BoxRec

Let's look at this great heavyweight champ greatest wins

WTKO7 Sonny Liston
WTKO8 George Foreman
WTKO15 Oscar Bonavena
WTKO14 Joe Frazier (fight #3)
WTKO12 Floyd Patterson
WTKO8 Bob Foster
W15 Leon Spinks (fight #2)
W15 Ken Norton (fight #2)
WTKO5 Henry Cooper
WTKO3 Cleveland Williams

To me, his two greatest wins were with Liston and Foreman.

Floyd Patterson was over the hill and was too small for Ali in '65. Plus, he was already blown out by Liston twice.

Bob Foster was a light heavyweight that could not find a real competition in his own weight class. Plus Foster needed bigger paychecks. He ain't was gonna make big dough fighting light heavyweights

The great Joe Frazier was over the hill and blown out by Foreman. Plus, he LEFT IT ALL OUT IN THE FIGHT OF THE CENTURY. After that great win in '71, Frazier was never the same. But, in fight #3 in Manila was a classic, and has to be one of his greatest wins between two great warriors that did not give an inch.

Ken Norton beat Ali 3 times. I don't buy that he beat Norton in that second fight. That was full of crap.

One of his greatest performances was against Cleveland "Big Cat" Williams. Some say that Williams was shot in the back or something like that before that fight. But it was a great performance of Ali in his prime.

So of TRUE LEGIT WINS, I only got Liston I and Foreman. Any comments?

elmersalsa wrote:Let's look at this great heavyweight champ greatest wins

WTKO7 Sonny Liston
WTKO8 George Foreman
WTKO15 Oscar Bonavena
WTKO14 Joe Frazier (fight #3)
WTKO12 Floyd Patterson
WTKO8 Bob Foster
W15 Leon Spinks (fight #2)
W15 Ken Norton (fight #2)
WTKO5 Henry Cooper
WTKO3 Cleveland Williams

To me, his two greatest wins were with Liston and Foreman.

Floyd Patterson was over the hill and was too small for Ali in '65. Plus, he was already blown out by Liston twice.

Bob Foster was a light heavyweight that could not find a real competition in his own weight class. Plus Foster needed bigger paychecks. He ain't was gonna make big dough fighting light heavyweights

The great Joe Frazier was over the hill and blown out by Foreman. Plus, he LEFT IT ALL OUT IN THE FIGHT OF THE CENTURY. After that great win in '71, Frazier was never the same. But, in fight #3 in Manila was a classic, and has to be one of his greatest wins between two great warriors that did not give an inch.

Ken Norton beat Ali 3 times. I don't buy that he beat Norton in that second fight. That was full of crap.

One of his greatest performances was against Cleveland "Big Cat" Williams. Some say that Williams was shot in the back or something like that before that fight. But it was a great performance of Ali in his prime.

So of TRUE LEGIT WINS, I only got Liston I and Foreman. Any comments?

Williams was shot, period.

Liston I is tainted because of the bizarre ending and the stench and all the questions.

Probably would come down to Foreman or Frazier III.

elmersalsa wrote:One of his greatest performances was against Cleveland "Big Cat" Williams. Some say that Williams was shot in the back or something like that before that fight. But it was a great performance of Ali in his prime.

"Some say..."

Jesus Christ, man. It is a fact he was shot during a scuffle with a copper.

You must inhabit the same galaxy as Yancey.

Giancarlo wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:One of his greatest performances was against Cleveland "Big Cat" Williams. Some say that Williams was shot in the back or something like that before that fight. But it was a great performance of Ali in his prime.

"Some say..."

Jesus Christ, man. It is a fact he was shot during a scuffle with a copper.

You must inhabit the same galaxy as Yancey.

Come on, Connie, out with your intelligent "opinion" on the topic.

The Richard Dunn fight, right?

Ah opinion over fact again, Nance.

Like your claim that Joe Frazier saying Ali underestimated him was "utter nonsense"?

elmersalsa wrote:
One of his greatest performances was against Cleveland "Big Cat" Williams. Some say that Williams was shot in the back or something like that before that fight. But it was a great performance of Ali in his prime.

He had literal bullets in him kid. Cleveland Williams is the most overrated win any fighter has ever had. Clay had a corpse in front of him and he treated him like one.

Well, what's a "legit win"? The only way I can think of that wins against Terrell, Quarry, Lyle and suchlike don't count is if we're only looking for wins against all-time great fighters in their prime.

If that's the case, it's probably just Foreman, but how many champions had any wins at all which fit the bill? Louis? Dempsey? Holmes? Tyson? Marciano? Did any of those great fighters ever defeat a fellow great at his peak? Convincing yourself that Ali's career is thin on achievement sounds like hard work to me.

