Was there any boxer in history more athletic than Mike Tyson?

[ICB]

But thats different SRR had over 200 fights, so 10+ losses on his record is still an amazing record. Muhammad Ali didn't even have a quarter of the amount of fights SRR did.

So of course if the decision's hadn't gone Muhammad Ali's way he would nowhere be considered the greatest. He should of lost to Henry Cooper by DQ because smelling salts wern't allowed in the UK at that time.

He should have atleast lost 2 out of 3 with Ken Norton, although you could make an argument he lost all 3. He got a draw against Doug Jones although it very easily could of gone Doug Jones's way. And the 2 fights with Henry Cooper/Doug Jones, Muhammad Ali wasn't that far from his peak, considering he won the title off Sonny Liston not long after these 2 fights, in arguably one of his best performances.

And he for certain lost to Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers. Your telling me if Muhammad Ali hadn't got all of these gift decision's, you would still consider him the greatest ?

As for your last comment thats ridiculous, Larry Holmes could compete with any version of Muhammad Ali. He is a better technical fighter than Muhammad Ali, he had a better jab. And he is pretty equal with Muhammad Ali in most attributes.

These are all your opinions. Others, myself included, will disagree with you on some of them. It's true...the Jones and Cooper fights where close and controversial. Ali was a young a fighter then and didn't exactly put on his best performances. As far as his fights against Young and Shavers...please! He was clearly past his best by then. He went into those fights not only past his prime, but also not well conditioned at all. I personally think the Shavers fight was a draw...and the fact that it was that close when Ali was so past his prime...is an attribute to Ali's great heart. And it's true...Holmes was technically a great fighter. But Ali in his prime was so much faster, such a great athlete...he would have beaten Holmes IMO. Again, we all have are opinions. And we aren't always going to agree.

What I always find amazing is the fact everyone who detracts from Ali always seems to disreguard the fact he had not yet hit his best in the Cooper/Jones fights but if it was any other fighter they would bring that up first off...and the fact Ali is not the only fighter to have contraversial wins...

why is it Cooper is always brought up?....Even if Cooper did get the win that day fact is when all was said and done he still was not better then Ali overall

Rules are rules Daxx if Smelling salts wern't allowed in the UK at that time, why should Muhammad Ali and his trainer's be allowed the break rules ? that should of been DQ loss.

And he wasn't that far from his prime i believe he fought Doug Jones/Henry Cooper in 1963, he then fought and beat Sonny Liston in one of his best performances in 1964.

[DaxxKahn]

These are all your opinions. Others, myself included, will disagree with you on some of them. It's true...the Jones and Cooper fights where close and controversial. Ali was a young a fighter then and didn't exactly put on his best performances. As far as his fights against Young and Shavers...please! He was clearly past his best by then. He went into those fights not only past his prime, but also not well conditioned at all. I personally think the Shavers fight was a draw...and the fact that it was that close when Ali was so past his prime...is an attribute to Ali's great heart. And it's true...Holmes was technically a great fighter. But Ali in his prime was so much faster, such a great athlete...he would have beaten Holmes IMO. Again, we all have are opinions. And we aren't always going to agree.

What I always find amazing is the fact everyone who detracts from Ali always seems to disreguard the fact he had not yet hit his best in the Cooper/Jones fights but if it was any other fighter they would bring that up first off...and the fact Ali is not the only fighter to have contraversial wins...

why is it Cooper is always brought up?....Even if Cooper did get the win that day fact is when all was said and done he still was not better then Ali overall

Rules are rules Daxx if Smelling salts wern't allowed in the UK at that time, why should Muhammad Ali and his trainer's be allowed the break rules ? that should of been DQ loss.

And he wasn't that far from his prime i believe he fought Doug Jones/Henry Cooper in 1963, he then fought and beat Sonny Liston in one of his best performances in 1964.

Again though why is it those are the only 2 things you can come up with to detract him....You have the same complaint everytime Ali is brought up...You still did not answer the one statement though...

Do you think Either was a better fighter then Ali

[holmcall]

Neitther was a better fighter IMO

[ICB]

What I always find amazing is the fact everyone who detracts from Ali always seems to disreguard the fact he had not yet hit his best in the Cooper/Jones fights but if it was any other fighter they would bring that up first off...and the fact Ali is not the only fighter to have contraversial wins...

why is it Cooper is always brought up?....Even if Cooper did get the win that day fact is when all was said and done he still was not better then Ali overall

Rules are rules Daxx if Smelling salts wern't allowed in the UK at that time, why should Muhammad Ali and his trainer's be allowed the break rules ? that should of been DQ loss.

And he wasn't that far from his prime i believe he fought Doug Jones/Henry Cooper in 1963, he then fought and beat Sonny Liston in one of his best performances in 1964.

Again though why is it those are the only 2 things you can come up with to detract him....You have the same complaint everytime Ali is brought up...You still did not answer the one statement though...

Do you think Either was a better fighter then Ali

But they are big things Daxx if i think Muhammad Ali should have atleast 10 losses on his record. That is a big complaint isn't it ? and i have every right to call him overrated, plus he had alot of struggles with lesser fighters.

Muhammad Ali was a great fighter im not doubting that, but he was very beatable even in his so called "Unbeatable Prime". Where as fighter's like Pernell Whitaker/Roy Jones Jr rarely lost a round let alone look beatable in there prime.

As for your last question no obviously there not as great as Muhammad Ali, but what has that got to do with anything ? is Antonio Tarver/Glen Johnson as great as Roy Jones Jr ? no but they still beat him. And it still doesn't change the fact Henry Cooper technically should of won by DQ, and Doug Jones IMO deserved a draw against Muhammad Ali.

[Taeth]

Ali may have foughten a quarter of the times that Robinson, but he fought 4 times better the opposition of Robinson who largely fought overrated guys like Basilio, Fulmer, etc. Only Gavilan and the natural feather weight Henry Armstrong were guys I really think were top knotch opponents that RObinson fought. I think because of his age, a lot of these guys are given more credit than they deserve for their talents, there is a reason Lamotta's record is basically 90-30. Robinson was unbelievably great , not question, but his opposition wasn't.