Is Muhammad Ali Overrated?

[addi]

ali was brilliant he proved it time and again in the best era of heavyweights ever, before the ban it was his speed and movement after it was guile and balls. no he's not the best fighter in history i'd say ray robinson was but he's up there. and so what if he got dropped he allways got up. that left hook frazier threw would off sparked allmost anybody else.

[ThatOne]

Ali had the tools to beat any heavyweight in history. No fighter is walking through him.

No one walks through him but I think prime Frazier was flat out better than Ali and Norton would always be a problem for Ali. When Frazier beat Ali in FOTC Ali was as close to prime that as he ever was, you simply can't credit Ali with anything during the years in exile. When I hear about how rusty he was in FOTC I feel like laughing. He swept the early rounds and was ahead at the halfway point for Christs sake. Sharp as a whip he was but then Frazier with his relentless pressure started to get to him like he always did and always would.

Ali was a great fighter but of course he was overrated in boxing terms. As an iconic sports figure it's virtually impossible to overrate him.

How is Frazier better? They fought three time and Ali won twice with the only fight not to go the distance won by Ali and Frazier was always younger and closer to his prime than Ali in those fights. Ask yourself this about the FOTC. One boxer has been boxing continuously for three and one half years. The other fighter had fought twice in the past three and one half years. You don't know anything else about them. Who would have the edge? No, Ali was a different fighter after the ban. He fought George Chuvalo and Floyd Patterson before and after the ban. In "Facing Ali" Chuvalo said he was a much slower fighter after the ban.
.
And the reason Frazier can never be better is that Foreman beat him badly. Ali beat Foreman badly. So head to head Ali is better and he is vastly better against common opponents. If Ali lost to Foreman that loss, imho, would have dropped him to nine or ten on an ATG HW list but he didn't. When you look at mythical matchups against all time greats Ali has the style to beat a lot more of them than Frazier.

Ali and Norton fought three competitive matches. But he never saw the prime Ali.

Ali was 27-0 in his prime, 27-2 in his post prime, and 1-3 as a shot fighter. He beat three other top ten hw fighters, two of them after his prime. He beat seven Hall Of Famers, four of them after his prime. And scores of near greats like Jerry Quarry, Zora Folley, Earnie Shavers, and Ron Lyle. IMHO, it's hard to overrate him.

I understand iconoclasm. It's fun to tip over sacred cows. I see it done on NBA boards with Michael Jordan all the time. But sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a special talent is a special talent.

[ryanst1982]

Well said thatone.

nothing to add to that. Bang on, best HW ever for me and top 5 p4p, true true legend

[hhaehre]

Ali had the tools to beat any heavyweight in history. No fighter is walking through him.

No one walks through him but I think prime Frazier was flat out better than Ali and Norton would always be a problem for Ali. When Frazier beat Ali in FOTC Ali was as close to prime that as he ever was, you simply can't credit Ali with anything during the years in exile. When I hear about how rusty he was in FOTC I feel like laughing. He swept the early rounds and was ahead at the halfway point for Christs sake. Sharp as a whip he was but then Frazier with his relentless pressure started to get to him like he always did and always would.

Ali was a great fighter but of course he was overrated in boxing terms. As an iconic sports figure it's virtually impossible to overrate him.

How is Frazier better? They fought three time and Ali won twice with the only fight not to go the distance won by Ali and Frazier was always younger and closer to his prime than Ali in those fights. Ask yourself this about the FOTC. One boxer has been boxing continuously for three and one half years. The other fighter had fought twice in the past three and one half years. You don't know anything else about them. Who would have the edge? No, Ali was a different fighter after the ban. He fought George Chuvalo and Floyd Patterson before and after the ban. In "Facing Ali" Chuvalo said he was a much slower fighter after the ban.
.
And the reason Frazier can never be better is that Foreman beat him badly. Ali beat Foreman badly. So head to head Ali is better and he is vastly better against common opponents. If Ali lost to Foreman that loss, imho, would have dropped him to nine or ten on an ATG HW list but he didn't. When you look at mythical matchups against all time greats Ali has the style to beat a lot more of them than Frazier.

Ali and Norton fought three competitive matches. But he never saw the prime Ali.

Ali was 27-0 in his prime, 27-2 in his post prime, and 1-3 as a shot fighter. He beat three other top ten hw fighters, two of them after his prime. He beat seven Hall Of Famers, four of them after his prime. And scores of near greats like Jerry Quarry, Zora Folley, Earnie Shavers, and Ron Lyle. IMHO, it's hard to overrate him.

