Ali in his prime: 4 guys that SURELY would've beaten him

[Grimm]

[ThatOne]

There's treasure in these archives.

You seem to be the BOTP archeologist.

It's much better to dig up the past than it is to repeat the same topics.

I am resurrecting only the best for the new group of posters.

[Bricks]

Many say that the Muhammad Ali, circa 1964-67 was the best that ever was. That that Ali of that era, was untouchable, and no heavyweight before or after him, could have beaten him. Here in my opinion are 4 heavyweight greats that would have beaten him every time.

1. Joe Frazier circa 1968-71: This guy when I saw him fight Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Ellis, Bob Foster and the same Ali (slower version, though) was as good as any heavyweight before or since. A relentless fighting machine that used to give you great suffocating pressure. Bobbed and weaved magnificentley, and was a difficult target to hit cleanly. Always going forward and strong like an ox. And that left hook would have been in Ali's chin as many times that you can read this. That same left hook that decapitated Foster and put Ali to the mat for a count of 8 was one the best hooks ever: short, precise and accurate. If Henry Cooper was able to land flush on Ali's chin, what would a hook like Frazier's could do? The Frazier that fought George Foreman in Jamaica in '73 was not the same fighter. He looked like he was ready to be taken. He looked ready to be taken in '72, in which he did not look impressive at all in his 2 title defenses that year. But the Frazier of the 1968-71 era, was fanstastic as he could be. One question: Would any other heavyweight in history beat the Joe Frazier of the night of the FIGHT OF THE CENTURY?


2. Larry Holmes circa 1978-82: Larry once said in his autobiography that when he used to spar with Ali, he used to beat him every time. I do not know is that true, only he, Ali and the people that were there watching the sparring sessions could attest to that. My question is, with a great jab that he had, which was one of the very best in the business, could Ali surpassed that jab? Would Ali speed and reflexes frustrate a great fighter like Larry? I have never seen Holmes being outbox in his prime. Zora Folley outboxed Ali for a couple of rounds and made the fight difficult to him. Holmes is not Zora Folley. Holmes is a gifted boxer with great ring generalship. He may not have Ali's speed, but in terms of will, grit, punch and in any other department, he is as close as Muhammad. A matter of fact, I say that he was a more COMPLETE FIGHTER THAN ALI. He was as strong as Ali and has the same chin. Maybe Ali had better chin. But I do not think that Ali had the punch to stopped Holmes. So this fight would have to go to the scorecards. I pick Larry Holmes by UD. A question: In that night with the fight with Gerry Cooney, would any other heavyweight, past or present would have beaten the great Easton Assassin?

3. Ken Norton circa 1973-76: Looking at the fights that I saw with Ali, the trilogy, there is no doubt in my mind that Norton won all the 3 fights. No matter how you flip it or flop it, Ali lost those fights BIG TIME!!! Well, you may say that that was not the Ali in his prime. Would the Ali of the 60s would have done better? I believe so. Would the Ali of the 60s would have beaten Norton easily? No way. It would have been a sensational contest, no matter who wins. Norton had that style that Ali could not crack nor solved. He was difficult, akward, slick and relentless, especially going to the body. Forget the ass kissing referees and judges. Forget the ass kissing promoters. Let's go with TRUE SPORSMANSHIP HERE. Holding behind the neck would not be a factor here. And if we have TRUE SPORTSMANSHIP, Ali would have had many point deductions, maybe DISQUALIFIED...Let's GET REAL. Norton would punish the body and then the head so many times that this time would be the repetition of round 4 of Ali vs Liston I, but this time, without the strange ointment that went through Ali's eyes....This time he would have been gotten hit and often. Norton was a very clever counter puncher, that kind of fighter that Ali hates to fight. And Ali's speed would not bother Norton that much. Norton wins every time by decision, with Ali crying FOUL of the point deductions that the referees took away from him.


4. Evander Holyfield circa 1990-93: And many would ask, Evander Holyfield? that blown up cruiserweight that could not stop a fly and had difficult time to stop BIGGER MEN? George Foreman, PROBABLY, the greatest puncher of the heavyweight class, could not stopped Ali either...So what is the point? I give Ali this, he was hard to stop or get KO'd. A guy like Frazier or Holmes could stop him because those guys can really hit. Evander would have to throw so much volume of punches to stop "The Greatest" just like he did in the 7th round with an old, slow and fat, but stronger Foreman, and still, did not put Foreman down. Holy likes to trades punches in his prime. He could also box when he wanted it to. His boxing skills were very underrated. He had excellent speed and was a complete fighter. Very clever. His stamina was one of the best. The most complete heavyweight since the greats Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles. Once Evander stars working the body of Ali, is over. Hit the body and the head would follow. Holyfield just did not do that regurlarly, he did it with extreme and accurate precision. He would not be hurt by Ali's flurries. And he was more complete of a fighter than Muhammad. He had the speed to offset Ali. He may not stop "The Greatest", but he wins by decision, being both at their very best.

5. Riddick Bowe circa 1991-92: This guy could have been the most talented heavyweight ever that stepped into the ring. He was tall, strong, hit hard, and had that great jab. Watching his war with Holyfield I, we forget what a magnificent and exellent fighter he was. He had the total package. A manager's dream. What happened? He also had that EXTRA: Charisma and self determination. He was very confident in his abilities. And for a big man, 6'5" with 235 pounds, was an excellent INSIDE FIGHTER AT HIS VERY BEST. How could Ali cope with a big guy like Bowe? We saw him cope with a guy like the giant Ernie Terrell, but Terrell did not had the physical attributes nor even close the boxing skills of "Big Daddy". Terrell was CLUMSY for his height. He could not used those advantanges against someone 3 inches smaller than he? I don't think that Ali would outjab Bowe. Bowe had a terrific jab. (see the Holyfield fight and the fights before he got greedy and lazy). Bowe did not had the same desire after he won the heavy crown, but if he were a motivated fighter, right now, we would have to call him one of the 3 or 5 greatest heavyweights of all-time. Probably we would have called him the greatest heavyweight ever, depending of his fights with Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson if he would have fought them and beat them. There was no question in my mind that he would have beaten Tyson or Lewis when he was at his very best. Bowe by knockout in late rounds. Too big and strong, and could fight.

