Comparing Muhammad Ali and Sugar Ray Leonard :What's more impressive:

[gilgamesh]

Lennox Lewis also beat Vitali Klitschko fair and square.

The cut was unfortunate for Vitali, but there was nothing unfair about how it happened or their decision to stop the bout as a result.

It's one of the greatest wins in the career of Lennox Lewis and arguably the greatest win any Champion has ever retired on.

[Ambling Alp II]

That wasn't one of the biggest wins of Lewis career. He looked awful for most of the fight. He seemed to be in slow motion. Had he been fighting a guy who was a really hard puncher, (or an accurate puncher who was throwing a lot of punches) he would have been stopped. Had he been fighting a good defensive fighter, he would have lost a decision. It was obvious after that fight that he was well past his best and he wisely retired.

[gilgamesh]

That wasn't one of the biggest wins of Lewis career. He looked awful for most of the fight. He seemed to be in slow motion. Had he been fighting a guy who was a really hard puncher, (or an accurate puncher who was throwing a lot of punches) he would have been stopped. Had he been fighting a good defensive fighter, he would have lost a decision. It was obvious after that fight that he was well past his best and he wisely retired.

Vitali never lost a fight and barely lost any rounds after losing to Lennox.

Lennox struggled in the fight, yes. But he won.

Other than Holyfield or Tyson. Lewis doesn't have a bigger name on his record, and unlike Holyfield and Tyson, Vitali was in his prime.

Add to it the fact that Lewis vs Vitali was a much better fight than either of the Holyfield bouts or the Tyson one.

[Ambling Alp II]

You can word this as carefully as you want, it doesn't change the fact that this wasn't an important fight for Lewis and he doesn't need this win at all. This wasn't some big showdown. The Ring had Vitaly as the #7 contender. He had already had the embarrassing loss to Byrd.

Vitali never had a win that means anything. Merely winning a WBS title doesn't count. Neither do meaningless WBS title defenses in a terrible era against weak competition. Doesn't matter if Klitschko was in his prime.
Lets not pretend that Klitschko was really good. He wasn't.
Lewis did more than struggle. He looked awful.

He won mostly because of the incompetence of his opponent. This was one of the worst fights of Lewis' career.
It adds nothing to the career of Lennox Lewis. He beat better fighters than Klitschko, regardless if Klitschko is a "bigger name".

Bottom line- If this fight never happened, Lewis would not be ranked any higher than he is.

[gilgamesh]

That's an absolutely idiotic opinion. Vitali was one of the most dominant Heavyweights of the next 10 years and a win over him don't matter?

It is a better win than more than half of Heavyweight Champions have on their record at all.

Name me a boxer in history with a better final bout and win on his record. Take your time.

[gilgamesh]

Let me ask you Alp. Did George Foreman beating Michael Moorer boost his legacy any?

[p4p1]

That's an absolutely idiotic opinion. Vitali was one of the most dominant Heavyweights of the next 10 years and a win over him don't matter?

It is a better win than more than half of Heavyweight Champions have on their record at all.

Name me a boxer in history with a better final bout and win on his record. Take your time.

I agree.
Surely that Vitali went on to be the consensus #1 HW in the world improves the meaning of the win down the line. Whether it was a weak era or not, the only two the brothers didn't fight were each other.
Off the top of my head, not including guys who didn't die mid prime (like a Sal Sanchez), the only guy who I can think of is Marciano knocking out Moore.

[Ambling Alp II]

that he was a dominant heavyweight for 10 years tells you more about the hw era that he fought in. It absolutely sucked. Still does. It is hard for people that became a fan during this time to wrap their head around this. But it is true.

Nobody thought it was a big win for Lewis at the time. Nobody. Why was that? Because hardly anyone thought Klitschko was that good. People has seen him fight and realized that. But fortunately, or him, the division got really weak. If he was a great fighter, he would have beaten Lennox Lewis that night. He was in his prime and Lewis was well past his.

[Ambling Alp II]

Let me ask you Alp. Did George Foreman beating Michael Moorer boost his legacy any?

Not really. Of course, everyone remembers that fight. But he was nowhere near the fighter that he once was. If this fight happens in his prime, Moorer doesn't get out of the 2nd round. I wouldn't rate him any higher had this fight not happened or he would have lost.

[gilgamesh]

Let me ask you Alp. Did George Foreman beating Michael Moorer boost his legacy any?

Not really. Of course, everyone remembers that fight. But he was nowhere near the fighter that he once was. If this fight happens in his prime, Moorer doesn't get out of the 2nd round. I wouldn't rate him any higher had this fight not happened or he would have lost.

So one of George Foreman's career defining wins didn't boost his legacy at all for you.

One of the most historic achievements in Heavyweight history. He regains the Heavyweight title 20 years after he lost it, becoming the only man to do so, and you say it doesn't even move the needle for you.

What else do I need to say? I'm not talking to a reasonable person.

[Ambling Alp II]

You aren't really getting what I am saying.
Obviously, it's a memorable fight. A 46-year old won the heavyweight championship. Nothing like that ever happened before.

