Can ANYBODY in history defeat 1967 Ali?

What about a prime Lennox? Or a 1991 Holyfield? Or 1988 Tyson? You know, the Tyson who just bludgeon Holmes and Spinks

Is it safe to say, that, that exciting Muhammad Ali that we all remember from the 1970s was only just a shell of what he was in the 60s?

And still look what he accomplished in the 1970s, as a heavier and slower and older more flat-footed fighter that he ever was before. And yet still he would mix it up and go toe-to-toe and still out punch and out box everybody

Look how he had to get revenge two times each against Ken Norton and Joe Frazier.

Always wonder what a Foreman rematch would have looked like.

It's hard I think to imagine anybody greater than Muhammad Ali. So what do you all say? Is there anybody seriously in the history of boxing who could be a prime Muhammad Ali? If so who would that be?

I always say that although I might be biased, Ali is the GOAT. The few fights before he lost his license were his peak and he looked unstoppable. With that said, nobody is actually unstoppable. I think that it would have taken someone like Holyfield to beat him. Someone who would come forward and could take all that he gave him.

Excellent points.

Yeah prime Evander 1991 would be nearly impossible for anyone, though I believe Foreman in 1973 would demolish Evander. Hell when Foreman was 42 years old he put a hurt on Holyfield that Holyfield says was the worst he ever got. And that is slow old man George Foreman.

Still wish there was a rematch between Ali and Foreman. Foreman would not have fought that same kind of fight. I think formans Jab if he had thrown 25 Jabs per round would have landed consistently on Ali's face, and would have made a big difference after four or five rounds. That coupled with George Foreman not throwing so many bombs and tiring himself out.

Also Ali got away with murder with all the holding and grabbing behind the head

But yeah 1966 1967 Muhammad Ali even 1965 and even 1964 somewhat this guy Cassius Clay was untouchable.

Yes he could be beaten. Incredible ring general he was, yes he was beatable, all fighters are from the best to the worst. Incredible boxer, outstanding skill, but yes he could have been beaten.

Holyfield I think is a guy in ANY era of boxing he'd give the best of the best of the best a hard time. Joe Louis was like that, Marciano to an extent (given he wasn't even really heavyweight sized) was like that. Not that they'd be the ones to beat Ali, but they were just not easy fights at any point in their careers. Foreman kind of evolved and his raw ability as a young fighter is only rivaled by Wilder.

Lennox may have the size and skill to overpower Ali, Tyson had the speed and power to trouble Ali, Holmes had the jab and chin but they are not greater than him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Lennox may have the size and skill to overpower Ali, Tyson had the speed and power to trouble Ali, Holmes had the jab and chin but they are not greater than him.

---

Greater doesn't always win though does it? We can look back on any number of fights where the overwhelming favorite got beat and in hypothetical matchups sometimes that is lost or dismissed.

Ali took punches from some big boppers in Foreman and Frazier and Shavers, but who is to say what would happen if someone was able to keep Ali at arm's length and force Ali to get on the inside? Never happened. Ali DID struggle with guys with good jabs, but that's later in his career.


Some people feel better putting Ali on a pedestal and saying he's The Goat and he'd never get beaten the same way others do it about Tyson or I've done it about Louis and Marciano, but those are just personal preferences at the end of the day. There's something to like about the swagger, the style, the grit, the heart, the performances put on by those incredible athletes and hell it's something that is across all sport. People love to elevate those they truly enjoyed to godlike status....some of them made their skills seem divine Ali was certainly one of them.








......but he's no Joe Louis ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Lennox may have the size and skill to overpower Ali, Tyson had the speed and power to trouble Ali, Holmes had the jab and chin but they are not greater than him.

---

Greater doesn't always win though does it? We can look back on any number of fights where the overwhelming favorite got beat and in hypothetical matchups sometimes that is lost or dismissed.

Ali took punches from some big boppers in Foreman and Frazier and Shavers, but who is to say what would happen if someone was able to keep Ali at arm's length and force Ali to get on the inside? Never happened. Ali DID struggle with guys with good jabs, but that's later in his career.


Some people feel better putting Ali on a pedestal and saying he's The Goat and he'd never get beaten the same way others do it about Tyson or I've done it about Louis and Marciano, but those are just personal preferences at the end of the day. There's something to like about the swagger, the style, the grit, the heart, the performances put on by those incredible athletes and hell it's something that is across all sport. People love to elevate those they truly enjoyed to godlike status....some of them made their skills seem divine Ali was certainly one of them.








......but he's no Joe Louis ;)

---

Yes he is greater ;D

BTW i am sure you know this when I say great I was not saying it because it was Ali's saying it was all that he achieved in the ring.

Great thread. I’ve said in the past that I don’t believe he is the GOAT as a Boxer. Obviously the total impact he had was iconic , possibly more than any other human let alone sportsman.
But when you narrow it down to Ali in ‘67, I don’t think anybody does beat him.
But even more intriguing, if there had been an “Ali of ‘68 & ‘69”, I truly think there would be absolutely no argument whatsoever. Shame really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Yes he is greater ;D

BTW i am sure you know this when I say great I was not saying it because it was Ali's saying it was all that he achieved in the ring.

