BoxRec

I know comparing different eras in boxing or sport in general is always hard, some might say impossible and others might say pointless but if you had to name the ultimate heavyweight who would be your pick, forget ali's character, tyson's presence or the klitscho's safety first approach, ( of course we all have our favorite ) but just tell me your opinion of the BEST heavyweight of all time and why ?
For me it's Vitali Klitscho, I believe his better now then when he lost to Lewis, I think he would of beat Lewis in a rematch and way to big for Ali and Tyson !
1 Vitali k
2 Tyson
3 Ali
4 Lewis
5 foreman
Frazier Marciano and Louis to small, Vladimir k and bowe a close call for 6th !

ali woulda battered him senseless...he always did very well against big men.

there are zero grounds to think that he woulda beat lennox should they have a rematch....lennox was underprepared and out of shape and still beat his face to bits...and woulda got the KO should the fight have continued for another round or so. it's a complete fallacy that vit was beatin him...lennox had taken his best shots and was still comin at him.

mike? i like mike but i think he's always been slightly overrated....dunno how this woulda gone really....

Prime Larry Holmes would have been too much for him in my view, also Ali, Lewis, Foreman, Tyson, Holyfield and Bowe I think would all beat him.

apophenic wrote:

ali woulda battered him senseless...he always did very well against big men.

there are zero grounds to think that he woulda beat lennox should they have a rematch....lennox was underprepared and out of shape and still beat his face to bits...and woulda got the KO should the fight have continued for another round or so. it's a complete fallacy that vit was beatin him...lennox had taken his best shots and was still comin at him.

mike? i like mike but i think he's always been slightly overrated....dunno how this woulda gone really....

Who did Ali fight that was even close to the size of Klitschko?

apophenic wrote:

ali woulda battered him senseless...he always did very well against big men.

there are zero grounds to think that he woulda beat lennox should they have a rematch....lennox was underprepared and out of shape and still beat his face to bits...and woulda got the KO should the fight have continued for another round or so. it's a complete fallacy that vit was beatin him...lennox had taken his best shots and was still comin at him.

mike? i like mike but i think he's always been slightly overrated....dunno how this woulda gone really....

You was doing so well until you put overrated and mike in the same sentence

reido wrote:

apophenic wrote:

ali woulda battered him senseless...he always did very well against big men.

there are zero grounds to think that he woulda beat lennox should they have a rematch....lennox was underprepared and out of shape and still beat his face to bits...and woulda got the KO should the fight have continued for another round or so. it's a complete fallacy that vit was beatin him...lennox had taken his best shots and was still comin at him.

mike? i like mike but i think he's always been slightly overrated....dunno how this woulda gone really....

Who did Ali fight that was even close to the size of Klitschko?

Terrel was 6,5 and he fought stronger fighters like Foreman who i think would have mullered big Klit.
AND Ali had the longer reach.

Is it April 1 already?

I'd say all the heavies mentioned on this thread bar maybe Marciano would have beaten the Klits even Tyson when he was in his Two year peak.

Jon Saxon wrote:

reido wrote:

apophenic wrote:

ali woulda battered him senseless...he always did very well against big men.

there are zero grounds to think that he woulda beat lennox should they have a rematch....lennox was underprepared and out of shape and still beat his face to bits...and woulda got the KO should the fight have continued for another round or so. it's a complete fallacy that vit was beatin him...lennox had taken his best shots and was still comin at him.

mike? i like mike but i think he's always been slightly overrated....dunno how this woulda gone really....

Who did Ali fight that was even close to the size of Klitschko?

Terrel was 6,5 and he fought stronger fighters like Foreman who i think would have mullered big Klit.
AND Ali had the longer reach.

