today consider "Heavyweights" his KO ratio drops to a shocking 33%! That's bad. That's REAL bad. It tells us that Muhammad was in reality, a blown up cruiser like the ones we see today. If you want to view Ali's total record including those opponents then you have to include the total record of all of guys like David Haye as "HW" and you can then see the quality of Haye as a "HW fighter".
Further, Ali's fights featured not a single proper KO against any modern sized opponent. Show me an example where Wladimir has ever been dropped or hurt by a guy that weak? Never! They were all hulking modern HW's!!
Ali was basically KO'd by Henry friggin Cooper! As if Henry could ever drop Wlad even if he stood there with his hands by his side!
Wladimir's chin is greater than Ali's chin... Undisputable FACT! Because Wladimir's chin was tested against the power of the modern HW division. Ali's division was by comparision, punch weak! Frazier landed continuously on Ali for eample, the correct interpretation is not that Ali had great chin, Frazier had a weak punch! And it makes sense becuse Ali LOOKS chinnier than Wlad (as does Fraier), Frazier LOOKS punch weak (as does Ali). FOTC is in reality proof how limited both fighters really were!
Of course there's George Foreman, indeed a hard puncher and Muhammad survived the onslught there to get the drop on him. Well my friend, 2 things, Ali did not take a flush shot fro George on the chin virtually the whole fight, so judging his chin from this fight is something of a misnomer, he did have to attend hospital for his body injuries though. And as for George that was the most stupidly executed gameplan in all of boxing! Wladimir is a better and sharper boxer than George in every way and he wold never ever fight so ridiculous as that.
Wladimir would systematically break Muhammad down over several rounds, punishing every move he made until he was a charmed cobra who stands right in front of him, instinctively glued in spot, ready to be knocked out. He caught Chris Byrd for christ sake! In the Chagaev fight the bell went, Wlad dropped his hands early an he caught a full power shot from Chag on the chin and shook it off, Chagaev a fighter stronger than any opponent of Ali!
I'm not convinced Ali could handle Tomasz Adamek or even Jean Marc Mormeck personally.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Also look at how well Holmes did in the 90's and he was pretty much a mold for Ali. He should got the nod and the belt off McCall a man who knocked Lewis out. Hell he also beat Mercer with ease a guy Lewis got gift against pretty much. My how the times now are so much better its crazy right.
Another serious problem with the logic.
The 3 incidences that are brang up most readily are comebacking Holmes and Foreman against the 90's fighters and old Holyfield against the 00's fighters. First of all, old greats have been coming back a decade or more past their prime throughout boxing history and have performed at the top level. It's only these 3 that are invoked to prove a point, Holmes and Foreman to protect the idea of a golden age (of which the 90's was clearly better), Holyfield to dismiss the Klitshko era.
By this logic then, every genertaion has been steadily getting worse since the fossils of the previous era(s) could hang with them. Something isn't quite right with that theory is it.
The answer is that athleticism and youth play big roles in boxing which is why they will always be successful qualities yet almost equally important is experience and ring IQ!
When Sultan Ibragimov takes on Evander Holyfield, he's not just fighting an older version, but one with the experience of an entire career worth of fights under his belt, same as Holmes vs Mercer.
No I don't think that Holyfield was as good as the prime Holyfield. But I think the difference is not so great as you make it seem!
Holmes and Foreman have even further advantages in their old age, they also had a weight advantage. Weight is such an important factor in boxing that it can make even a bum oppoennt dangerous. The chub might have been detrimental to their athleticism but certainly added to chin and crude power and resistance.
Besides, MErcer was a tanker, he hit hard and took a lot of punches, McCall was inconsistent, Valuev was an oaf, none of them actually fought many live bodies and WON did they??
In the case of Foreman I would even go so far as to say that old Foreman was just as effective as young Foreman!!
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Max power is a joker. Ali's chin can not be disputed taking monster punchers like Foreman, Shavers and Frazier illustrates that. To call these guy weak punchers illustrates how mad you are.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Max power is a joker. Ali's chin can not be disputed taking monster punchers like Foreman, Shavers and Frazier illustrates that. To call these guy weak punchers illustrates how mad you are.
Well you can carry on the believe that Master but I am definitely not joking.
Earnie Shavers was a hard puncher for CW's (KO ratio in the 90%ile)
Against real HW punchers his KO ratio is nothing special, 60%ile.
Against 233+ opponents, the average size of Wladimir's opponents, his KO ratio is non existent!
Plus he is virtually a bum, unco as and has virtually no wins against quality opponents! So we can conclude that Shaver's power was dangerous only to CW's and bums or both but not so much to anything approaching a modern HW. Not surprising since Shavers is about the size of a modern CW!