---

25 Consecutive Successful Title Defenses...a measurable statistical accomplishment greater than ....wait for it.....wait for it....ANY.OTHER.HEAVYWEIGHT.CHAMPION.....let's put that in a time frame.....EVER.


I rest my case

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Great thread. I’ve said in the past that I don’t believe he is the GOAT as a Boxer. Obviously the total impact he had was iconic , possibly more than any other human let alone sportsman.
But when you narrow it down to Ali in ‘67, I don’t think anybody does beat him.
But even more intriguing, if there had been an “Ali of ‘68 & ‘69”, I truly think there would be absolutely no argument whatsoever. Shame really.

---

Let us not forget that Joe Louis lost years of his prime as well.....and again 25 title defenses in a row

Thread of the Year

My finally take on this manner is that '67 Ali would outspeed any fighter in history. Or even 1965-1968 Ali as well. Frazier would've HAD to fight Ali WAY SOONER THAN MARCH 8, 1971, had Ali not been revoked. By 1968 or '69, an Ali-Frazier fight would've been forced to challenge for the title.
In 1968/69, a continuously active Ali would have whipped a younger, less experienced Frazier.

Prime Evander would dog the hell outta Ali but land few shots, maybe a boring fight due to styles. Can't picture Evander trying to cut the ring off for 15 rounds. That's just not his style.

Lennox ' s size would be tough for Ali but Lennox had shit stamina (and Ali would knock him out by the 10th or 11th or 12th round. I can see Lennox gasping for breath by about the 10th round and then Ali would just slice him like a razor blade. Ali wood pretty much due to Lennox Lewis what he did to George Foreman, it would just take him about 5 more rounds too do it. Ali TKO 13
IT WOULD SORT OF LOOK LIKE HOLMES VS COONEY.

Marciano and Dempsey would be too small

the only people I can think of at this may sound crazy but what about a prime Klitschko?

What about a prime Jack Johnson or Joe Louis?

I am not going to criticize Joe Louis accomplishments in his 25 defences. As for him beating Ali, he was too small and slow.

Jack Johnson was way ahead of his time and was huge for his time period with the skills to match. Wonder how Johnson would manage 12 and 15 rounds compared to the 45 he was doing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

I am not going to criticize Joe Louis accomplishments in his 25 defences. As for him beating Ali, he was too small and slow.

Jack Johnson was way ahead of his time and was huge for his time period with the skills to match. Wonder how Johnson would manage 12 and 15 rounds compared to the 45 he was doing?

---

You're not going to criticize it because you can't. You could say "Who really did he beat?" but I'd counter with "OK then who did he duck?". Louis was 6'2...too slow? Where do you get that? He was fast enough to knock out the majority of the fighters he faced.


Jack Johnson was 6'0 & 1/2", Dempsey was 6'1, Jess Willard was 6'6 & 1/2" ....so "huge" for his time period....meh John L. Sullivan was 5'10 & 1/2", Jim Corbett was 6'1, James J. Jeffries was 6'1 & 1/2". Not really all that much of a "giant" unless you're talking personality and then yeah sure thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

I am not going to criticize Joe Louis accomplishments in his 25 defences. As for him beating Ali, he was too small and slow.

Jack Johnson was way ahead of his time and was huge for his time period with the skills to match. Wonder how Johnson would manage 12 and 15 rounds compared to the 45 he was doing?

---

You're not going to criticize it because you can't. You could say "Who really did he beat?" but I'd counter with "OK then who did he duck?". Louis was 6'2...too slow? Where do you get that? He was fast enough to knock out the majority of the fighters he faced.


Jack Johnson was 6'0 & 1/2", Dempsey was 6'1, Jess Willard was 6'6 & 1/2" ....so "huge" for his time period....meh John L. Sullivan was 5'10 & 1/2", Jim Corbett was 6'1, James J. Jeffries was 6'1 & 1/2". Not really all that much of a "giant" unless you're talking personality and then yeah sure thing.

---

Ok, remember I did not ask for this, you made me do it.

Joe did not duck anyone but whoever they were they were not of the calibre or league of Liston, Frazier and Foreman.

Remember Billy Conn, if a light heavy can out box Joe who was a slow starter and got knocked down early in some of his defences what would a full grown prime Ali do?

Jack Johnson I believe weighed over 15 stones which was heavy for that time period. He had great boxing skills too. I was not talking about height.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Ok, remember I did not ask for this, you made me do it.

Joe did not duck anyone but whoever they were they were not of the calibre or league of Liston, Frazier and Foreman.

Remember Billy Conn, if a light heavy can out box Joe who was a slow starter and got knocked down early in some of his defences what would a full grown prime Ali do?

Jack Johnson I believe weighed over 15 stones which was heavy for that time period. He had great boxing skills too. I was not talking about height.

---

I made you do NOTHING. Bring your tired ass arguments. Joe didn't duck anyone, THANK YOU for proving, my point.

Billy Conn got BEAT....twice. You can do nothing but speculate as to what a full grown prime Ali would do...Joe Louis certainly had better nights than the Conn fight and Ali certainly had worse nights than the Williams fight. You make the mistake of taking the best of the best of the best of Ali and then holding up an overall poor Joe Louis performance (one where he needed a KO and GOT IT mind you) and say "You think this could beat this?"....why would it not be Ali as Conn who boxes perfectly for 15 rounds and then gets KO'd late trying to finish the show? Why in your mind does that NEVER happen? Surely Ali never suffered a KO loss like that BUT Joe Louis certainly dealt those out.