Terrel was much lighter than Klitschko, I find it very difficult to imagine anybody from that era where heavyweights were about 15.5 stones not having trouble with someone like Vitali who has both size and a good level of skill to go with it.

thats what im thinking, its easy to say ali would run rings around him, but when you actually think about the men before the 1980's were much smaller and even the big men were no way near as strong, theres no way on earth ali could of taken vitalis onslaught against the ropes round after round ! no way...

jessi wrote:I know comparing different eras in boxing or sport in general is always hard, some might say impossible and others might say pointless but if you had to name the ultimate heavyweight who would be your pick

I have never had any real interest in trying to work out if Lewis could have beaten Ali, or if Foreman could have beaten a Klitschko etc. For me, i'm much more interested in what was achieved during the fighters time at the top, and then ranking them on that basis. Its all about what level of oposition was available at the time, and of that oposition what was faced.

Floyd Mayweather is a beautiful talent, but for whatever reason he's missed out on fighting his biggest challengers time after time and due to this should not rank highly on all time lists IMO. Neither should the likes of Joe Calzaghe. Obviously others may disagree, but IMO if you dont prove yourself against the best of your era, your not deserving of being ranked above those that did!

reido wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

reido wrote:

Who did Ali fight that was even close to the size of Klitschko?

Terrel was 6,5 and he fought stronger fighters like Foreman who i think would have mullered big Klit.
AND Ali had the longer reach.

Terrel was much lighter than Klitschko, I find it very difficult to imagine anybody from that era where heavyweights were about 15.5 stones not having trouble with someone like Vitali who has both size and a good level of skill to go with it.

And "big" George wasn't even 6 foot 4 and was just 4 lbs heavier than Ali in Zaire..... hardly a massive size difference between Foreman and Ali.

Ali vs Vitali would have been interesting..... Vitali is still very underated - when you see Lennox in all his title defensive post 1997 when he was in shape - you think of the speed he had, the power, the size, just generally everything - plus he was a thinking boxer. Yet, okay he was in bad shape and past his prime - but he after 6 rounds of boxing hadn't figured out how to beat Vitali.... he had recovered from his poor start, but I still don't think but for the cut that anyone could confidently say before the fight was stopped "he's got him now". There was still a lot more fight left in Vitali and he was still dangerous.

I was talking through the Adamek fight with my old man, thinking of what strategies you would do if you were coaching any of the top ten heavyweights against Vitali.... and my conclusion, perhaps disgracefully, was come in and look for the headbutt try and cause a cut.... break the rules to get him off his game. I thought against Solis there were signs that he was becoming slow....not last Saturday.... and there was also the most variety I have seen Vitali use. My god, he even threw some uppercuts and body punches.

He was catching Adamek, a very good fighter in his own right, with the lead right hand at will. This is apparently a slow, big, clumbersome, heavyweight fighting a former 2 (lighter) weight world champion. Adamek, whilst not the quickest Light Heavyweight in history, should have been able to avoid those right hands but he couldn't - the handspeed of Vitali shocked me. Adamek had fought slower, but bigger men, than Vitali in the build up - and generally made them look silly.... so he knew how to fight as the smaller man and how to come inside (something I aint convinced about Haye) - he couldn't do a thing against Vitali because he wasn't quick enough.

I know I have my Tyson's fan hat on when I say that I think Tyson would have had the natural style and speed to get inside and land something on the big man. However, I think if Tyson would beat him - it would have to mean that those punches in those early sessions (before Klitchsko's defensive tactics tire him out) would need to score a KO..... I aint sure Tyson would KO Vitali early. Lennox landed some bombs and Vitali stood up to them.

Vitali was really impressive at the weekend.

It depends on what era they fight.

If Klitschko went back in time to Ali's heyday - and the fight was at his peak, in America, with all of Ali's mind games - then you would give him Ali fair shake at beating him.

But put Ali in Germany, against a mentally resilient Klitschko in 2011 with 60,000 fans screaming for him (i mean, politely clapping) then it could be a reverse.

So with so many tangibles to this question - i dont think there is a definitive answer.

It's a good one, but I can't get tangled in it as my brain will melt.

Besides I dont think any one on that list would beat every other one.. it's a case of who'd beat the most.