The Joe Frazier who fought Foreman wasnt "ready to be taken" it took a George Foreman to take him.

I wouldnt listen to much to what Larry Holmes says. He says a lot of things. He said Lennox Lewis was afraid to fight him in the early 2000's after Lewis had respectfully said he wouldnt fight Larry was a bad ass.
Holmes is a bitter ingrate to the core. He has the bare nerve and cheek to say that the Ali of 1974-1977 who used to let his sparring partners beat on his body so that he could get ready for his rope a dope, was being beaten by Larry Holmes??? Holmes thinks as he beat Ali in 1980 when Ali was already suffering from Parkinsons and under medication means something as hell Ali looked fine in 75-76. Holmes should be ashamed and know that 5 years is a long time in HW boxing in those days. Is there any comparison between the Holmes who lost to Tyson and the Holmes of 1983?
Holmes was a poor mans Ali in terms of his boxing ability.

Riddick Bowe- this thing was started by Steve Farhood and the new york magazines in the 90's. Its crap.

Evander Holyfield- this is a really interesting one. Holyfield is underrated as a HW. even a shot version arguably split fights with lewis. Holyfield could have done a Norton on Ali

[elmersalsa]

Many say that the Muhammad Ali, circa 1964-67 was the best that ever was. That that Ali of that era, was untouchable, and no heavyweight before or after him, could have beaten him. Here in my opinion are 4 heavyweight greats that would have beaten him every time.

1. Joe Frazier circa 1968-71: This guy when I saw him fight Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Ellis, Bob Foster and the same Ali (slower version, though) was as good as any heavyweight before or since. A relentless fighting machine that used to give you great suffocating pressure. Bobbed and weaved magnificentley, and was a difficult target to hit cleanly. Always going forward and strong like an ox. And that left hook would have been in Ali's chin as many times that you can read this. That same left hook that decapitated Foster and put Ali to the mat for a count of 8 was one the best hooks ever: short, precise and accurate. If Henry Cooper was able to land flush on Ali's chin, what would a hook like Frazier's could do? The Frazier that fought George Foreman in Jamaica in '73 was not the same fighter. He looked like he was ready to be taken. He looked ready to be taken in '72, in which he did not look impressive at all in his 2 title defenses that year. But the Frazier of the 1968-71 era, was fanstastic as he could be. One question: Would any other heavyweight in history beat the Joe Frazier of the night of the FIGHT OF THE CENTURY?


2. Larry Holmes circa 1978-82: Larry once said in his autobiography that when he used to spar with Ali, he used to beat him every time. I do not know is that true, only he, Ali and the people that were there watching the sparring sessions could attest to that. My question is, with a great jab that he had, which was one of the very best in the business, could Ali surpassed that jab? Would Ali speed and reflexes frustrate a great fighter like Larry? I have never seen Holmes being outbox in his prime. Zora Folley outboxed Ali for a couple of rounds and made the fight difficult to him. Holmes is not Zora Folley. Holmes is a gifted boxer with great ring generalship. He may not have Ali's speed, but in terms of will, grit, punch and in any other department, he is as close as Muhammad. A matter of fact, I say that he was a more COMPLETE FIGHTER THAN ALI. He was as strong as Ali and has the same chin. Maybe Ali had better chin. But I do not think that Ali had the punch to stopped Holmes. So this fight would have to go to the scorecards. I pick Larry Holmes by UD. A question: In that night with the fight with Gerry Cooney, would any other heavyweight, past or present would have beaten the great Easton Assassin?

3. Ken Norton circa 1973-76: Looking at the fights that I saw with Ali, the trilogy, there is no doubt in my mind that Norton won all the 3 fights. No matter how you flip it or flop it, Ali lost those fights BIG TIME!!! Well, you may say that that was not the Ali in his prime. Would the Ali of the 60s would have done better? I believe so. Would the Ali of the 60s would have beaten Norton easily? No way. It would have been a sensational contest, no matter who wins. Norton had that style that Ali could not crack nor solved. He was difficult, akward, slick and relentless, especially going to the body. Forget the ass kissing referees and judges. Forget the ass kissing promoters. Let's go with TRUE SPORSMANSHIP HERE. Holding behind the neck would not be a factor here. And if we have TRUE SPORTSMANSHIP, Ali would have had many point deductions, maybe DISQUALIFIED...Let's GET REAL. Norton would punish the body and then the head so many times that this time would be the repetition of round 4 of Ali vs Liston I, but this time, without the strange ointment that went through Ali's eyes....This time he would have been gotten hit and often. Norton was a very clever counter puncher, that kind of fighter that Ali hates to fight. And Ali's speed would not bother Norton that much. Norton wins every time by decision, with Ali crying FOUL of the point deductions that the referees took away from him.


4. Evander Holyfield circa 1990-93: And many would ask, Evander Holyfield? that blown up cruiserweight that could not stop a fly and had difficult time to stop BIGGER MEN? George Foreman, PROBABLY, the greatest puncher of the heavyweight class, could not stopped Ali either...So what is the point? I give Ali this, he was hard to stop or get KO'd. A guy like Frazier or Holmes could stop him because those guys can really hit. Evander would have to throw so much volume of punches to stop "The Greatest" just like he did in the 7th round with an old, slow and fat, but stronger Foreman, and still, did not put Foreman down. Holy likes to trades punches in his prime. He could also box when he wanted it to. His boxing skills were very underrated. He had excellent speed and was a complete fighter. Very clever. His stamina was one of the best. The most complete heavyweight since the greats Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles. Once Evander stars working the body of Ali, is over. Hit the body and the head would follow. Holyfield just did not do that regurlarly, he did it with extreme and accurate precision. He would not be hurt by Ali's flurries. And he was more complete of a fighter than Muhammad. He had the speed to offset Ali. He may not stop "The Greatest", but he wins by decision, being both at their very best.