I understand iconoclasm. It's fun to tip over sacred cows. I see it done on NBA boards with Michael Jordan all the time. But sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a special talent is a special talent.

When I said flat out better I meant prime Ali vs prime Frazier head to head and I stand by that. I agree Ali had the better career but even the 68-69 Ali, you know the one that never existed in boxing, would have had his hands full with Frazier and Norton. Ken Norton had Alis number, simple as that. It always amazes me how picking prime Frazier to beat prime Ali is viewed by some as sacrilegious and gets one labeled as an iconoclast, Ali was good but come on..

[ThatOne]

I disagree...Ali owns his losses to Frazier and Norton as they own their losses against him. When you start qualifying the losses and wins then the fact that neither faced a prime Ali has to be given consideration.

I will give you some hypotheticals.

Two soccer teams play. All you know about the two teams is one team played two games in the past three and one half years and the other team has been playing continuously. Which team would be favored?


Two basketball teams play. All you know about the two teams is one team played two games in the past three and one half years and the other team has been playing continuously. Which team would be favored?

The same can be said about two boxers...


BTW, how can it be as simple as Norton had Ali's number when they fought three competitive fights that are still hotly debated thirty five, forty years later?

[hhaehre]

I disagree...Ali owns his losses to Frazier and Norton as they own their losses against him. When you start qualifying the losses and wins then the fact that neither faced a prime Ali has to be given consideration.

I will give you some hypotheticals.

Two soccer teams play. All you know about the two teams is one team played two games in the past three and one half years and the other team has been playing continuously. Which team would be favored?


Two basketball teams play. All you know about the two teams is one team played two games in the past three and one half years and the other team has been playing continuously. Which team would be favored?

The same can be said about two boxers...


BTW, how can it be as simple as Norton had Ali's number when they fought three competitive fights that are still hotly debated thirty five, forty years later?

Ok, this has been debated many times here and common ground is seldom reached. I'm going to leave your soccer/basketball analogy alone and say this on the FOTC. Ali was as close to prime as he ever was in FOTC. Sure he may have peaked in 68/69 had he been allowed to fight but that is really irrelevant imo. Not having fought more than twice in three + years and being rusty is something that I largely disregard simply because he looked great in FOTC. He wasn't rusty and he wasn't slow. It was one of his best efforts and one of the best hw fights in the history of boxing.
Finally Norton had the style to beat Ali, how that is even debatable is beyond me. First fight he won, second he lost by a hair and in the third one he was screwed over royally by the judges. The series should have been 2-1 Norton and could have been 2-0-1 Norton. Frazier was very difficult for Ali but Joe had to go through a hail storm of leather to get to Ali. Norton on the other hand gave Ali fits and Ali could never put much hurt on him.

[Rambo]

Look at the time of post, the person who started this thread is probably dead by now

[ThatOne]

I disagree...Ali owns his losses to Frazier and Norton as they own their losses against him. When you start qualifying the losses and wins then the fact that neither faced a prime Ali has to be given consideration.

I will give you some hypotheticals.

Two soccer teams play. All you know about the two teams is one team played two games in the past three and one half years and the other team has been playing continuously. Which team would be favored?


Two basketball teams play. All you know about the two teams is one team played two games in the past three and one half years and the other team has been playing continuously. Which team would be favored?

The same can be said about two boxers...


BTW, how can it be as simple as Norton had Ali's number when they fought three competitive fights that are still hotly debated thirty five, forty years later?

Ok, this has been debated many times here and common ground is seldom reached. I'm going to leave your soccer/basketball analogy alone and say this on the FOTC. Ali was as close to prime as he ever was in FOTC. Sure he may have peaked in 68/69 had he been allowed to fight but that is really irrelevant imo. Not having fought more than twice in three + years and being rusty is something that I largely disregard simply because he looked great in FOTC. He wasn't rusty and he wasn't slow. It was one of his best efforts and one of the best hw fights in the history of boxing.
Finally Norton had the style to beat Ali, how that is even debatable is beyond me. First fight he won, second he lost by a hair and in the third one he was screwed over royally by the judges. The series should have been 2-1 Norton and could have been 2-0-1 Norton. Frazier was very difficult for Ali but Joe had to go through a hail storm of leather to get to Ali. Norton on the other hand gave Ali fits and Ali could never put much hurt on him.