And that's the problem in a nutshell with this game...Marciano never lost a single fight and yet "Well he's too small to beat Ali" ....well I guess Marciano stood no chance vs the larger Rex Layne....oh wait.


I'm not hating on Ali by saying he's beatable, I'm merely pointing out Joe Louis' statistical achievement which no heavyweight has ever matched (or probably ever will) match. It's a special achievement and worthy of praise and accolade.


15 stone....210 pounds....again not "giant" ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Yes he is greater ;D

BTW i am sure you know this when I say great I was not saying it because it was Ali's saying it was all that he achieved in the ring.

---

25 Consecutive Successful Title Defenses...a measurable statistical accomplishment greater than ....wait for it.....wait for it....ANY.OTHER.HEAVYWEIGHT.CHAMPION.....let's put that in a time frame.....EVER.


I rest my case

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Great thread. I’ve said in the past that I don’t believe he is the GOAT as a Boxer. Obviously the total impact he had was iconic , possibly more than any other human let alone sportsman.
But when you narrow it down to Ali in ‘67, I don’t think anybody does beat him.
But even more intriguing, if there had been an “Ali of ‘68 & ‘69”, I truly think there would be absolutely no argument whatsoever. Shame really.

---

Let us not forget that Joe Louis lost years of his prime as well.....and again 25 title defenses in a row

---

Not gonna discount Louis obviously. But he was a bit before my time and I haven’t seen much of him. Although Louis’s record was clearly phenomenal, The way Ali changed the face of HW Boxing is unrivalled. Big guys never had speed and skills like him.

Size usually matters, I hate it but let's look at some examples where size really did mattered:

1. First based off Lennox Louis's destruction of everybody he ever faced (let aside for now his to knockout losses with HE REVENGED in a devastation-style), he only struggled against Klitshko. He really laid a whooping down to Ray Mercer and Mike Tyson, even though they are so powerful, Lennox size dominated.

2. Now Klitschko as the examples, he dominated everyone and his size was the big factor, but moment he faced the guy the same size as in AJ, and also in Fury, he choked in both battles. Because this size was bigger than his size.

3. Ruddock Bowe destroyed everyone he faced and was undefeated because he was always the biggest fighter. That is why he tried to avoid Lenox Louis. Finally when Bo faced a fighter his own size, Andrew Gollota, he got a butt whooping 2 *.

4. See how Foreman knocked out Frazier two times. Frasier can never win that fight. Why? Because size matters.

5. Least but not least, Valuev could not be beat, due to SIZE.

1. Wladimir had the size, athleticism, and skill to give Ali trouble- bad style matchup for Ali.
2. Lennox and Riddick were both big men who had the jabs and ability to beat a prime Ali.
3. Larry Holmes in his prime gives Ali trouble with his jab.
4. Fury is a horrible match up for Ali.
5. Frazier and Ken Norton have Ali’s number and bad style match ups- they could pull the win out.

Ali is favored vs all of those listed, but I think they all are capable of pulling off the upset vs the great Ali.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeeod

1. Wladimir had the size, athleticism, and skill to give Ali trouble- bad style matchup for Ali.
2. Lennox and Riddick were both big men who had the jabs and ability to beat a prime Ali.
3. Larry Holmes in his prime gives Ali trouble with his jab.
4. Fury is a horrible match up for Ali.
5. Frazier and Ken Norton have Ali’s number and bad style match ups- they could pull the win out.

Ali is favored vs all of those listed, but I think they all are capable of pulling off the upset vs the great Ali.

---

@mikeeod Mike that is a great analysis. I totally agree. Especially with your number 1 and number 2 and number 4. And youre wright Frazier in Norton both had his number

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Lennox may have the size and skill to overpower Ali, Tyson had the speed and power to trouble Ali, Holmes had the jab and chin but they are not greater than him.

---

Greater doesn't always win though does it? We can look back on any number of fights where the overwhelming favorite got beat and in hypothetical matchups sometimes that is lost or dismissed.

Ali took punches from some big boppers in Foreman and Frazier and Shavers, but who is to say what would happen if someone was able to keep Ali at arm's length and force Ali to get on the inside? Never happened. Ali DID struggle with guys with good jabs, but that's later in his career.


Some people feel better putting Ali on a pedestal and saying he's The Goat and he'd never get beaten the same way others do it about Tyson or I've done it about Louis and Marciano, but those are just personal preferences at the end of the day. There's something to like about the swagger, the style, the grit, the heart, the performances put on by those incredible athletes and hell it's something that is across all sport. People love to elevate those they truly enjoyed to godlike status....some of them made their skills seem divine Ali was certainly one of them.








......but he's no Joe Louis ;)

---

A contest between Ali and Vitali Klitschko would be fascinating. Ali of 1967 was lightning, but could he deal with the size? Vitali had chin, output, and could bang. Wlad is less interesting for me as I can just see him getting buzzed and folding. I have always liked Vitali more as a fighter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Lennox may have the size and skill to overpower Ali, Tyson had the speed and power to trouble Ali, Holmes had the jab and chin but they are not greater than him.