5. Riddick Bowe circa 1991-92: This guy could have been the most talented heavyweight ever that stepped into the ring. He was tall, strong, hit hard, and had that great jab. Watching his war with Holyfield I, we forget what a magnificent and exellent fighter he was. He had the total package. A manager's dream. What happened? He also had that EXTRA: Charisma and self determination. He was very confident in his abilities. And for a big man, 6'5" with 235 pounds, was an excellent INSIDE FIGHTER AT HIS VERY BEST. How could Ali cope with a big guy like Bowe? We saw him cope with a guy like the giant Ernie Terrell, but Terrell did not had the physical attributes nor even close the boxing skills of "Big Daddy". Terrell was CLUMSY for his height. He could not used those advantanges against someone 3 inches smaller than he? I don't think that Ali would outjab Bowe. Bowe had a terrific jab. (see the Holyfield fight and the fights before he got greedy and lazy). Bowe did not had the same desire after he won the heavy crown, but if he were a motivated fighter, right now, we would have to call him one of the 3 or 5 greatest heavyweights of all-time. Probably we would have called him the greatest heavyweight ever, depending of his fights with Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson if he would have fought them and beat them. There was no question in my mind that he would have beaten Tyson or Lewis when he was at his very best. Bowe by knockout in late rounds. Too big and strong, and could fight.

The Joe Frazier who fought Foreman wasnt "ready to be taken" it took a George Foreman to take him.

I wouldnt listen to much to what Larry Holmes says. He says a lot of things. He said Lennox Lewis was afraid to fight him in the early 2000's after Lewis had respectfully said he wouldnt fight Larry was a bad ass.
Holmes is a bitter ingrate to the core. He has the bare nerve and cheek to say that the Ali of 1974-1977 who used to let his sparring partners beat on his body so that he could get ready for his rope a dope, was being beaten by Larry Holmes??? Holmes thinks as he beat Ali in 1980 when Ali was already suffering from Parkinsons and under medication means something as hell Ali looked fine in 75-76. Holmes should be ashamed and know that 5 years is a long time in HW boxing in those days. Is there any comparison between the Holmes who lost to Tyson and the Holmes of 1983?
Holmes was a poor mans Ali in terms of his boxing ability.

Riddick Bowe- this thing was started by Steve Farhood and the new york magazines in the 90's. Its crap.

Evander Holyfield- this is a really interesting one. Holyfield is underrated as a HW. even a shot version arguably split fights with lewis. Holyfield could have done a Norton on Ali

Ok, nobody beats Ali....But Ali got 5 losses in his record. A record that could have been, if the judges$$$$$ were RIGHT, AT LEAST 9 DEFEATS!!!

Ali never beat a prime Frazier
Ali has never seen nothing like Holmes...Holmes a poor Ali? Holmes had the best jab, maybe of all-time, pound per pound.

Bowe was a very talented big man that in the night that he beat the great Evander Holyfield, not too many hws of any era would have beaten him. Big, strong, good inside fighting, quick and hit hard.

Holyfield in his prime to me, would have beaten Ali. This match is the closest of them all. I could called it a toss up.

I think we made too much out of the great Ali. His quality of opposition in the 60s, except of the great Sonny Listonm, was average, not great.

[Goodnight, Irene]

There are no, "Five Guys Who SURELY Would Have Beaten Ali."

Simply, he was too good for that.

[p4p1]

i dont think any od these guys beat a prime ali more than once in a series of fights ali beats them all

bullshit, he is not invencible, he got to lose at some point.

he did but never at his best which is what you are saying

[p4p1]

Many say that the Muhammad Ali, circa 1964-67 was the best that ever was. That that Ali of that era, was untouchable, and no heavyweight before or after him, could have beaten him. Here in my opinion are 4 heavyweight greats that would have beaten him every time.

1. Joe Frazier circa 1968-71: This guy when I saw him fight Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Ellis, Bob Foster and the same Ali (slower version, though) was as good as any heavyweight before or since. A relentless fighting machine that used to give you great suffocating pressure. Bobbed and weaved magnificentley, and was a difficult target to hit cleanly. Always going forward and strong like an ox. And that left hook would have been in Ali's chin as many times that you can read this. That same left hook that decapitated Foster and put Ali to the mat for a count of 8 was one the best hooks ever: short, precise and accurate. If Henry Cooper was able to land flush on Ali's chin, what would a hook like Frazier's could do? The Frazier that fought George Foreman in Jamaica in '73 was not the same fighter. He looked like he was ready to be taken. He looked ready to be taken in '72, in which he did not look impressive at all in his 2 title defenses that year. But the Frazier of the 1968-71 era, was fanstastic as he could be. One question: Would any other heavyweight in history beat the Joe Frazier of the night of the FIGHT OF THE CENTURY?


2. Larry Holmes circa 1978-82: Larry once said in his autobiography that when he used to spar with Ali, he used to beat him every time. I do not know is that true, only he, Ali and the people that were there watching the sparring sessions could attest to that. My question is, with a great jab that he had, which was one of the very best in the business, could Ali surpassed that jab? Would Ali speed and reflexes frustrate a great fighter like Larry? I have never seen Holmes being outbox in his prime. Zora Folley outboxed Ali for a couple of rounds and made the fight difficult to him. Holmes is not Zora Folley. Holmes is a gifted boxer with great ring generalship. He may not have Ali's speed, but in terms of will, grit, punch and in any other department, he is as close as Muhammad. A matter of fact, I say that he was a more COMPLETE FIGHTER THAN ALI. He was as strong as Ali and has the same chin. Maybe Ali had better chin. But I do not think that Ali had the punch to stopped Holmes. So this fight would have to go to the scorecards. I pick Larry Holmes by UD. A question: In that night with the fight with Gerry Cooney, would any other heavyweight, past or present would have beaten the great Easton Assassin?