Ali and Frazier fought three times. The first time they fought Frazier was 27 Ali was 29. The second time they fought Frazier was 30. Ali was 32. The third time they fought Frazier was 31. Ali was 33. When they fought the first time Ali had boxed eighteen rounds in the past four years. Joe Frazier was fighting regularly. Frazier fans not only want to discount the second and third fight but want to argue Ali was at his best for the first one despite having had three matches in the three and one half years leading up to the prior fight.

And Ali and Ken Norton fought three competitive matches. I can cite contemporaneous accounts by respected sportwriters, including sportwriters inducted into the International Boxing Hall Of Fame , that Ken Norton didn't do enough to wrest the title from Ali when they met in 1976. I concede that you can find sportwriters who thought Norton won. Thatis why it was a hotly contested decision.

And if you want to see a fighter that really had another fighter's number just watch the two matches between the 1964 Olympic heavyweight champion and the 1968 Olympic heavyweight champion.

[hhaehre]

Ali and Frazier fought three times. The first time they fought Frazier was 27 Ali was 29. The second time they fought Frazier was 30. Ali was 32. The third time they fought Frazier was 31. Ali was 33. When they fought the first time Ali had boxed eighteen rounds in the past four years. Joe Frazier was fighting regularly. Frazier fans not only want to discount the second and third fight but want to argue Ali was at his best for the first one despite having had three matches in the three and one half years leading up to the prior fight.

Did you think Ali looked rusty and slow vs. Frazier in '71?

And Ali and Ken Norton fought three competitive matches. I can cite contemporaneous accounts by respected sportwriters, including sportwriters inducted into the International Boxing Hall Of Fame , that Ken Norton didn't do enough to wrest the title from Ali when they met in 1976. I concede that you can find sportwriters who thought Norton won. Thatis why it was a hotly contested decision.

Sportswriters aside, did you really score the third Ali-Norton fight in favor of Ali? Given the magnitude of the fight it's possibly the worst decision I've ever seen.

And if you want to see a fighter that really had another fighter's number just watch the two matches between the 1964 Olympic heavyweight champion and the 1968 Olympic heavyweight champion.

So what? Everybody knows Foreman had Joe's number. I also though with everybody would recognize the difficulty Ali had with Norton but maybe I was wrong, maybe Ali handled Norton with ease?

[ThatOne]

Ali and Frazier fought three times. The first time they fought Frazier was 27 Ali was 29. The second time they fought Frazier was 30. Ali was 32. The third time they fought Frazier was 31. Ali was 33. When they fought the first time Ali had boxed eighteen rounds in the past four years. Joe Frazier was fighting regularly. Frazier fans not only want to discount the second and third fight but want to argue Ali was at his best for the first one despite having had three matches in the three and one half years leading up to the prior fight.

Did you think Ali looked rusty and slow vs. Frazier in '71?

And Ali and Ken Norton fought three competitive matches. I can cite contemporaneous accounts by respected sportwriters, including sportwriters inducted into the International Boxing Hall Of Fame , that Ken Norton didn't do enough to wrest the title from Ali when they met in 1976. I concede that you can find sportwriters who thought Norton won. Thatis why it was a hotly contested decision.

Sportswriters aside, did you really score the third Ali-Norton fight in favor of Ali? Given the magnitude of the fight it's possibly the worst decision I've ever seen.

And if you want to see a fighter that really had another fighter's number just watch the two matches between the 1964 Olympic heavyweight champion and the 1968 Olympic heavyweight champion.

So what? Everybody knows Foreman had Joe's number. I also though with everybody would recognize the difficulty Ali had with Norton but maybe I was wrong, maybe Ali handled Norton with ease?

We are at an impasse. I don't want to discredit Frazier's win in the first fight. Howver you are intent on discrediting Ali's redemption by winning the rematch and rubber match by stating that was the only fight they had when both men were in their primes. Ali was a different fighter after the ban which cost him three and one half years of his boxing prime. I don't see how anybody in good faith can discount that.

I watched all three Ali-Norton fights live and felt Ali won the rematch by a larger margin than was indicated on the scorecard and did enough to score a decision in the their rubber match. Up until that point the heavyweight title had not changed hands via a decision in thirty siox years. I don't think Norton did enough to change that. Allso, keep in mind , all three fights were scored on a round system not a point system. Ali got as many points for a close round as Norton got for a big round.