---

Greater doesn't always win though does it? We can look back on any number of fights where the overwhelming favorite got beat and in hypothetical matchups sometimes that is lost or dismissed.

Ali took punches from some big boppers in Foreman and Frazier and Shavers, but who is to say what would happen if someone was able to keep Ali at arm's length and force Ali to get on the inside? Never happened. Ali DID struggle with guys with good jabs, but that's later in his career.


Some people feel better putting Ali on a pedestal and saying he's The Goat and he'd never get beaten the same way others do it about Tyson or I've done it about Louis and Marciano, but those are just personal preferences at the end of the day. There's something to like about the swagger, the style, the grit, the heart, the performances put on by those incredible athletes and hell it's something that is across all sport. People love to elevate those they truly enjoyed to godlike status....some of them made their skills seem divine Ali was certainly one of them.








......but he's no Joe Louis ;)

---

A contest between Ali and Vitali Klitschko would be fascinating. Ali of 1967 was lightning, but could he deal with the size? Vitali had chin, output, and could bang. Wlad is less interesting for me as I can just see him getting buzzed and folding. I have always liked Vitali more as a fighter.

---

Vitali is good but he is way too open to get countered. Ali would cut him up badly. I see stylistically Wlad giving Ali some trouble, but his chin is too weak to really survive I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Ok, remember I did not ask for this, you made me do it.

Joe did not duck anyone but whoever they were they were not of the calibre or league of Liston, Frazier and Foreman.

Remember Billy Conn, if a light heavy can out box Joe who was a slow starter and got knocked down early in some of his defences what would a full grown prime Ali do?

Jack Johnson I believe weighed over 15 stones which was heavy for that time period. He had great boxing skills too. I was not talking about height.

---

I made you do NOTHING. Bring your tired ass arguments. Joe didn't duck anyone, THANK YOU for proving, my point.

Billy Conn got BEAT....twice. You can do nothing but speculate as to what a full grown prime Ali would do...Joe Louis certainly had better nights than the Conn fight and Ali certainly had worse nights than the Williams fight. You make the mistake of taking the best of the best of the best of Ali and then holding up an overall poor Joe Louis performance (one where he needed a KO and GOT IT mind you) and say "You think this could beat this?"....why would it not be Ali as Conn who boxes perfectly for 15 rounds and then gets KO'd late trying to finish the show? Why in your mind does that NEVER happen? Surely Ali never suffered a KO loss like that BUT Joe Louis certainly dealt those out.


And that's the problem in a nutshell with this game...Marciano never lost a single fight and yet "Well he's too small to beat Ali" ....well I guess Marciano stood no chance vs the larger Rex Layne....oh wait.


I'm not hating on Ali by saying he's beatable, I'm merely pointing out Joe Louis' statistical achievement which no heavyweight has ever matched (or probably ever will) match. It's a special achievement and worthy of praise and accolade.


15 stone....210 pounds....again not "giant" ;D

---

You made me do it and it hurts critizing the great Joe Louis.

Whilst i said Joe did not duck anyone you conveniently ignored the important fact that you can not dispute (but you will now try) that he never fought anyone of the calibre that Ali fought. Frazier, Foreman and Liston were great boxers better than anything Joe fought.

It is more than speculation that Joe had trouble with movers and Ali was all wrong for Louis.


It is not just size that Ali had the advantage it was speed and skill.


25 defences is a sign of a great heavyweight champion and i am not belittling that.


15 stone is big for those times when Johnson fought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

You made me do it and it hurts critizing the great Joe Louis.

Whilst i said Joe did not duck anyone you conveniently ignored the important fact that you can not dispute (but you will now try) that he never fought anyone of the calibre that Ali fought. Frazier, Foreman and Liston were great boxers better than anything Joe fought.

It is more than speculation that Joe had trouble with movers and Ali was all wrong for Louis.


It is not just size that Ali had the advantage it was speed and skill.


25 defences is a sign of a great heavyweight champion and i am not belittling that.


15 stone is big for those times when Johnson fought.

---

:rolleyes:


So he didn't duck anyone BUT he also didn't fight guys who weren't around during his era...gee how very dare he :vd:


And Ali what didn't have trouble with Joe Frazier? Compare just a left hand (all Frazier had when he beat Ali) to Louis' arsenal...dynamite in both hands, rarely misjudged distance, very accurate and devastating when he landed. I must be imagining things but didn't Henry Cooper almost KO Ali? Is 'enry on par with Louis in terms of greatness as a boxer?


Ali had speed and size advantages over most of the guys he fought....he still lost fights.


25 in a row is statistically the GREATEST


John L. Sullivan was just as big :shrug03: ...I don't doubt Johnson's greatness, just saying 'Galveston Giant' is a bit much. Bigger than the common man, perhaps, but still. Great fighter, giant personality, exceptionally tall? Nah. Exceptionally muscular? Nah. Just an exceptional fighter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

You made me do it and it hurts critizing the great Joe Louis.

Whilst i said Joe did not duck anyone you conveniently ignored the important fact that you can not dispute (but you will now try) that he never fought anyone of the calibre that Ali fought. Frazier, Foreman and Liston were great boxers better than anything Joe fought.