3. Ken Norton circa 1973-76: Looking at the fights that I saw with Ali, the trilogy, there is no doubt in my mind that Norton won all the 3 fights. No matter how you flip it or flop it, Ali lost those fights BIG TIME!!! Well, you may say that that was not the Ali in his prime. Would the Ali of the 60s would have done better? I believe so. Would the Ali of the 60s would have beaten Norton easily? No way. It would have been a sensational contest, no matter who wins. Norton had that style that Ali could not crack nor solved. He was difficult, akward, slick and relentless, especially going to the body. Forget the ass kissing referees and judges. Forget the ass kissing promoters. Let's go with TRUE SPORSMANSHIP HERE. Holding behind the neck would not be a factor here. And if we have TRUE SPORTSMANSHIP, Ali would have had many point deductions, maybe DISQUALIFIED...Let's GET REAL. Norton would punish the body and then the head so many times that this time would be the repetition of round 4 of Ali vs Liston I, but this time, without the strange ointment that went through Ali's eyes....This time he would have been gotten hit and often. Norton was a very clever counter puncher, that kind of fighter that Ali hates to fight. And Ali's speed would not bother Norton that much. Norton wins every time by decision, with Ali crying FOUL of the point deductions that the referees took away from him.


4. Evander Holyfield circa 1990-93: And many would ask, Evander Holyfield? that blown up cruiserweight that could not stop a fly and had difficult time to stop BIGGER MEN? George Foreman, PROBABLY, the greatest puncher of the heavyweight class, could not stopped Ali either...So what is the point? I give Ali this, he was hard to stop or get KO'd. A guy like Frazier or Holmes could stop him because those guys can really hit. Evander would have to throw so much volume of punches to stop "The Greatest" just like he did in the 7th round with an old, slow and fat, but stronger Foreman, and still, did not put Foreman down. Holy likes to trades punches in his prime. He could also box when he wanted it to. His boxing skills were very underrated. He had excellent speed and was a complete fighter. Very clever. His stamina was one of the best. The most complete heavyweight since the greats Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles. Once Evander stars working the body of Ali, is over. Hit the body and the head would follow. Holyfield just did not do that regurlarly, he did it with extreme and accurate precision. He would not be hurt by Ali's flurries. And he was more complete of a fighter than Muhammad. He had the speed to offset Ali. He may not stop "The Greatest", but he wins by decision, being both at their very best.

5. Riddick Bowe circa 1991-92: This guy could have been the most talented heavyweight ever that stepped into the ring. He was tall, strong, hit hard, and had that great jab. Watching his war with Holyfield I, we forget what a magnificent and exellent fighter he was. He had the total package. A manager's dream. What happened? He also had that EXTRA: Charisma and self determination. He was very confident in his abilities. And for a big man, 6'5" with 235 pounds, was an excellent INSIDE FIGHTER AT HIS VERY BEST. How could Ali cope with a big guy like Bowe? We saw him cope with a guy like the giant Ernie Terrell, but Terrell did not had the physical attributes nor even close the boxing skills of "Big Daddy". Terrell was CLUMSY for his height. He could not used those advantanges against someone 3 inches smaller than he? I don't think that Ali would outjab Bowe. Bowe had a terrific jab. (see the Holyfield fight and the fights before he got greedy and lazy). Bowe did not had the same desire after he won the heavy crown, but if he were a motivated fighter, right now, we would have to call him one of the 3 or 5 greatest heavyweights of all-time. Probably we would have called him the greatest heavyweight ever, depending of his fights with Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson if he would have fought them and beat them. There was no question in my mind that he would have beaten Tyson or Lewis when he was at his very best. Bowe by knockout in late rounds. Too big and strong, and could fight.

The Joe Frazier who fought Foreman wasnt "ready to be taken" it took a George Foreman to take him.

I wouldnt listen to much to what Larry Holmes says. He says a lot of things. He said Lennox Lewis was afraid to fight him in the early 2000's after Lewis had respectfully said he wouldnt fight Larry was a bad ass.
Holmes is a bitter ingrate to the core. He has the bare nerve and cheek to say that the Ali of 1974-1977 who used to let his sparring partners beat on his body so that he could get ready for his rope a dope, was being beaten by Larry Holmes??? Holmes thinks as he beat Ali in 1980 when Ali was already suffering from Parkinsons and under medication means something as hell Ali looked fine in 75-76. Holmes should be ashamed and know that 5 years is a long time in HW boxing in those days. Is there any comparison between the Holmes who lost to Tyson and the Holmes of 1983?
Holmes was a poor mans Ali in terms of his boxing ability.

Riddick Bowe- this thing was started by Steve Farhood and the new york magazines in the 90's. Its crap.

Evander Holyfield- this is a really interesting one. Holyfield is underrated as a HW. even a shot version arguably split fights with lewis. Holyfield could have done a Norton on Ali

Ok, nobody beats Ali....But Ali got 5 losses in his record. A record that could have been, if the judges$$$$$ were RIGHT, AT LEAST 9 DEFEATS!!!

Ali never beat a prime Frazier
Ali has never seen nothing like Holmes...Holmes a poor Ali? Holmes had the best jab, maybe of all-time, pound per pound.

Bowe was a very talented big man that in the night that he beat the great Evander Holyfield, not too many hws of any era would have beaten him. Big, strong, good inside fighting, quick and hit hard.

Holyfield in his prime to me, would have beaten Ali. This match is the closest of them all. I could called it a toss up.

I think we made too much out of the great Ali. His quality of opposition in the 60s, except of the great Sonny Listonm, was average, not great.

ALI made himself great in the 70's but u would have to blind to not see he was at his physical prime in the 60's, holyfeild beat ali in their primes your dreaming.
Frazier beat Ali when frazier was at his best Ali wasnt

[Sweet P]

This is a difficult topic, I dont think any of the 5 metioned at the top could beat Ali.
I think the Hardest 2 matchups for Ali Are, Joe Loius and Lennox Lewis.