ALI wrote:

jessi wrote:I know comparing different eras in boxing or sport in general is always hard, some might say impossible and others might say pointless but if you had to name the ultimate heavyweight who would be your pick

I have never had any real interest in trying to work out if Lewis could have beaten Ali, or if Foreman could have beaten a Klitschko etc. For me, i'm much more interested in what was achieved during the fighters time at the top, and then ranking them on that basis. Its all about what level of oposition was available at the time, and of that oposition what was faced.

Floyd Mayweather is a beautiful talent, but for whatever reason he's missed out on fighting his biggest challengers time after time and due to this should not rank highly on all time lists IMO. Neither should the likes of Joe Calzaghe. Obviously others may disagree, but IMO if you dont prove yourself against the best of your era, your not deserving of being ranked above those that did!

completely disagree about floyd, the only 2 of his era he hasent fought YET is cotto and pacman ! you dont win titles in 6 diffrent weights for no reason, agree with calzage though !

stujones wrote:

reido wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote: Terrel was 6,5 and he fought stronger fighters like Foreman who i think would have mullered big Klit.
AND Ali had the longer reach.

Terrel was much lighter than Klitschko, I find it very difficult to imagine anybody from that era where heavyweights were about 15.5 stones not having trouble with someone like Vitali who has both size and a good level of skill to go with it.

And "big" George wasn't even 6 foot 4 and was just 4 lbs heavier than Ali in Zaire..... hardly a massive size difference between Foreman and Ali.

Ali vs Vitali would have been interesting..... Vitali is still very underated - when you see Lennox in all his title defensive post 1997 when he was in shape - you think of the speed he had, the power, the size, just generally everything - plus he was a thinking boxer. Yet, okay he was in bad shape and past his prime - but he after 6 rounds of boxing hadn't figured out how to beat Vitali.... he had recovered from his poor start, but I still don't think but for the cut that anyone could confidently say before the fight was stopped "he's got him now". There was still a lot more fight left in Vitali and he was still dangerous.

I was talking through the Adamek fight with my old man, thinking of what strategies you would do if you were coaching any of the top ten heavyweights against Vitali.... and my conclusion, perhaps disgracefully, was come in and look for the headbutt try and cause a cut.... break the rules to get him off his game. I thought against Solis there were signs that he was becoming slow....not last Saturday.... and there was also the most variety I have seen Vitali use. My god, he even threw some uppercuts and body punches.

He was catching Adamek, a very good fighter in his own right, with the lead right hand at will. This is apparently a slow, big, clumbersome, heavyweight fighting a former 2 (lighter) weight world champion. Adamek, whilst not the quickest Light Heavyweight in history, should have been able to avoid those right hands but he couldn't - the handspeed of Vitali shocked me. Adamek had fought slower, but bigger men, than Vitali in the build up - and generally made them look silly.... so he knew how to fight as the smaller man and how to come inside (something I aint convinced about Haye) - he couldn't do a thing against Vitali because he wasn't quick enough.

I know I have my Tyson's fan hat on when I say that I think Tyson would have had the natural style and speed to get inside and land something on the big man. However, I think if Tyson would beat him - it would have to mean that those punches in those early sessions (before Klitchsko's defensive tactics tire him out) would need to score a KO..... I aint sure Tyson would KO Vitali early. Lennox landed some bombs and Vitali stood up to them.

Vitali was really impressive at the weekend.

great post, totally agree !

G0mez wrote:It depends on what era they fight.

If Klitschko went back in time to Ali's heyday - and the fight was at his peak, in America, with all of Ali's mind games - then you would give him Ali fair shake at beating him.

But put Ali in Germany, against a mentally resilient Klitschko in 2011 with 60,000 fans screaming for him (i mean, politely clapping) then it could be a reverse.

So with so many tangibles to this question - i dont think there is a definitive answer.

It's a good one, but I can't get tangled in it as my brain will melt.