It is more than speculation that Joe had trouble with movers and Ali was all wrong for Louis.


It is not just size that Ali had the advantage it was speed and skill.


25 defences is a sign of a great heavyweight champion and i am not belittling that.


15 stone is big for those times when Johnson fought.

---

:rolleyes:


So he didn't duck anyone BUT he also didn't fight guys who weren't around during his era...gee how very dare he :vd:


And Ali what didn't have trouble with Joe Frazier? Compare just a left hand (all Frazier had when he beat Ali) to Louis' arsenal...dynamite in both hands, rarely misjudged distance, very accurate and devastating when he landed. I must be imagining things but didn't Henry Cooper almost KO Ali? Is 'enry on par with Louis in terms of greatness as a boxer?


Ali had speed and size advantages over most of the guys he fought....he still lost fights.


25 in a row is statistically the GREATEST


John L. Sullivan was just as big :shrug03: ...I don't doubt Johnson's greatness, just saying 'Galveston Giant' is a bit much. Bigger than the common man, perhaps, but still. Great fighter, giant personality, exceptionally tall? Nah. Exceptionally muscular? Nah. Just an exceptional fighter.

---

Why you rolling your eyes I thought this was a bit of fun?

I name 3 great heavyweights not because Joe never fought them which is impossible but he never fought anyone as good as them.

Ali may have been knocked down but he always got back up and had a fantastic chin.

Wlad was 2nd highest title defences but no one would have him as the 2nd best heavyweight of all time.

The point about Johnson is a separate point and unrelated to Ali but pointing out Johnson was ahead of his time.

A prime Ali is simply too fast and elusive for anyone and would dance the whole 12 (or 15) rounds. He UDs and schools even his most difficult opponent.

You could say those with one punch power would have a puncher's chance eg Tyson - but a prime Ali does not get hit, and even then has a hell of a jaw, so that cancels that one out.

The only fighters I see with any chance of troubling him are fighters like Vitali, Lewis and Fury - and that's purely based on their size.

and yes - good thread

How has it taken this long for this subject to come up ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Why you rolling your eyes I thought this was a bit of fun?

I name 3 great heavyweights not because Joe never fought them which is impossible but he never fought anyone as good as them.

Ali may have been knocked down but he always got back up and had a fantastic chin.

Wlad was 2nd highest title defences but no one would have him as the 2nd best heavyweight of all time.

The point about Johnson is a separate point and unrelated to Ali but pointing out Johnson was ahead of his time.

---

I am having a bit of fun dismantling your arguments.

Joe fought the best of the best in his era and won 25 in a row. How could you or anyone else expect anything more from the guy? Expecting more from him (especially considering, he like your much beloved Ali had years of his prime taken from him, Danke Adolf :shakehead: ) Is more ever expected of Ali? Why not? Joe Louis did everything a guy could do and in his era he dominated from 1938 to 1950 he was THE MAN and nobody in any era has been able to replicate his feat...and therefore it's impressive and therefore it deserves praise and attention and Joe Louis deserves his name listed at the tippy top of the All-Time greats of the division not because he had a weak era, but everything he COULD control he did and did so brilliantly. What is wrong with that?


I say great things about Joe Louis because he earned them. I don't or attempt to not diminish what Ali accomplished, I always mention that he's a great boxer...he's not MY Greatest of All-Time. Why is that a bother for some people? Rocky Marciano never lost a single fight .... how's it logical to say "Oh yeah Ali was better than Rocky because of his opponents"...Rocky couldn't pick and choose who he had in his era anymore than Ali did.


Ali had his glove cut to give him time to survive vs Cooper. I'm sorry, it's clever, it's smart thinking from Dundee, but come on dude.


Wlad's title defenses weren't all in a row. He cumulatively held the title longer than anyone else, but that involves LOSING in between title reigns so that dents his standing. I think he's top 10, based on resiliency and longevity at the top, but that's me and my personal opinion...others are free to vary.

Must people ALWAYS read my celebration of the Great Joe Louis as a disrespect to Muhammad Ali? Joe Louis is MY All-Time Greatest Heavyweight Champion he stands alone on top of the peak of the sport in that division and my view isn't going to budge an inch. Ali is up there, Marciano is up there...great champions, but the GREATEST, statistically the GREATEST is Joe Louis and had it not been for WW2 he could have easily had 35 successful title defenses in a row.


How exactly was Johnson ahead of his time? I'm not being an ass, I just am curious. The stick and move style for heavyweights had been around, perhaps the brash audaciousness and flashiness of the man himself was new, or perhaps due to the era it was broadcast farther and wider and therefore had a larger impact? I think Johnson's style had certainly been seen elsewhere, I think the sport was changing at the time, I think he was a big personality and an exceptional boxer, but new and unique altogether? Maybe. But I'm genuinely curious as to your thoughts on him being ahead of his time.

What are you bumbling on about? Of course you can only fight who is in your era.

Where have you dismantled my argument? You just keep ignoring what I wrote.

What I am saying quite clearly is that Ali fought 3 of the greatest heavyweights ever in the history of the division and you could not name me any who were better that Joe beat than them or who would be in anyone's top 10.

