Ali
Ali-overrated lucky, not as good as everybody thinks, theres alot of boxers better than him, GEne Tunney is one of them
http://www.boxingaddicts.com
http://www.boxingaddicts.com
There's not a lot of boxers better than him. There may be a few. SRR and Roy Jones spring to mind.Mongoose wrote:Ali-overrated lucky, not as good as everybody thinks, theres alot of boxers better than him, GEne Tunney is one of them.
I see your Gene Tunney fixation has resurfaced here Mongoose. Are you related to him by any chance?
I do think Ali is vastly overrated, as he was not invincable like some claim to think. He is definetly a top 5 heavyweight of all-time, but I personally don't feel he is #1. He had flaws like every boxer but was talented. His best talent was getting it fighters heads before the fight, using their anger to his advantage, which I feel lead to many of his victories. But nobody can discredit his resume, which is excellent.
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 15660
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
-
humanrobot
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 64
- Joined: 03 Mar 2002, 20:00
Marciano was crude, slow and had little fluidity or skill. In any other era he would've been an also-ran and certainly not the icon he is today. I can't knock his record but I can criticise his ability. Ali would've beat Rocky fairly comfortably.Mongoose wrote:Ali overrated fraud, I agree Mariano is to good tobe compared to alihumanrobot wrote:Marciano cannot be compared to Ali - I would have a tough time putting Marciano in my top ten. He might just make it on a good day.
I suppose it depends on whether you judge it on who would win a hypothetical match up or career achievements. The reason i think you can make a case for Ali being the best Heavy ever is that he fought a very high standard of opposision and overcame hudge odds to win his titles (against Liston and Foreman). Also you could never count him out against any apponent as he has such a gift for using psychological tactics, particularly in later years when the exceptional physical gifts of his youth have started to leave him.Mongoose wrote:There are ten people better than him(just to name a few)
Ezzard Charles
Joe Louis
Gene Tunney
JAck Johnson
Mike Tyson
Evander Holyfield
Rocky Marciano
Archie Moore
Sonny Liston
Joe Frazier
I don't feel Ali is the prefect fighter some others wouldd have you belive he was, as George Foreman said of his later career, once his speed started going it just showed he never developed a great defence.
Mongoose, it's interesting that three of the people on your list (Moore, Liston and Fraizer) are all people which Ali beat though I suppose you can argue extenuating cercumstances for each (Moore's age, Liston's bad prep and Frazier's eyesight in the 3rd fight). While I agree Charles, Moore and Tunney were all time great Light-Heavies I can't see a case for them being better Heavyweights than Ali (which is, I assume, the point your making)
-
ABA Boxing
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 772
- Joined: 16 Sep 2004, 13:37
-
Max Molyneux
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 7084
- Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 16:53
If you're going to knock Ali at least try to get your facts right! the glove was laready split before the end of the 4th round!... also if you thought Frazier was winning Manila then you must have missed the 13th and 14th rounds.... Futch said in interviews that he stopped Frazier coming out because he didn't want him to get seriously hurt... doesn't sound like someone about to win to me!.Max Molyneux wrote:The way they cut his glove to recover when Henry floored him.
On Frazier Vs Ali 3 though did it look like Frazier was winning? Did to me.
As for Frazier being better than Ali, Ali fought Frazier when Frazier was in his prime and he (Ali) had only fought 18 rounds in almost 4 years!!!.... yet he stillgave Frazier a beating even in losing!.... Frazier never fought Ali in his prime.... the Ali of '67 would have danced around Frazier and had a much easier fight. Ali beat Foreman and Frazier and all the rest of the top heavies of the 70s when the talent was vastly superior to that of any era either before or after yet at a time when he was physically past his best!... if that is not the sign of true greatness then I don't know what is!........ certainly more impressive than a padded and skillfully built record like Marcianoes!.
To be blunt of any Haevyweight champ is overrated it is Marciano!... he would have been hard pushed to make it as a contender in the 70s! and to say he would have beaten Ali is simply ridiculous!.
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 15660
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
Spot on.silkov wrote:And it shouldn't be forgotten that we never got to see Ali in his real prime!... those 3 + years took away alot of his speed and yet he still managed to adapt his style and beat the best bunch of heavyweights there has ever been!... overrated!?... I think not!!!.
A key word you used there was 'adapt' something many fighter cannot do such as Tyson.
Indeed, I had to laugh when I saw someone pick Tyson to beat Ali!... despite his obvious talent in his early days Tyson was always flawed mentally, a front runner really and Ali would have completely outpsyched him.... a young Ali would have been far too fast for Tyson while the older Ali would have beaten Tyson more mentally and take his best shots before stopping Tyson late. I see the young Ali outpointing Tyson and the older Ali stopping Tyson... people often underrate Ali's strength and power... especially in the latter part of his career!.KOJOE90 wrote:Spot on.silkov wrote:And it shouldn't be forgotten that we never got to see Ali in his real prime!... those 3 + years took away alot of his speed and yet he still managed to adapt his style and beat the best bunch of heavyweights there has ever been!... overrated!?... I think not!!!.
A key word you used there was 'adapt' something many fighter cannot do such as Tyson.
I always remember reading an article in the British press just after the Tyson v Spinks fight. It had a mocked up photograph of Tyson standing over a fallen Ali.
The poorly researched piece had got together a group of 'Boxing experts' to talk about what would have happened in a Tyson V Ali fight. They came to the conclusion that Tyson would have KO'd Ali in 11 rounds.
It was about that time I gave up reading Newspapers.
The poorly researched piece had got together a group of 'Boxing experts' to talk about what would have happened in a Tyson V Ali fight. They came to the conclusion that Tyson would have KO'd Ali in 11 rounds.
It was about that time I gave up reading Newspapers.
Ali seldom gets credit for having probably the best chin of all the heavyweight champs... if you look at his record his durability and stamina was second to none... even when he was past his best.KOJOE90 wrote:I always remember reading an article in the British press just after the Tyson v Spinks fight. It had a mocked up photograph of Tyson standing over a fallen Ali.
The poorly researched piece had got together a group of 'Boxing experts' to talk about what would have happened in a Tyson V Ali fight. They came to the conclusion that Tyson would have KO'd Ali in 11 rounds.
It was about that time I gave up reading Newspapers.
Well when he was near shot to pieces he took the shots of Earnie Shavers, that says it all really.silkov wrote:Ali seldom gets credit for having probably the best chin of all the heavyweight champs... if you look at his record his durability and stamina was second to none... even when he was past his best.KOJOE90 wrote:I always remember reading an article in the British press just after the Tyson v Spinks fight. It had a mocked up photograph of Tyson standing over a fallen Ali.
The poorly researched piece had got together a group of 'Boxing experts' to talk about what would have happened in a Tyson V Ali fight. They came to the conclusion that Tyson would have KO'd Ali in 11 rounds.
It was about that time I gave up reading Newspapers.
The ironic and sad think is that if his chin had been less reliable he may have been in better health today.