Couple of extra points:

I've seen Ali-Norton II and there was nothing wrong with the decision. Ali was clearly on top in the first half, the second half was pretty even.

Cleveland Williams was undoubtedly diminished when he faced Ali, but he'd had 4 fights since returning from his injury and won them all. He continued to win regularly for the remaining six years of his career. Not the man he had been - the fight is remembered for Ali's performance, not for the quality of the opponent - but all this rhetoric about him being a walking corpse who had to be dragged to the ring from his hospital bed is nonsensical.

Cleveland wasn't a world class fighter when Ali beat him. In a career as great as Ali's was, it makes that win nondescript, except for the laughable praise and acclaim from people who don't know any better. Saying it's about the performance and not the opponent is akin to praising Hector Camacho for defeating Leonard.

Foreman and Liston are the two best wins.

Norton 2 was a 50-50 fight IMO. Frazier 2 and 3 are good wins.

Wins over Young and Shavers were good on paper but he probably didn;t deserve those.

But there are many othe rtop contenders that he defeated.

Ezzard wrote:Foreman and Liston are the two best wins.

Norton 2 was a 50-50 fight IMO. Frazier 2 and 3 are good wins.

Wins over Young and Shavers were good on paper but he probably didn;t deserve those.

But there are many othe rtop contenders that he defeated.

Frazier 2 is tainted because of the ridiculous amount of holding that Ali got away with.

The referee should have stopped that crap.

Of course, the Ali groupie set will counter with their fantasy that Ali was on the verge of knocking Frazier out in the 2nd before the bell rang early.

I like clean, undisputed wins. So maybe from that standpoint, the Williams fight was Ali's mountain top.

his greatest win has got to be over george foreman most thought he'd get destroyed.

It really depends on your criteria for "greeatest victiories.)

Best Opponents that he defeated (At the time that he fought them.)
Foreman
Liston I
Frazier III
Frazier II
Norton I and II
Patterson I

His best performances: Take your pick between all of his title fights from 1964-1967 (Not counting Liston II)
In particular against Folley, he looked terrific after playing around early on. As others have mentioned hooked great against Williams.

He was never quite the same in the comeback period after losing much of his speed and reflexes. There was nothing that he was better at during the comeback period (post 1967).
After the comeback, several times he looked very good in fights against undermanned opponents such as Quarry II and Bob Foster. Looked very good in Frazier II and III (totally different kinds of fights) , but might have to lean toward the Foreman fight.

He had more durability in his comeback and more power on his shots.

Can you tell where he showed that he didn't have durabilty (such which fights) in any of this title fights from 1964-1967, and why you think that?

I guess you can argue about power; that is more subjective. I certainly don't agree with that.

Where did I say he wasn't durable?

You said he wasn't as durable. Give me some examples during his fights from 1964-1967 where he was not as durable as he was later on.

This thread is the very definition of clutching at straws. Ali's 70s wins over Frazier, Foreman, Quarry, Lyle, Ellis, Shavers, Norton (and their rematch was a fair, close decision that could've gone to either man) occured when Ali was himself past his best. Then his collection of 60s wins is not as good but you have Liston, Folley, Jones, Patterson (who went on to several other impressive performances) . . the guy's resume is amazing.

Ambling Alp wrote:You said he wasn't as durable. Give me some examples during his fights from 1964-1967 where he was not as durable as he was later on.

In 63 he was dropped by Cooper and Chuvalo bullied him around a bit. Like I said, his competition was better after the layoff. I don't think the Ali before the layoff would have lasted the distance in MSG. It can't be proven anymore than your assertion that he was diminished in every way. It's more about what he absorbed after the layoff than the fights you're pining for beforehand. He was clowning most of his opponents. His actual prime was probably when he didn't fight, but to me he was better after the layoff when he was taking on greater fighters.

Here is a fact: 1963 is not between 1964-1967.

Bullied around a bit by Chuvalo? That;'s a little vague, but he certainly was never in any serious trouble whatsoever in the Chvialo fight. Ali never got hurt, never was knocked down, never cut in 10 title fights from 1967. He had much better stamina than he did after the layoff. There is absoutely no basis to think he wasn't at least as durable in in the 1964-1967 period as there was when he older and after the layoff.
As for Frazier I, even he though he was much easier to hit and got tired fairly early in their first fight, he still went the 15 round distance. Had he been the same fighter as he was in 1964-1967, he would have much less trouble going the distance since he would have been hit less and had better stamina.

dempseyfire wrote:This thread is the very definition of clutching at straws. Ali's 70s wins over Frazier, Foreman, Quarry, Lyle, Ellis, Shavers, Norton (and their rematch was a fair, close decision that could've gone to either man) occured when Ali was himself past his best. Then his collection of 60s wins is not as good but you have Liston, Folley, Jones, Patterson (who went on to several other impressive performances) . . the guy's resume is amazing.