I am not expecting you to agree and you can have anyone as your number 1 heavyweight. Twenty five defences is a great statistic but use your common sense and intelligence. Joe was vulnerable early, got knocked down by relatively average fighters, slow footed and did not like movers. Joe was knocked out before became champion. All clear signs that Ali was the perfect boxer to beat Joe Louis, he was all wrong for him.

We can debate Jack Johnson another time he is getting in the way of this post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

What are you bumbling on about? Of course you can only fight who is in your era.

Where have you dismantled my argument? You just keep ignoring what I wrote.

What I am saying quite clearly is that Ali fought 3 of the greatest heavyweights ever in the history of the division and you could not name me any who were better that Joe beat than them or who would be in anyone's top 10.

I am not expecting you to agree and you can have anyone as your number 1 heavyweight. Twenty five defences is a great statistic but use your common sense and intelligence. Joe was vulnerable early, got knocked down by relatively average fighters, slow footed and did not like movers. Joe was knocked out before became champion. All clear signs that Ali was the perfect boxer to beat Joe Louis, he was all wrong for him.

We can debate Jack Johnson another time he is getting in the way of this post.

---

Well if you can only fight who is in your era why are you holding Joe Louis' era against him? He had no control over it!


:vd: ok sure, I didn't "dismantle your argument" whatever you say.


What makes those 3 heavyweights "great"? I didn't even attempt to list off who Joe Louis beat because good, bad, indifferent they are different fighters from different eras. And while you can look at someone like Max Baer and say "He wasn't great" in his era he was a big time somebody as was James J Braddock, Jimmy Bivins was a hell of a fighter quite underrated, Jersey Joe Walcott, Jack Sharkey was a quality fighter, Max Schmeling was a quality fighter, the nearly 6'7 Buddy Baer who had a very good record was easily taken out by Joe TWICE.


Louis had trouble with movers....ok and my response was Ali had trouble with Frazier who stalked Ali down each time they fought and guess what Ali lost one of those bouts. Louis had trouble with Walcott when Louis was well past it, but in the rematch Louis knocked him spark out.


Sorry, Joe Louis is my guy, I'd take him over ANY other heavyweight, ANY @Master.....ANY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

What are you bumbling on about? Of course you can only fight who is in your era.

Where have you dismantled my argument? You just keep ignoring what I wrote.

What I am saying quite clearly is that Ali fought 3 of the greatest heavyweights ever in the history of the division and you could not name me any who were better that Joe beat than them or who would be in anyone's top 10.

I am not expecting you to agree and you can have anyone as your number 1 heavyweight. Twenty five defences is a great statistic but use your common sense and intelligence. Joe was vulnerable early, got knocked down by relatively average fighters, slow footed and did not like movers. Joe was knocked out before became champion. All clear signs that Ali was the perfect boxer to beat Joe Louis, he was all wrong for him.

We can debate Jack Johnson another time he is getting in the way of this post.

---

Well if you can only fight who is in your era why are you holding Joe Louis' era against him? He had no control over it!


:vd: ok sure, I didn't "dismantle your argument" whatever you say.


What makes those 3 heavyweights "great"? I didn't even attempt to list off who Joe Louis beat because good, bad, indifferent they are different fighters from different eras. And while you can look at someone like Max Baer and say "He wasn't great" in his era he was a big time somebody as was James J Braddock, Jimmy Bivins was a hell of a fighter quite underrated, Jersey Joe Walcott, Jack Sharkey was a quality fighter, Max Schmeling was a quality fighter, the nearly 6'7 Buddy Baer who had a very good record was easily taken out by Joe TWICE.


Louis had trouble with movers....ok and my response was Ali had trouble with Frazier who stalked Ali down each time they fought and guess what Ali lost one of those bouts. Louis had trouble with Walcott when Louis was well past it, but in the rematch Louis knocked him spark out.


Sorry, Joe Louis is my guy, I'd take him over ANY other heavyweight, ANY @Master.....ANY

---

None of the fighters you mentioned were at the level of the 3 I mentioned. None of the fighters you mentioned are in anyone's top 10 of the best heavyweights. Some of the opposition was so bad, Joe had to fight them twice. :)

No crime having trouble against Joe Frazier he was a great heavyweight champion. Being constantly knocked down as a champion by some poor challengers is.

I am not trying to persuade you to change your mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

None of the fighters you mentioned were at the level of the 3 I mentioned. None of the fighters you mentioned are in anyone's top 10 of the best heavyweights. Some of the opposition was so bad, Joe had to fight them twice. :)

No crime having trouble against Joe Frazier he was a great heavyweight champion. Being constantly knocked down as a champion by some poor challengers is.

I am not trying to persuade you to change your mind.

---

How do you define that "level"? It's a bit ambiguous. Sonny Liston isn't a top 10 heavyweight, sorry. I'm not 100% certain Joe Frazier is top 10, he's around there, but golly you're talking quality of opponents one second then you're touting a guy who beat Buster Mathis for a vacant title, Foster, Ali, and who else? Jerry Quarry? Beating a great fighter once doesn't make you a great fighter it doesn't even mean you fought a great fight, sometimes the champ sucks on a specific night.

Getting knocked down doesn't mean much unless you STAY down. I guess this sort of thing really hampers the reputation of Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson among others.