What I am saying is that when rating Goerge Foreman among the all-time greats, it's his prime that should be looked at. i.e. the fights with Frazier, Ali, Norton etc.

[gilgamesh]

You aren't really getting what I am saying.
Obviously, it's a memorable fight. A 46-year old won the heavyweight championship. Nothing like that ever happened before.

What I am saying is that when rating Goerge Foreman among the all-time greats, it's his prime that should be looked at. i.e. the fights with Frazier, Ali, Norton etc.

Your prime is your physical best. It's not the entire body of your work.

Regardless of age. Michael Moorer is one of the best opponents he has a win over at all. Certainly one of his best wins at any age.

If Foreman had never returned and never had that second career, he'd definitely drop on the all time list quite a bit. Coming back at an older age to do what he did is what proved he was more extraordinary than any of us could've figured. If he left it all behind for good after the Jimmy Young defeat, he'd be rated about as highly as someone like Liston. Still great, but not the Legend he grew into.

[Ambling Alp II]

Really don't think Moorer was anywhere near the best opponents that Foreman beat. Frazier was light years better than Moorer. Norton was a lot better. Lyle was a lot better. Those wins should (and I emphasize "should") mean a lot more to people than beating Moorer. Of course beating Moorer is a nice story.

Foreman should be ahead of Liston if he never made a comeback. Foreman is usually ranked anywhere from 3-8. Maybe people do give him the benefit of the doubt over some guys (at least subconsciously ) because of his comeback and his announcing. Human beings tend to give the benefit of the doubt to someone they like.

After Ali and Louis, There isn't a lot of consensus between Foreman and several others. Take out the Moorer win and it doesn't really change much. Maybe some people that do give him the benefit of the doubt over Holmes, Frazier, Johnson, Lewis, and Holyfield would have him further down the list than they do. But that still leaves him at #8 all time. Maybe some people would have him behind Dempsey, Marciano, Tyson and Liston. Even then he is still #12. No way he would be any further down the list. And even that is a stretch.

[gilgamesh]

Without the 2nd career. He'd basically have the reputation of Riddick Bowe, and his record would be extremely similar.

I'd personally rate Moorer higher than Lyle even though Lyle would have a very good chance of knocking out Moorer if they were in the same era. Ultimately though Moorer's best wins top Lyle's so you gotta give him the edge.

The Foreman-Lyle fight is infinitely more fun to watch though I'll grant you that.

[Ambling Alp II]

No, Foreman would still be higher than Bowe. Yes Bowe beat Holyfield. But Foreman destroyed Frazier. And Foreman destroyed Norton. And Foreman beat Lyle.

I am assuming that you are joking about Moorer's best wins (plural) being better than Lyles. Yes Holyfield is better than anyone Lyle beat. But Holyfield was terrible in that fight and tons of guy would have beaten him that night. After that, what can you possibly come up as a good win for Moorer? Close win over Alex Schulz? Tough fight with the legendary Frans Botha? Vaughan Bean? How impressive.

Lyle beat Ellis, Bonavena, Shavers and Bugner. Altogether, that easily outweighs Moorer's victims list.

[gilgamesh]

No, Foreman would still be higher than Bowe. Yes Bowe beat Holyfield. But Foreman destroyed Frazier. And Foreman destroyed Norton. And Foreman beat Lyle.

I am assuming that you are joking about Moorer's best wins (plural) being better than Lyles. Yes Holyfield is better than anyone Lyle beat. But Holyfield was terrible in that fight and tons of guy would have beaten him that night. After that, what can you possibly come up as a good win for Moorer? Close win over Alex Schulz? Tough fight with the legendary Frans Botha? Vaughan Bean? How impressive.

Lyle beat Ellis, Bonavena, Shavers and Bugner. Altogether, that easily outweighs Moorer's victims list.

I'd have Moorer's achievements over Lyle's myself.

Moorer also has Bert Cooper, and an impressive Light Heavyweight career. They're not far off, from one another, but seeing as how Moorer won Championships and Lyle did not, I'd give Moorer the edge.

[Ambling Alp II]

Moorer was in the right place in the right time when he beat Holyfield.
Bert Cooper? Seriously? Come on.

Lyle was the better fighter. We should not have to argue about this.

[gilgamesh]

Bert Cooper? Seriously? Come on.

Ron Lyle didn't do anything especially impressive either there bucko. He lost spectacularly to legends, and beat some good not great fighters. Moorer beat 1 great fighter, and quite a few good ones. They're certainly on about the same level.

Moorer to me would rate higher. I don't think that's an outrageous opinion.

I think you'd have to agree that Lyle and Moorer are both Top 5 wins for Foreman either way you slice it.

Frazier and Norton are his best wins, but after that it's Lyle and Moorer. If you think Lyle is his 4th best win and Moorer his 5th, that's not really a world of difference in levels is it?

[Ambling Alp II]

Bucko? Have not heard that since Richie from Happy Days.
Moorer didn't beat quite few good ones. That's one of my points. Bert Cooper was not a good fighter. That you had to resort to him is laughable.