Clutching at straws what I thought as well when I hear that Ali was not as durable during his first title reign. He obviously past his prime in the 1970s and nobody could stop him then. Yet we are supposed to beleive that he wasn't durable when he was younger? Make no sense.

I do think that who you are fighting makes is obviously important when rating a fighter. However, what people sometimes do is assume that the level of competition is all there is to consider. Yes, Ali's opponents overall were better than they were before the layoff. That doesn't mean that he himself was better after the layoff then he was during his first title reign. Of course he wasn't.

Ambling Alp wrote:Here is a fact: 1963 is not between 1964-1967.

Bullied around a bit by Chuvalo? That;'s a little vague, but he certainly was never in any serious trouble whatsoever in the Chvialo fight. Ali never got hurt, never was knocked down, never cut in 10 title fights from 1967. He had much better stamina than he did after the layoff. There is absoutely no basis to think he wasn't at least as durable in in the 1964-1967 period as there was when he older and after the layoff.
As for Frazier I, even he though he was much easier to hit and got tired fairly early in their first fight, he still went the 15 round distance. Had he been the same fighter as he was in 1964-1967, he would have much less trouble going the distance since he would have been hit less and had better stamina.

And you chose those years because you know he got dropped in 63. I never specified any time frame. And lets be real, it's only definitive for you because he never lost before the layoff so you can lay your head down on your Ali pillow and pretend that he was invincible. Clay wouldn't have seen the 15th round against Frazier for my money. As for his stamina being greater, more speculation, tougher fights are more draining.

I mentioned 1964-1967 and you answered with 1963. Yes he got careless and got dropped by Cooper. Almost anyone would have been dropped if they got hit like that. He learned from it didn't get careless like that very often again. Your prime has to start somewhere. I choose the first Liston fight; other people would say it was a little later. You want to go with 1965, fine. Don't know anyone who thinks Ali was in prime when he was fought Cooper.

Love your statement "Clay wouldn't have seen the 15th round against Frazier for my money. As for his stamina being greater, more speculation, tougher fights are more draining."

You then speculate that "Clay would not have seen the 15 the round against Frazier. Then you chide me for speculating about his stamina!!
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that he had better stamina during his first title reign. He moved around a lot more and still didn't seem tired. This includes the Chuvalo fight fight which was intesense and went 15 rounds. He was already tired by the middle of the Frazier fight.
Ali would have not trouble going 15 during his prime. He would have hit Fraizer a lot more and got hit a lot less. He isn't going to be gassed in the middle rounds He wins a comfortable decison (which you probably would have disputed.) It would have been somehwat similar to their 2nd fight although better.

Lets be real; you only grasp at staws like this because you don't want have to admit that your notion that Ali was at better in his post layoff period is ridiucluas.

Gentleman, Gentleman. One thing we can all agree on here. Ali definitely did the rope-a-dope better in the 70's.

Ambling Alp wrote:I mentioned 1964-1967 and you answered with 1963. Yes he got careless and got dropped by Cooper. Almost anyone would have been dropped if they got hit like that. He learned from it didn't get careless like that very often again. Your prime has to start somewhere. I choose the first Liston fight; other people would say it was a little later. You want to go with 1965, fine. Don't know anyone who thinks Ali was in prime when he was fought Cooper.

Love your statement "Clay wouldn't have seen the 15th round against Frazier for my money. As for his stamina being greater, more speculation, tougher fights are more draining."

You then speculate that "Clay would not have seen the 15 the round against Frazier. Then you chide me for speculating about his stamina!!
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that he had better stamina during his first title reign. He moved around a lot more and still didn't seem tired. This includes the Chuvalo fight fight which was intesense and went 15 rounds. He was already tired by the middle of the Frazier fight.
Ali would have not trouble going 15 during his prime. He would have hit Fraizer a lot more and got hit a lot less. He isn't going to be gassed in the middle rounds He wins a comfortable decison (which you probably would have disputed.) It would have been somehwat similar to their 2nd fight although better.

Lets be real; you only grasp at staws like this because you don't want have to admit that your notion that Ali was at better in his post layoff period is ridiucluas.

I have news for you, the entire discussion is speculation. Ali moved around for 15 rounds and didn't seem tired in the Spinks rematch. As for your prediction in a mythical pre-layoff Clay vs Frazier. That's about as predictable as you getting upset in a thread about Ali and turning any point into a personal vendetta. Yup, I think he was slightly better after the layoff. That isn't diminishing him in any way. It's just my opinion and as much as you want me to agree with you, I know I'm extremely important to you, you'll just have to accept that I don't. Stop pouting Alp.

granberry told me that that Ali's only SEMI legit win was over Mildenberger....and that's just because the Ali zealots got Mr M. stinkin' drunk the night before.