You implied Norton had Ali's number. I will concede that stylistically Frazier and Norton were horrible match ups for Ali but what made him special. at least in my opinion, was that he usually found a way to win. Norton and Ali fought thirty nine rounds with neither man in serious trouble.

When I think of a fighter having another fighter's number I think of Liston over Patterson. Frazier over Ellis, Foreman over Norton and Frazier, and Holyfield over Tyson. I don't think of neither Frazier or Norton over Ali.

To conclude I believe that Ali owns his wins and losses over Joe Frazier and Ken Norton with neither the wins or losses deserving of an asterisk.

[Adamj1987]

yes, im not saying he isnt a top 20 heavyweight maybe lower top 10 but most of his reputation is based on the foreman and frasier fights and his anti war stance

[ThatOne]

yes, im not saying he isnt a top 20 heavyweight maybe lower top 10 but most of his reputation is based on the foreman and frasier fights and his anti war stance

Since he is in the lower top ten according to you, could you please name the fighters you think had betterv careers or could beat him head to head.

[Adamj1987]

yes, im not saying he isnt a top 20 heavyweight maybe lower top 10 but most of his reputation is based on the foreman and frasier fights and his anti war stance

Since he is in the lower top ten according to you, could you please name the fighters you think had betterv careers or could beat him head to head.

in no order

Lewis
Louis
Holyfield
johnson
holmes
tyson
foreman (his 2nd career pushes him ahead of ali for me)


that would make ali 8 in my list

i also think vitali and bowe in there respective primes would beat ali but there careers are inferior so i rank them bellow

[ThatOne]

yes, im not saying he isnt a top 20 heavyweight maybe lower top 10 but most of his reputation is based on the foreman and frasier fights and his anti war stance

Since he is in the lower top ten according to you, could you please name the fighters you think had betterv careers or could beat him head to head.

in no order

Lewis
Louis
Holyfield
johnson
holmes
tyson
foreman (his 2nd career pushes him ahead of ali for me)


that would make ali 8 in my list

i also think vitali and bowe in there respective primes would beat ali but there careers are inferior so i rank them bellow

Who did any of those boxers beat that were good as Floyd Patterson, Sonny Liston, Joe Frazier, and George Foreman? I can't include Archie Moore because he was shot.

And how could Foreman be better than Ali when beat him in his prime and Ali was past his?
And a prime Foreman also lost to Jimmy Young.

[Adamj1987]

Since he is in the lower top ten according to you, could you please name the fighters you think had betterv careers or could beat him head to head.

in no order

Lewis
Louis
Holyfield
johnson
holmes
tyson
foreman (his 2nd career pushes him ahead of ali for me)


that would make ali 8 in my list

i also think vitali and bowe in there respective primes would beat ali but there careers are inferior so i rank them bellow

Who did any of those boxers beat that were good as Floyd Patterson, Sonny Liston, Joe Frazier, and George Foreman?



And how could Foreman be better than Ali when beat him in his prime and Ali was past his?

look its just what i think.

who did ali beat at 45?

[ThatOne]

in no order

Lewis
Louis
Holyfield
johnson
holmes
tyson
foreman (his 2nd career pushes him ahead of ali for me)


that would make ali 8 in my list

i also think vitali and bowe in there respective primes would beat ali but there careers are inferior so i rank them bellow

Who did any of those boxers beat that were good as Floyd Patterson, Sonny Liston, Joe Frazier, and George Foreman?



And how could Foreman be better than Ali when beat him in his prime and Ali was past his?

look its just what i think.

who did ali beat at 45?

It's fair. You are entitled to your opinion.

Beating Michael Moorer at 45 or was it 46 was a huge achievement. His second act is what gets Foreman ranked as highly as he is. If he stay retired, after losing to Young, I don't think he would be ranked nearly as high.

It's just my opinion , but Tyson's career doesn't put him much higher than thirteen or fourteen on a ATG HW list.

Ali
Louis
Foreman
Holmes
Frazier
Johnson
Marciano
Holyfield
Dempsey
Liston
Lewis
Charles
Walcott
Tyson

[Adamj1987]

Who did any of those boxers beat that were good as Floyd Patterson, Sonny Liston, Joe Frazier, and George Foreman?



And how could Foreman be better than Ali when beat him in his prime and Ali was past his?

look its just what i think.

who did ali beat at 45?

It's fair. You are entitled to your opinion.

