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.
Last edited by Max Power; 03-27-2014 at 12:07 PM.
"Enough with the games mate! Your messing with the Grand Master!"
Lennox Lewis
Bookmarks