It kind of seems like you're taking what I've posted personally.



Joe Louis is the greatest heavyweight champion of all-time FACT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

None of the fighters you mentioned were at the level of the 3 I mentioned. None of the fighters you mentioned are in anyone's top 10 of the best heavyweights. Some of the opposition was so bad, Joe had to fight them twice. :)

No crime having trouble against Joe Frazier he was a great heavyweight champion. Being constantly knocked down as a champion by some poor challengers is.

I am not trying to persuade you to change your mind.

---

How do you define that "level"? It's a bit ambiguous. Sonny Liston isn't a top 10 heavyweight, sorry. I'm not 100% certain Joe Frazier is top 10, he's around there, but golly you're talking quality of opponents one second then you're touting a guy who beat Buster Mathis for a vacant title, Foster, Ali, and who else? Jerry Quarry? Beating a great fighter once doesn't make you a great fighter it doesn't even mean you fought a great fight, sometimes the champ sucks on a specific night.

Getting knocked down doesn't mean much unless you STAY down. I guess this sort of thing really hampers the reputation of Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson among others.

It kind of seems like you're taking what I've posted personally.



Joe Louis is the greatest heavyweight champion of all-time FACT.

---

I am not taking anything personally this is fun.

The names you mention on Joe Louis record, with all due respect, just do not compare. I am being very polite to them.

Joe Frazier had 9 defences and was a top 10 heavyweight on most people's list.

Getting knocked down by Two Ton Galento et al, outboxed by Conn showed his vulnerabilities. Just pointing them out and showing you Ali could have exploited them.

Just because you write FACT in capital letters does not mean he is. :)

Muhammid Ali is the best heavyweight ever, the quality and calibre of fighters he beat during a period regarded as the best in terms of quality, illustrates that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

I am not taking anything personally this is fun.

The names you mention on Joe Louis record, with all due respect, just do not compare. I am being very polite to them.

Joe Frazier had 9 defences and was a top 10 heavyweight on most people's list.

Getting knocked down by Two Ton Galento et al, outboxed by Conn showed his vulnerabilities. Just pointing them out and showing you Ali could have exploited them.

Just because you write FACT in capital letters does not mean he is. :)

Muhammid Ali is the best heavyweight ever, the quality and calibre of fighters he beat during a period regarded as the best in terms of quality, illustrates that.

---

Again Joe Louis could only fight the fighters in his era and AGAIN you're saying "Yeah but those guys weren't as good as these guys from the 1960's and 70's".....well damn I guess Joe needed a time machine to impress you.

Frazier's defenses...my word: Manuel Ramos, Oscar Bonavena, Dave Zyglewicz, Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Ellis, Bob Foster, Ali, Terry Daniels, Ron Stander.

THE Terry Daniels? THE Ron Stander? :rolleyes:

The result of the Galento fight was? the result of the Conn fight was? A win is a win is a win is a win...sometimes you win ugly, not like Ali ever did that :-X


I guess I had better change my opinion so that your feathers aren't ruffled :shakehead:

That one detraction that I can make against Ali is that he couldn't seem to like mix it up toe to toe, slugging for slugging, like the Brown Bomber use it to do. Ali would like to always grab HARD around the neck when the heat was on!

The debate between Ali and Joe Louis is pretty damn near unwinnable, as they belonged to two totally different eras (no overlapping) so there aren't even any common opponents to discuss.

You guys are doing a pretty good job at debating it, though. ;D

When we're arguing for "our guy", we always denigrate the other guy's opponents. For instance, I rate Sonny Liston highly. He was a powerful, feared fighter in his time... and only had one early defeat when he first faced Ali. He was heavily favored... and the fact Ali won counts for something right there. History repeated itself years later against George Foreman. Strong, powerful, feared, and undefeated when he faced Ali. Heavily favored, too. Ali's list of opponents over time was impressive. None of those easy, soft touches to pad his record like we've seen from other subsequent champions, even in other weight divisions. He lost the prime years of his boxing career, then came back, reinvented himself, and went on to add more boxing glory to his career. He always found a way to win. He avenged losses to Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, and Leon Spinks. Ali also fought around the globe, something I admire in a fighter.

Louis, on the other hand, has his own long, glorious career. His only loss in the prime of his career was to Max Schmeling, a loss he later avenged in spectacular fashion. He fought often, was consistent as clockwork, and faced his own formidable lineup of challengers including the feared Max Baer. I feel he was ahead of his time, having watched film of him and finding him to be surprisingly fluid as compared to most of the fighters at that time. During one particular stretch he was incredibly busy, defending his title 13 times in about 2 and a half years. With today's fighters we're lucky if they fight twice a year. His opponents during that stretch were highly rated (top 10), and Louis dispatched them with ease.

So basically it all boils down to personal opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

I am not taking anything personally this is fun.

The names you mention on Joe Louis record, with all due respect, just do not compare. I am being very polite to them.

Joe Frazier had 9 defences and was a top 10 heavyweight on most people's list.

Getting knocked down by Two Ton Galento et al, outboxed by Conn showed his vulnerabilities. Just pointing them out and showing you Ali could have exploited them.