Moorer beat Holyfield who was for whatever reason totally off his game. Didn't beat him by much. And that is about it. Moorer has little else. Certainly no one that was as good as Ellis, Bonavena, Shavers, and Bugner.

Sometimes there is a big difference between someone's best and 2nd best win. Sometimes there is a big difference between a 4th and 5th best win. That is the case here.

You also have to look at losses. Moorer got knocked out by one punch from Foreman by a punch that anyone with a decent chin would have survived.
He got knocked out by Tua before Tua hit him with anything. Anyone with a chin at all would not have went down. And Holyfield destroyed him in their rematch.

[gilgamesh]

Bucko? Have not heard that since Richie from Happy Days.
Moorer didn't beat quite few good ones. That's one of my points. Bert Cooper was not a good fighter. That you had to resort to him is laughable.

Moorer beat Holyfield who was for whatever reason totally off his game. Didn't beat him by much. And that is about it. Moorer has little else. Certainly no one that was as good as Ellis, Bonavena, Shavers, and Bugner.

Sometimes there is a big difference between someone's best and 2nd best win. Sometimes there is a big difference between a 4th and 5th best win. That is the case here.

You also have to look at losses. Moorer got knocked out by one punch from Foreman by a punch that anyone with a decent chin would have survived.
He got knocked out by Tua before Tua hit him with anything. Anyone with a chin at all would not have went down. And Holyfield destroyed him in their rematch.

Michael Moorer was the Heavyweight Champion, Ron Lyle wasn't. Moorer's very best win is better than Lyle's very best win.

Because of where Foreman was in his career when he beat Moorer, it definitely makes it the more impressive victory considering that he is still to this day the Oldest Heavyweight Champion of all time.

Apparently that's an insignificant achievement to you, and you alone, and that's certainly a point of view to have. One I'll never agree with.

I must say your take that a fighter getting a meaningful win in the Twilight of their career doesn't boost their legacy is a highly, highly, highly, highly unusual one.

[Ambling Alp II]

And everything else favors Lyle over Moorer. When I say the Lyle win was more impressive, I am saying this mainly because Lyle was better than Moorer. I realize that Foreman was 46 when he beat Moorer; obviously a great achievement for someone that age. OK, we have beat this to death. Time to move on.

[gilgamesh]

And just for the record. Since this is what indirectly lead us down this road anyway.

How many wins would you say Lennox Lewis has that's more impressive than Vitali Kitschko?

[Cojimar 1946]

Bucko? Have not heard that since Richie from Happy Days.
Moorer didn't beat quite few good ones. That's one of my points. Bert Cooper was not a good fighter. That you had to resort to him is laughable.

Moorer beat Holyfield who was for whatever reason totally off his game. Didn't beat him by much. And that is about it. Moorer has little else. Certainly no one that was as good as Ellis, Bonavena, Shavers, and Bugner.

Sometimes there is a big difference between someone's best and 2nd best win. Sometimes there is a big difference between a 4th and 5th best win. That is the case here.

You also have to look at losses. Moorer got knocked out by one punch from Foreman by a punch that anyone with a decent chin would have survived.
He got knocked out by Tua before Tua hit him with anything. Anyone with a chin at all would not have went down. And Holyfield destroyed him in their rematch.

Could anyone from this era beat Moorer? If so who would you pick?

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

You aren't really getting what I am saying.
Obviously, it's a memorable fight. A 46-year old won the heavyweight championship. Nothing like that ever happened before.

What I am saying is that when rating Goerge Foreman among the all-time greats, it's his prime that should be looked at. i.e. the fights with Frazier, Ali, Norton etc.

- Likely you don't even get what YOU are saying.

Ali ducked the rematch of a controversial stoppage where Foreman was waved off looking straight into Clayton's eyes. Video count shows George up at the 10 sec mark before Clayton waves him off, likely because, 1-Zaire was a shyte place to be then, 2-he was 67 yrs old and worn out after having to break incessantly clinching by Ali, and 3-not to mention 5 min later acres of water dumped on the proceedings that would've ended the fight anyway.

Ali and Norton were only good for a single fight for George, yet Ali fought Norton and Frazier tooth and nail 3x apiece. Fought rematches with Cooper who arguably knocked him out in England, Chuvalo 2x who put him in the hospital the first fight, Patterson 2x, and Spinks 2x.

Norton we can understand why he wouldn't want a rematch, yet Ali wouldn't commit to the lucrative rematch proposed by a black Indonesian Oilman post fight where as George was ready to roll in a Ring Interview. At least Frazier was a fighting man who took a George rematch.

Ali with Cosell in his yeller ABC sport jacket even tracked George to Canada where Ali makes a point to scream all through George's 5 man exhibition that George ain't never gonna get a rematch. That's why Ali ended up in Podunk Ohio getting beat up by Wepner in between whining to the referee.

Look, we understand, and it's OK...;)

[gilgamesh]

Man. This dude been hating on Ali since the Nixon Administration.