Both are totally diffrent fighters, Louis's Boxing ability would really make it hard for Ali. And Lennox's size along with ability would cause headaches for Ali.

[Goodnight, Irene]

This is a difficult topic, I dont think any of the 5 metioned at the top could beat Ali.
I think the Hardest 2 matchups for Ali Are, Joe Loius and Lennox Lewis.

Both are totally diffrent fighters, Louis's Boxing ability would really make it hard for Ali. And Lennox's size along with ability would cause headaches for Ali.

Did you just effectively state the five guys mentioned have 0% chance to beat Ali?

[cosimo]

What if Ali fought himself - could he lose? The Boxrec paradox.

[p4p1]

What if Ali fought himself - could he lose? The Boxrec paradox.

[yancey]

Well I guess I will try to answer comments from several people.

I compared Louis opponents to Ali's man for man. I don't see how Bob Pastor is better than Chuvalo. I don't even see that as an argument.
Folley was washed up? He was the #1 contender. He was a much better fighter than Artuo Godoy.
Cleveland Williams was washed up? Well, he was past his prime but he still had some gas in the tank. If Cleveland Williams was washed up, what were Jim Braddock and John Kenry Lewis when Louis fought them?
Williams was certainly better than Tony Galento. Galento's entire reputation is from knocking down Louis. He did nothing else of note in his entire career. Look at him on film against Max Baer. It's on youtube.

I'm not going to get into the BS about the first Liston fight. The people around Liston say his shoulder really did hurt. How surprising.

Tommy Farr was better than Patterson on the night that ali beat Patterson? Ok, I can just as easily say that Brian London was better than Schmeling (who was clueless once he got hurt) on the night Louis beat Schmeling. Karl Mildenberger was certainly a lot better than the blind John Henry Lewis looking for one last payday that Louis fought.

In 4 of Louis' 10 fights he either had a tough 15 round ecdion or got decked. This didn't happen in any of Ali's fights.

Ezzard-I will ask the question that no one wants to answer. What could Ali have done to make his reign better?
He beat a very good champion to win the title. (As opposed to beating one of the worst champions who hadn't fought in 2 years.)
He defended the title a lot.
He didn't duck anyone.
All four times that he defended his title against a challenger from another country he fought in their native country. (Very few champions from the US do this.)
He didn't have any remotely close calls.
What could he have done to make this better?

John L- I'm sorry if you think I have made too many posts. I am really just replying to other people's comments. I haven't made as many posts on this thread as some people.

Cleveland Williams still "had some gas in the tank" against Ali????

He was running on fumes in '66.

[ThatOne]

There's a primary and recency effect. I think too many people remember and dwell on the fights Ali had in the latter part of his career, i.e. Young, Norton lll, Evangelista, Shavers, and the Spinks debacle and think that's a fair represenatation of the man. A cursory review of this board and other boxing sites certainly suggests that.

A few additional points.


We all know The Cat was a literally shot fighter when he fought Ali but he had did have a decent career post Ali.

Also, I see people are trying to hang additional losses on Ali and claiming he lost the second fight with Norton, the third fight with Norton, the fight with Young which is probably the most disputed of them all, the Shavers fight, the Evangelista fight, the Jones fight, the second Spinks fight, et cetera. Heck I have ever seen folks say the stoppage against Billy Daniels was premature. If you do the research you can find scorecards and contemporaneous accounts of the fights from UPI, AP, Sports Illustrated, and other media outlets and most of them but not all of them will confirm and reenforce the judge's decisions.

[Bricks]

Many say that the Muhammad Ali, circa 1964-67 was the best that ever was. That that Ali of that era, was untouchable, and no heavyweight before or after him, could have beaten him. Here in my opinion are 4 heavyweight greats that would have beaten him every time.


5. Riddick Bowe circa 1991-92: This guy could have been the most talented heavyweight ever that stepped into the ring. He was tall, strong, hit hard, and had that great jab. Watching his war with Holyfield I, we forget what a magnificent and exellent fighter he was. He had the total package. A manager's dream. What happened? He also had that EXTRA: Charisma and self determination. He was very confident in his abilities. And for a big man, 6'5" with 235 pounds, was an excellent INSIDE FIGHTER AT HIS VERY BEST. How could Ali cope with a big guy like Bowe? We saw him cope with a guy like the giant Ernie Terrell, but Terrell did not had the physical attributes nor even close the boxing skills of "Big Daddy". Terrell was CLUMSY for his height. He could not used those advantanges against someone 3 inches smaller than he? I don't think that Ali would outjab Bowe. Bowe had a terrific jab. (see the Holyfield fight and the fights before he got greedy and lazy). Bowe did not had the same desire after he won the heavy crown, but if he were a motivated fighter, right now, we would have to call him one of the 3 or 5 greatest heavyweights of all-time. Probably we would have called him the greatest heavyweight ever, depending of his fights with Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson if he would have fought them and beat them. There was no question in my mind that he would have beaten Tyson or Lewis when he was at his very best. Bowe by knockout in late rounds. Too big and strong, and could fight.

People talk about the lie that travelled the world. Well here is another one. The riddick bowe who fought Evander Holyfield in 1992 could have beaten any heavyweight in history that night.
It was started by Steve Farhood and the other new york box cabal of the 80's (senior members, Mike Katz, Mike Marley,Ed Shuyler,Wallace Matthews etc).

I think that statement about Bowe 92 is perhaps as accurate as me saying Bowe is just a a harder hitting, trash talking Ray Austin for the early 90's.

If Bowe had managed to get to Ruddock before Lewis did, taken out Lewis in 93 and again later in the decade, had a winning fight wioth Tyson or Foreman,and had victories over some of the early 2000's crop (ie to add longevivity to his credentials) we might be talking.