Besides I dont think any one on that list would beat every other one.. it's a case of who'd beat the most.

dont mean to melt your brain but if the top 10 heavyweights of all time all fought each other twice (home and away ) so each had 18 fights in a league style system, who would be number 1 ?

reido wrote:

apophenic wrote:

ali woulda battered him senseless...he always did very well against big men.

there are zero grounds to think that he woulda beat lennox should they have a rematch....lennox was underprepared and out of shape and still beat his face to bits...and woulda got the KO should the fight have continued for another round or so. it's a complete fallacy that vit was beatin him...lennox had taken his best shots and was still comin at him.

mike? i like mike but i think he's always been slightly overrated....dunno how this woulda gone really....

Who did Ali fight that was even close to the size of Klitschko?

and having alreadty beaten him fact..can anyone ranked vitali ahead of a past prime lewis.

bullshit .................exits thread.

Although i'm not a big fan when people go on about fighters from a different era being so much better then this one, there still has to be some realism attached too.

If this was a thread about who was better at 40, Ali or Klitschko then fair enough and it'd obviously be Vitali but who exactly has he beat that makes you feel ok to put him in the same sentence as Ali? You can make all the excuses you want that he was winning both fights but the simple truth is that he got beat by the 2 best boxers he's ever faced in Lennox Lewis and Chris Byrd.

Could it be any of his following Career Best wins:

Tomasz Adamek - Good but a natural cruiser and only 1 decent heavyweight win over Arreola
Odlanier Solis - Should have been a NC, Vitali didn't land a punch on him
Shannon Briggs - Totally shot fighter, did nothing to justify title fight.
Albert Sosnowski - average European class at best. Never beaten Top 20 Heavyweight
Kevin Johnson - average at best, did nothing to justify title fight. Never beaten a Top 20 Heavyweight
Chris Arreola - Fat and lazy, has never beaten a Top 20 Heavyweight
Juan Carlos Gomez - Good at his best but Fat lazy coke head by time faced Vitali
Samuel Peter - Good power but Fat lazy bum too.
Danny Williams - Fat and never more then a good domestic fighter.
Corrie Sanders - Had potential but was too lazy and fat.
Kirk Johnson - Average plus Fat and lazy
Timo Hoffmann - Crap big man. Never beaten anyone of note.
Herbie Hide - Good power but never a real heavyweight.

Sure he can only beat whats infront of him but as stated before the 2 best fighters he faced beat him.

Also you can't just take Boxers from different era's and not take in Height and weight discrepencies in terms of the natural evolution in the human race due to better diets, nutrients and supplements nowadays.

Therefore either Ali at 28 would be a 6ft 5inch, 17 stone Heavyweight in todays era or Vitali would be a 6ft 5, 16 and half stone Heavyweight in Ali's era. Either way there wouldn't have been much Height/weight difference between the two.

Thing is Klitschko has never been beaten in a fight on merit (i mean knocked out or points loss) he has only lost on cuts and an injury. While obviously Ali was in a different league to Klitschko i think he beats Tyson all day long

Camcas wrote:Thing is Klitschko has never been beaten in a fight on merit (i mean knocked out or points loss) he has only lost on cuts and an injury. While obviously Ali was in a different league to Klitschko i think he beats Tyson all day long

He did lose both of those fights on merit though as there are all kinds of ways to win a boxing match not just the traditional ways of Knockout and points. His cuts stoppage against Lewis was due to punches and perhaps the most severe cuts ever seen in a boxing ring and regarding the Byrd loss it was almost definately down to him either being made to miss a punch and sustaining a shoulder injury or being hit by Byrd on that shoulder causing the injury:

Vitali Klitschko:
“It was not an easy fight. Chris Byrd has a special style and it was not easy to get him. In the second round I had a tough round. I had a pain in my shoulder and every round the pain grew more and more and more.

Vitali is a very good Champion, and we'll probably never no if he's a great or not due to the era he's fighting in. Personall i think Wlad has a better resume, even though i think Vitali the better boxer. So based on Merit surely you would have to rank Wlad above Vitali??


as mythical match ups go here's how i see a few ATG's against Vitali

Tyson - Vitali probably stops him any time after 8, Mike lost against anybody that stood up to him.