Let me clarify here, the 70's Ali, DID have a good chin, just not an "iron" chin. Te 60's version, the little guy, did not imo. It was chubby Ali of the 70's with the chin, not the lean athletic version.
As for Foreman, Ali did not TAKE bombs from Foreman. Show me the part of their fight where Foreman lands clean shots to Ali's head? You will struggle! Apparently Ali knew he was lucky here too because he ducked a rematch for the rest of his life!
That George is a hard puncher though is not in dispute.
As for Frazier, KO ratio 46% against 200+, already a featherfist. The size of an out of shape modern CW. What is more you can SEE how weak the punches were, just look at them and then compare them to a Wladimir right, a Lewis uppercut, a Tyson hook, and you can SEE the difference is staggering.
Ali could absorb a lot of punishment, only a fool would dispute that. Single hard shots were not imo his strong suit because except on rare occasions, he was never really subjected to them! Not his fault, it was his era!
Atleast if you want to rate a version of Muhammad Ali against the criteria of modern boxing, please PLEASE confine your comparisons to the heftier, smarter, 70's Ali who is concievably competitive, any promotion of 60's Ali who never once faced what we would describe today as a "decent opponent" is as outrageous as Louis beating Bowe!
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Listen most of the guys were over 200 pounds that not cw and i don't think weighing 230 makes your chin way better cant really buff up your chin. If that was true then Lewis and Wlad would not have been knocked that fuck out like they were man weight 210 to 220 with a well placed punch can end things.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
wlad has a better chin than ali? maxpower better quit while hes behind. your crazy claims are getting more insane by the post.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Listen most of the guys were over 200 pounds that not cw and i don't think weighing 230 makes your chin way better cant really buff up your chin. If that was true then Lewis and Wlad would not have been knocked that fuck out like they were man weight 210 to 220 with a well placed punch can end things.
Look I'm not saying that being very heavy automatically confers iron chin and power punching, of course that is not always the case. Valuev was not the hardest hitter, and Wlad definitely doesn't have the hardest chin. Conversely Tyson was a hard hitter and Holyfield did have an iron chin.
The point is though is that I'm not stating these "laws of boxing" if you will for individual circumstances, I am stating them as general principles that can be applied to all opponents across a boxers career. That the heftier the opponents are, the harder they hit and the harder the punch they can take! That is statistically and reasonably obvious!
Yeah sure I'm not denying that a 210-220lbs guy could KO a big man. Tyson obviously could.
Frazier and Ali did not. Shavers never did unless the opponent was either Bummy, or a glass jaw named Ken Norton.
McCall, Rahman and Sanders were the only cold KO's of Wlad and Lenny (Puritty was a gas and Brewster was an illness), and all 3 of them involved cracker punches the likes of which Ali never took or never could deliver.
Shavers might have produced a punch somewhere approaching the power of McCall (although I would argue otherwise) but he could never have delivered it on Wlad or Lenny.
One thing I want you to understand is that those old school "HW's" that weighed 200-210lbs, were what we would today consider CW's. Today's CW's undergo an artificial dehydration days before the fight to make weight and often put on as much as 15lbs before the actual fight.
So when I say that a CW fighter today would have been considered a HW back in Ali's day for instance, they in fact ARE real HW's at fight time even by todays standard!
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
wlad has a better chin than ali? maxpower better quit while hes behind. your crazy claims are getting more insane by the post.
But I'm not behind. I just made a common sense observation, that a massive square jawed boxer who has only been cold KO'd just once legitimately (in which there was a sandwich headbutt and he still finished on his feet after getting up several times) against the hardest punching division in history over 65 fights has a harder chin than a blown up CW with a pencil neck.
One of these guys was dropped by a 185lb boxer, one of them was not.
One of them faced and tasted power punchers from the career average of 235lbs with solid records.
And the other faced and tasted the power from career average of 200lbs with bummy records.
I can give examples where Wlad was whacked hard and either did not drop (Chag) or got up to win (Peter). Where are the analogues of this for Ali?
The correct description I think is that Ali had a great chin FOR HIS ERA, but would today be knocked out readily.
Wladimir today has a questionable chin but back in Ali's era would have been virtually indestructible.
Re: Is this the worst era in HW boxing history?
nope. you have never made a common sense post. your only argument is that wlad is better because he is better. i have already told you that there have been big HWs in the past but you call them oafs. yet if i call big HWs today oafs then you just say that im wrong. for example, joe louis fought abe simon (6'4), primo carnera (6'6), and buddy baer (6'6) and they were all modern HW weight. louis knocked them all out. but again, you just say that they are oafs because you have watched them fight but corrie sanders, who is actually smaller than all 3 of those guys, is faster than ali, and hits like a truck and we know this because he knocked out wlad so he must be really good even though he wasnt even thought to be a threat to wlad when they fought because sanders was viewed as an easy fight.
thats your common sense.