Beating Michael Moorer at 45 or was it 46 was a huge achievement. His second act is what gets Foreman ranked as highly as he is. If he stay retired, after losing to Young, I don't think he would be ranked nearly as high.

It's just my opinion , but Tyson's career doesn't put much higher than thirteen or fourteen on a ATG HW list.

foreman wouldnt but you could say the same for ali after losing to norton or spinks

i see what you means about tyson opponant wise but it was the way he won as much as who he beat for tyson with me

[ThatOne]

look its just what i think.

who did ali beat at 45?

It's fair. You are entitled to your opinion.

Beating Michael Moorer at 45 or was it 46 was a huge achievement. His second act is what gets Foreman ranked as highly as he is. If he stay retired, after losing to Young, I don't think he would be ranked nearly as high.

It's just my opinion , but Tyson's career doesn't put much higher than thirteen or fourteen on a ATG HW list.

foreman wouldnt but you could say the same for ali after losing to norton or spinks

i see what you means about tyson opponant wise but it was the way he won as much as who he beat for tyson with me

Well, Ali beat both men in their return matches but Ali was 36 when he lost to Spinks. That's a bit different than the twenty eight year old Foreman losing to Ali in his flat out prime.

I have him third which is pretty high. If he beats Ali and Young I think he would be ranked #1 by just about everybody.

[Giancarlo]

yes, im not saying he isnt a top 20 heavyweight maybe lower top 10 but most of his reputation is based on the foreman and frasier fights and his anti war stance

Since he is in the lower top ten according to you, could you please name the fighters you think had betterv careers or could beat him head to head.

in no order

Lewis
Louis
Holyfield
johnson
holmes
tyson
foreman (his 2nd career pushes him ahead of ali for me)


that would make ali 8 in my list

i also think vitali and bowe in there respective primes would beat ali but there careers are inferior so i rank them bellow

I love this place!

[Adamj1987]

Yes 52% 52% [ 30 ] x
No 48% 48% [ 28 ]

[ThatOne]

Yes 52% 52% [ 30 ] x
No 48% 48% [ 28 ]

I don't think the results are dispositive. JMO

[hhaehre]

To conclude I believe that Ali owns his wins and losses over Joe Frazier and Ken Norton with neither the wins or losses deserving of an asterisk.

I agree with the exception of the third Norton fight. For the record I rate Ali as an all time great but I still think he is overrated by many.

[ThatOne]

To conclude I believe that Ali owns his wins and losses over Joe Frazier and Ken Norton with neither the wins or losses deserving of an asterisk.

I agree with the exception of the third Norton fight. For the record I rate Ali as an all time great but I still think he is overrated by many.

I understand the backlash. Michael Jordan suffers the same backlash in basketball. Fans get tired of being bombarded with so and so is the greatest all the time.

Ray Robinson was probably the best pfp fighter.

But Ali is inarguably the most famous boxer to have ever lived. I know some folks will say Dempsey but I just don't think he's the same worldwide figure.

[hhaehre]

To conclude I believe that Ali owns his wins and losses over Joe Frazier and Ken Norton with neither the wins or losses deserving of an asterisk.

I agree with the exception of the third Norton fight. For the record I rate Ali as an all time great but I still think he is overrated by many.

I understand the backlash. Michael Jordan suffers the same backlash in basketball. Fans get tired of being bombarded with so and so is the greatest all the time.

Ray Robinson was probably the best pfp fighter.

But Ali is inarguably the most famous boxer to have ever lived. I know some folks will say Dempsey but I just don't think he's the same worldwide figure.

I read somewhere that the only name more recognized across the globe was Coca Cola.

[Goodnight, Irene]

To conclude I believe that Ali owns his wins and losses over Joe Frazier and Ken Norton with neither the wins or losses deserving of an asterisk.

I agree with the exception of the third Norton fight. For the record I rate Ali as an all time great but I still think he is overrated by many.

I understand the backlash. Michael Jordan suffers the same backlash in basketball. Fans get tired of being bombarded with so and so is the greatest all the time.

Ray Robinson was probably the best pfp fighter.

But Ali is inarguably the most famous boxer to have ever lived. I know some folks will say Dempsey but I just don't think he's the same worldwide figure.

Its not the fairest of comparisons, though. Dempsey fought in an era where there was less exposure. Even so, there are newspaper accounts of Dempseys exploits from places like New Zealand, FFS...in the 20's! Gotta give that Tex Rickard his due.