Lewis - primer for prime i favour lennox but its a very even match-up, one that would undoubtedly be close on the cards.

Foreman - The only man in history i can see stopping the big Vitali is a prime George. Vitalis always there to be hit, and Foreman would catch him eventually.

Ali - Again probably the only fighter in history i can see dancing his way to victory, al beit through a few hairy moments.

Frazier - I think Smokin Joes style is alright for Vitali and he stops him around mid way point through accumulation.

reido wrote:

apophenic wrote:

ali woulda battered him senseless...he always did very well against big men.

there are zero grounds to think that he woulda beat lennox should they have a rematch....lennox was underprepared and out of shape and still beat his face to bits...and woulda got the KO should the fight have continued for another round or so. it's a complete fallacy that vit was beatin him...lennox had taken his best shots and was still comin at him.

mike? i like mike but i think he's always been slightly overrated....dunno how this woulda gone really....

Who did Ali fight that was even close to the size of Klitschko?

And Who did Klitscko face that was remotley as good as Tyson, Ali, Holmes, Bowe, Foreman etc.

Oh yeah, that's right, he faced Lennox. We all know how that panned out.

Ali then Tyson then Klitschko.
Ok, how good are either of the Klitschko's? Well all we've got to go on are their performances against the fighters they beat and lost to, as with anybody else. Ali and Tyson (especially Ali-underlined, bold and italic) beat better fighters, therefore they rank higher or can be considered better, according to what is proven. Who would win if they all fought a tournament in their primes? Who can say, it's not likely to happen. What we know is Ali fought great opposition and beat the best guys he faced, Tyson fought decent opposition and lost post-prime to the two best fighters he fought. Klitschko fought Lewis, Byrd and beat the cast of day of the dead and beat the cast of day of the dead.

Ali and Tyson are far more proven than Klitschko. Proof = > supposition.

jessi wrote:

ALI wrote:

jessi wrote:I know comparing different eras in boxing or sport in general is always hard, some might say impossible and others might say pointless but if you had to name the ultimate heavyweight who would be your pick

I have never had any real interest in trying to work out if Lewis could have beaten Ali, or if Foreman could have beaten a Klitschko etc. For me, i'm much more interested in what was achieved during the fighters time at the top, and then ranking them on that basis. Its all about what level of oposition was available at the time, and of that oposition what was faced.

Floyd Mayweather is a beautiful talent, but for whatever reason he's missed out on fighting his biggest challengers time after time and due to this should not rank highly on all time lists IMO. Neither should the likes of Joe Calzaghe. Obviously others may disagree, but IMO if you dont prove yourself against the best of your era, your not deserving of being ranked above those that did!

completely disagree about floyd, the only 2 of his era he hasent fought YET is cotto and pacman ! you dont win titles in 6 diffrent weights for no reason, agree with calzage though !

He should have fought at least several of the following when they were in their peak: Frietas, Tyszu, Margarito, Cotto, Williams, a young Mosley, Pacquiao. Please point out to me one name on Mayweather's record that stands above any of those fighters, respective to the division. Maybe Corrales, but other than that, you cant!

Re Mayweather arguement - Cotto? Margarito? Williams? Good fighters, but who have they beaten to place them above some of the fighters Mayweather beat? It used to annoy me when people slated him for fighting the lineal Welterweight champion in Baldomir and were saying he won't man up and face Margarito - just who had Margarito beaten in his first reign as a world champion to make him so justifiable.

The 2007 version of DLH at 154 was everybit as proven a challenge as these three..... Ricky Hatton also let alone Jose Luis Castillo.

As for Lewis vs Klitchsko - no doubting it was a definate win for Lennox who was past his prime and overweight. I would favour Lennox to beat Vitali in a prime vs prime fight. However, it should also be noted that Vitali also wasn't as good in 2003 as he is now. He's been dominant since his return from the sport... amazing to think the only fighter who gave him anything to think about (remotely) was Sosnowski.