As it is any arguments about bowe on his best night against ATG HW's are moot as the body of evidence isnt thick enough, bowe was very erratic in his career

[ThatOne]

There's got to be some middle ground on Ali... We just seem to be chasing our tails...with the same thread articulated in a slightly different way.

On one hand some think Ali is going to struggle with Bowe??? On the other hand others are arguing that Ali's 60's prime has now become as mythically untouchable as Tyson's.

There's no reason or logic in any of it, just some kind of fan/anti-based emotion to it all.

Fair enough , Ezzard. The big difference is Tyson's prime was ended in the ring by another fighter at the tender age of twenty four. Muhammad Ali's prime was ended unnaturally through no fault of his own and by his own government.

He was not the same fighter when he returned. That's not just my opinion. That's the opinion of the only man beside Floyd Patterson to fight Ali before and after the exile. Oh, somebody called it a retirement. It was no more of a retirement than Napolean's exile to Elba. Ali wanted to fight. I digress. Here's George Chuvalo discussing the pre exile and post exile Ali:

"GC: You got it wrong. Ali went the distance with me both times (laughing). I threw more head punches in the second fight. In the first fight, I concentrated on maybe 75 - 80 % to the body.

I kinda switched it the other way around in the second fight. I fought a smarter fight the second time. I hit him with a lot of jabs in the second fight. Nobody ever talks about that but if you look at the film, you’ll notice I hit him with a lot of jabs. But I still think I should have worked the body more than I did. I worked the body too much in the first fight and not enough in the second fight. The second fight was still a very close, hard fought fight. Some sportswriters even thought I won the second fight. How was Ali different? He was just more energetic in the first fight. He threw more punches and had more verve in a sense. He was trying to get by in the second fight with a lot of guile. He didn’t have the same physical attributes as he had in the first fight. He had flashes of it but he couldn’t sustain it like he could in the first fight. In the first fight, he was a much better conditioned athlete. After his exile, he never really came back. He never came back to the fighter he was before he was put into exile. He was never that fighter ever, ever, ever again. Even though he fought some great fights after with Joe Frazier for instance, he was never the same fighter. When he beat George Foreman he beat him by using his brains. He sucked him in with the "rope - a - dope." He didn’t beat him on physical ability as much as a well planned fight plan. He used his intelligence and general boxing savvy and let Foreman punch himself out. Then he just took over. But he was not the same athlete ever again."


http://cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/chuvalo.htm

Ali was still learning and still filling out physically when he was stripped of his title. It would have been interesting to see his natural progression which was artificially stilted.

I suspect Ali would have eventually lost. His greatest asset , his unmatched sense of self, would have been eventually his undoing as he would have not given one of his opponents the respect and attention they deserved.

I reckon any athlete can be defeated in his or her sport. However I do think there are athletes where that proposition becomes a lot less likely.

[ThatOne]

It looks like Alp is using the same strategy that prime BrocktonBlockbuster49 used to use. Keep up the pressure with high volume posts until the opponent(s) will is completely destroyed.

I for one have an injured shoulder and will retire from this debate.

If you are more passionate about your subject than your interloctor should you be penalized? I would answer yes but only if you are enlonging the debate for nothing more than to elong the debate.

[Ezzard]

There's got to be some middle ground on Ali... We just seem to be chasing our tails...with the same thread articulated in a slightly different way.

On one hand some think Ali is going to struggle with Bowe??? On the other hand others are arguing that Ali's 60's prime has now become as mythically untouchable as Tyson's.

There's no reason or logic in any of it, just some kind of fan/anti-based emotion to it all.

Fair enough , Ezzard. The big difference is Tyson's prime was ended in the ring by another fighter at the tender age of twenty four. Muhammad Ali's prime was ended unnaturally through no fault of his own and by his own government.

He was not the same fighter when he returned. That's not just my opinion. That's the opinion of the only man beside Floyd Patterson to fight Ali before and after the exile. Oh, somebody called it a retirement. It was no more of a retirement than Napolean's exile to Elba. Ali wanted to fight. I digress. Here's George Chuvalo discussing the pre exile and post exile Ali:

"GC: You got it wrong. Ali went the distance with me both times (laughing). I threw more head punches in the second fight. In the first fight, I concentrated on maybe 75 - 80 % to the body.

I kinda switched it the other way around in the second fight. I fought a smarter fight the second time. I hit him with a lot of jabs in the second fight. Nobody ever talks about that but if you look at the film, you’ll notice I hit him with a lot of jabs. But I still think I should have worked the body more than I did. I worked the body too much in the first fight and not enough in the second fight. The second fight was still a very close, hard fought fight. Some sportswriters even thought I won the second fight. How was Ali different? He was just more energetic in the first fight. He threw more punches and had more verve in a sense. He was trying to get by in the second fight with a lot of guile. He didn’t have the same physical attributes as he had in the first fight. He had flashes of it but he couldn’t sustain it like he could in the first fight. In the first fight, he was a much better conditioned athlete. After his exile, he never really came back. He never came back to the fighter he was before he was put into exile. He was never that fighter ever, ever, ever again. Even though he fought some great fights after with Joe Frazier for instance, he was never the same fighter. When he beat George Foreman he beat him by using his brains. He sucked him in with the "rope - a - dope." He didn’t beat him on physical ability as much as a well planned fight plan. He used his intelligence and general boxing savvy and let Foreman punch himself out. Then he just took over. But he was not the same athlete ever again."


http://cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/chuvalo.htm

Ali was still learning and still filling out physically when he was stripped of his title. It would have been interesting to see his natural progression which was artificially stilted.

I suspect Ali would have eventually lost. His greatest asset , his unmatched sense of self, would have been eventually his undoing as he would have not given one of his opponents the respect and attention they deserved.

I reckon any athlete can be defeated in his or her sport. However I do think there are athletes where that proposition becomes a lot less likely.