Just because you write FACT in capital letters does not mean he is. :)

Muhammid Ali is the best heavyweight ever, the quality and calibre of fighters he beat during a period regarded as the best in terms of quality, illustrates that.

---

Again Joe Louis could only fight the fighters in his era and AGAIN you're saying "Yeah but those guys weren't as good as these guys from the 1960's and 70's".....well damn I guess Joe needed a time machine to impress you.

Frazier's defenses...my word: Manuel Ramos, Oscar Bonavena, Dave Zyglewicz, Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Ellis, Bob Foster, Ali, Terry Daniels, Ron Stander.

THE Terry Daniels? THE Ron Stander? :rolleyes:

The result of the Galento fight was? the result of the Conn fight was? A win is a win is a win is a win...sometimes you win ugly, not like Ali ever did that :-X


I guess I had better change my opinion so that your feathers aren't ruffled :shakehead:

---

I do not know why you are ignoring my simple point that 1960's and 70's were regarded as the best quality of heavyweight fighters. Ali fought in that era. I am not asking that Joe Louis gets in a Delorean and fights them. You are deliberately making out that Joe Louis opposition was better when it was plainly not.

Ali could have made 25 defences in Joe's time period there was no one there that he could not beat. On the other hand Joe would have struggled with Liston, Frazier and Big George.

I could easily dissect some of Joe Louis opponents.

Jack Sharkey was a quality fighter but he was finished by the time Louis fought him, it was his last ever fight. This is the same Sharkey that fought Jack Dempsey in his prime 10 years earlier. :o

Max Schmeling beat up and knocked out Joe Louis so it could easily be shown that he could be beaten near his prime.

The nearly 6'7 Buddy Baer had his last 2 fights against Joe and retired so was finished and at the end of his career.

There is a reason why Braddock was called the Cinderella Man.

Yet you criticise an Olympic gold medallist and heavyweight legend like Joe Frazier and yet tell me Jimmy Bivins was underrated? :confused:

The result of the Henry Cooper was? ;D

My feathers are not ruffled I enjoy bringing up what Ali achieved. He was way before my time but I read books, see his fights and understand what he did in the ring. No one can say that what he achieved does not make him the best ever heavyweight ever.

When I pictured great brown bomber verses Smoking Joe, 1971 prime, action Frasier would have been too much for him. Lookout Smoking took ALL that Ali HAD, 15 rounds at a fastest pace anybody ever saw in boxing history. That 1971 Frazier would likely knockout brown bomber with one of his incredible left hooks!

​Ali was indeed the GREATEST heavyweight who ever lived ...... but Joe Louis was the BEST

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by X

​Ali was indeed the GREATEST heavyweight who ever lived ...... but Joe Louis was the BEST

---

What does that even mean in the context of these posts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

I do not know why you are ignoring my simple point that 1960's and 70's were regarded as the best quality of heavyweight fighters. Ali fought in that era. I am not asking that Joe Louis gets in a Delorean and fights them. You are deliberately making out that Joe Louis opposition was better when it was plainly not.

Ali could have made 25 defences in Joe's time period there was no one there that he could not beat. On the other hand Joe would have struggled with Liston, Frazier and Big George.

I could easily dissect some of Joe Louis opponents.

Jack Sharkey was a quality fighter but he was finished by the time Louis fought him, it was his last ever fight. This is the same Sharkey that fought Jack Dempsey in his prime 10 years earlier. :o

Max Schmeling beat up and knocked out Joe Louis so it could easily be shown that he could be beaten near his prime.

The nearly 6'7 Buddy Baer had his last 2 fights against Joe and retired so was finished and at the end of his career.

There is a reason why Braddock was called the Cinderella Man.

Yet you criticise an Olympic gold medallist and heavyweight legend like Joe Frazier and yet tell me Jimmy Bivins was underrated? :confused:

The result of the Henry Cooper was? ;D

My feathers are not ruffled I enjoy bringing up what Ali achieved. He was way before my time but I read books, see his fights and understand what he did in the ring. No one can say that what he achieved does not make him the best ever heavyweight ever.

---

Why were the fighters considered better? Could be they didn't have The Great Depression or WW2 to steal talented men away from the ring :dontknow: Could be that post WW2 America allowed for it to be easier to be a Prize Fighter as a full time job. Joe Louis went 25 in a row with the belt and Ali didn't...and therefore the Greatest Heavyweight Champion of All-Time is Joe Louis....read again...The Greatest Heavyweight CHAMPION of All-Time is Joe Louis. Was Ali more skilled? Was Lennox more skilled? Was Tyson more skilled? Was anyone else more skilled? Doesn't fucking matter 25 in a row, 1,2...twenty fucking five in a row, set 'em up knock 'em down 1-25....how difficult is that to understand?

Ali clouda shoulda woulda...you can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which fills up first JOE LOUIS DID IT....Ali could have....:rolleyes: Joe Louis DID


Well Joe never fought the likes of Karl Mildenberger or Brian London or Zora Folley or Richard Dunn or Joe Bunger....so don't play like Ali only fought all-time greats either.


Oh I'm sorry Joe didn't need his glove cut to save him vs Galento or Conn.


I can say Joe Louis is the Greatest Heavyweight Champion of All-Time and back it up and I have....25

They both had their share of sub-par opponents.