If it has to be a coin with two faces on it then I’d rather be on your side of the coin…

But his career was what it was: an outstanding one. Though, yes, he did get some wins towards the end that are very questionable. Most great fighters win one or two questionable fights (the fact I’m having qualify this, and to point out what is obvious, shows you just how impossible it has become to discuss certain topics here).

Back to discussion that has evolved in this thread. If you can’t countenance a great fighter being beaten by another great fighter then something is wrong. If you can’t accept that any great fighter has weaknesses that can be exploited then why bother even discussing these things?

I like discussing boxing.

And, if someone thinks Floyd Mayweather is better than Emile Griffiths I’ll argue with them. But at some point enough is enough and passion is nothing more than blind faith and over-identification.

[ThatOne]

There's got to be some middle ground on Ali... We just seem to be chasing our tails...with the same thread articulated in a slightly different way.

On one hand some think Ali is going to struggle with Bowe??? On the other hand others are arguing that Ali's 60's prime has now become as mythically untouchable as Tyson's.

There's no reason or logic in any of it, just some kind of fan/anti-based emotion to it all.

Fair enough , Ezzard. The big difference is Tyson's prime was ended in the ring by another fighter at the tender age of twenty four. Muhammad Ali's prime was ended unnaturally through no fault of his own and by his own government.

He was not the same fighter when he returned. That's not just my opinion. That's the opinion of the only man beside Floyd Patterson to fight Ali before and after the exile. Oh, somebody called it a retirement. It was no more of a retirement than Napolean's exile to Elba. Ali wanted to fight. I digress. Here's George Chuvalo discussing the pre exile and post exile Ali:

"GC: You got it wrong. Ali went the distance with me both times (laughing). I threw more head punches in the second fight. In the first fight, I concentrated on maybe 75 - 80 % to the body.

I kinda switched it the other way around in the second fight. I fought a smarter fight the second time. I hit him with a lot of jabs in the second fight. Nobody ever talks about that but if you look at the film, you’ll notice I hit him with a lot of jabs. But I still think I should have worked the body more than I did. I worked the body too much in the first fight and not enough in the second fight. The second fight was still a very close, hard fought fight. Some sportswriters even thought I won the second fight. How was Ali different? He was just more energetic in the first fight. He threw more punches and had more verve in a sense. He was trying to get by in the second fight with a lot of guile. He didn’t have the same physical attributes as he had in the first fight. He had flashes of it but he couldn’t sustain it like he could in the first fight. In the first fight, he was a much better conditioned athlete. After his exile, he never really came back. He never came back to the fighter he was before he was put into exile. He was never that fighter ever, ever, ever again. Even though he fought some great fights after with Joe Frazier for instance, he was never the same fighter. When he beat George Foreman he beat him by using his brains. He sucked him in with the "rope - a - dope." He didn’t beat him on physical ability as much as a well planned fight plan. He used his intelligence and general boxing savvy and let Foreman punch himself out. Then he just took over. But he was not the same athlete ever again."


http://cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/chuvalo.htm

Ali was still learning and still filling out physically when he was stripped of his title. It would have been interesting to see his natural progression which was artificially stilted.

I suspect Ali would have eventually lost. His greatest asset , his unmatched sense of self, would have been eventually his undoing as he would have not given one of his opponents the respect and attention they deserved.

I reckon any athlete can be defeated in his or her sport. However I do think there are athletes where that proposition becomes a lot less likely.

If it has to be a coin with two faces on it then I’d rather be on your side of the coin…

But his career was what it was: an outstanding one. Though, yes, he did get some wins towards the end that are very questionable. Most great fighters win one or two questionable fights (the fact I’m having qualify this, and to point out what is obvious, shows you just how impossible it has become to discuss certain topics here).

Back to discussion that has evolved in this thread. If you can’t countenance a great fighter being beaten by another great fighter then something is wrong. If you can’t accept that any great fighter has weaknesses that can be exploited then why bother even discussing these things?

I like discussing boxing.

And, if someone thinks Floyd Mayweather is better than Emile Griffiths I’ll argue with them. But at some point enough is enough and passion is nothing more than blind faith and over-identification.

It's interesting how adamant George Chuvalo is in his opinion that the post exile Ali was a vastly inferior boxer to the pre exile one. When people say the post exile Ali was the same fighter or roughly the same fighter as the post exile one they should pay boxers who experienced both more heed.

[ThatOne]

Most great fighters win one or two questionable fights (the fact I’m having qualify this, and to point out what is obvious, shows you just how impossible it has become to discuss certain topics here).

-ezzard

The list of Ali's disputed wins by his most ardent detractors is getting so long as to be unimaginable; when that list inludes Billy Daniels, Spinks ll, and Alfredo Evangelista. Let's deal with Ali's wins that reasonable people can disagree on- Doug Jones, Norton ll and lll, Young, and Shavers. It is interesting to note that Young*, Norton lll, and Shavers came almost at the conclusion of Ali's career** If you look at various scorecards from UPI, AP, and Sports Illustrated for the Jones fight, the Shavers fight, the second and third Norton fights even the Young fight, you will find that on most of these scorecards but not all of them Ali won. One could say they were all biased I guess but where then does that leave the person making the charge of bias. They are leaning on nobody's bias but their own.


* It would be interesting to see the fight press scorecards for the Young fight. I can't find them.

**The Holmes and Berbick debacles have about as much relevance to his career as Louis' debacle against Marciano's had to his but there are still folks who wrongly in my opinion believe Louis had enough left to be fairly judged by his performance in that fight.

[The Great John L]

Yeah, I was pretty shocked the first time I read a post about the Evngelista fight being questionable. I was confident enough in my own memory to not have to rewatch it.

And now that someone posted Chuvalo's thoughts about his second fight with Ali being close, we'll now be reading posts about the two Chuvalo fights being questionable decisions as well.

[ThatOne]

Yeah, I was pretty shocked the first time I read a post about the Evngelista fight being questionable. I was confident enough in my own memory to not have to rewatch it.

And now that someone posted Chuvalo's thoughts about his second fight with Ali being close, we'll now be reading posts about the two Chuvalo fights being questionable decisions as well.

Well, most folks are incapacle of honest self appraisal and boxers are folks too so Chuvalo's opinion on his performance is understandable. In his mind since he finished the fight relatively intact he must have done fine and possibly won. I think they fought twenty seven rounds and Ali won more than twenty of them.

The pushback in Ali's case is understandable because he has reached demigod status in the eyes of the public. All historical figues go through that and Ali is a historical figure as well as a boxer. You can see with the way historians treat historical figures. Leaders like Roosevelt, Churchill and Kennedy were deified shortly after their deaths and then historians went back and took a critical look. This caused their proponents to dig in their heels and further testify to the greatness of the men. Same with Ali. I just think folks who underrate him fall into the same trap as those who overrate him. He was certainly not without flaws as a boxer and a man but in toto he was somebody special.

[Ezzard]

Most great fighters win one or two questionable fights (the fact I’m having qualify this, and to point out what is obvious, shows you just how impossible it has become to discuss certain topics here).

-ezzard

The list of Ali's disputed wins by his most ardent detractors is getting so long as to be unimaginable; when that list inludes Billy Daniels, Spinks ll, and Alfredo Evangelista. Let's deal with Ali's wins that reasonable people can disagree on- Doug Jones, Norton ll and lll, Young, and Shavers. It is interesting to note that Young*, Norton lll, and Shavers came almost at the conclusion of Ali's career** If you look at various scorecards from UPI, AP, and Sports Illustrated for the Jones fight, the Shavers fight, the second and third Norton fights even the Young fight, you will find that on most of these scorecards but not all of them Ali won. One could say they were all biased I guess but where then does that leave the person making the charge of bias. They are leaning on nobody's bias but their own.


* It would be interesting to see the fight press scorecards for the Young fight. I can't find them.

**The Holmes and Berbick debacles have about as much relevance to his career as Louis' debacle against Marciano's had to his but there are still folks who wrongly in my opinion believe Louis had enough left to be fairly judged by his performance in that fight.

I think Jones and Norton II are debatable...but nothign worng with them. Young and Norton III (though closer than you remember when you watch again because Norton held off) probably should be defeats. Shavers...yeah, probably a defeat again but when a guy gets hit like Ali did in the 15th, comes back and almost has his man out you sort of think to hell with it he desevres the decision.

Spinks, Evangelista, Daniels?????

I can't agree though on the press score cards. We can watch the fights and have opinions. I've been to countless sporting events and seen a totally different game to the one reported in the papers the next day.

[The Great John L]

Shavers...yeah, probably a defeat again but when a guy gets hit like Ali did in the 15th, comes back and almost has his man out you sort of think to hell with it he desevres the decision.

And Shavers did catch him pretty solid in that fight. Pretty incredible that Ali didn't hit the canvas.

I can't agree though on the press score cards. We can watch the fights and have opinions. I've been to countless sporting events and seen a totally different game to the one reported in the papers the next day.

Well, I still have a number of articles from the Young fight, and don't recall too many, if any, that had it for Ali. He really fought stupid in that fight, doing virtually nothing for the first 4 or 5 rounds and then expecting that he would doimnate all the late rounds. Not only should Ali have lost that one, it really wasn't even close.

[ThatOne]

I wish I could find the link but SI, AP, and UPI had Ali in the neighborhood of 9-6 over Shavers; same as the official scorcecard. As for Norton lll AP had it 9-6 for Ali, UPI had it 8-7 for Norton; close to the scorecard. If you believe some of the comments here you would think Norton beat Ali from post to post. What's interesting is how that has become received opinion. I recently watched the entire fight again on youtube. Also, what's interesting are some of the comments. Of course the opinion is heavily divided but there are many comments in the vein that " I thought this was fight that Ali clearly lost but he actually acquitted himself quite well." Oh, for what it's worth Ali never said he lost that fight as has been claimed falsely here. I will find the link if that person likes.

Also, the Shavers and Norton fights were scored on a round system not a point system. So a round that Ali barely won counts as much as a round as a round Norton and Shavers won big.

Here's a nugget about the Jones fight from SI:


If that, or something else did it ("Sheer will, heart and guts did it," said Bill Faversham, Clay's manager), Clay had the gumption then to demonstrate how good a fighter he can be, and for the last three rounds looked, a little bit at least, like the fighter he says he can be. But once Clay had failed to knock Jones out in the fourth, as he had predicted he would, the crowd became blind to all his later efforts. Because Clay lost that fourth-round battle, too many convinced themselves that Jones won the war—which is illogical in any case and untrue in this one. Jones fought one of the best fights of his career, but Clay, fighting his worst, still got the fair decision.



http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm

[ThatOne]

Well, I still have a number of articles from the Young fight, and don't recall too many, if any, that had it for Ali. He really fought stupid in that fight, doing virtually nothing for the first 4 or 5 rounds and then expecting that he would doimnate all the late rounds. Not only should Ali have lost that one, it really wasn't even close.

-The Great JohnL

Here's an interesting take from Mark Kram who was no fan of Ali:


Indeed, Ali had come dangerously close to committing professional suicide. He flirted with the caprices of scoring. The scoring of a fight is subjective, as inexact as anything can be. It is emotional, even sentimental. Nonetheless a bout, especially a title fight, should be looked at as a stage production or a painting. It is the whole that counts.

A challenger is not given a champion's title. He must take that title, preferably with his hands, but with a ring post if necessary. Young never has been a positive fighter, and he was far from it against Ali. He is a fighter of slight craft with a few cute moves. On the attack, his jab is a trifle, his punching of no account. On defense, caution marks his every move, his eyes are always on the exit doors. As the old wheeze goes, Young is a fighter without bad intentions. He is also not a Philadelphia fighter, that primordial strain of workmen who have left a wake of blood and upsets in the ring; Philadelphia fighters know how to take titles.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm