BoxRec

Considering the success of the Marciano punch stat thread show cashing his tremendous conditioning prowess, I thought it would be interesting to see whether or not Ali came close to Marciano in terms of overall punches being thrown and, considering all the Ali bashing here lately on the forum, determine just how much greater he was than the rest of the field.


Personally, alot of people say the Cleveland Williams fight was Ali's best performance, but for my money I always felt his one sided domination of Brian London was quite possibly his best outing. And so, I will do the punch stats on this three round knockout victory.


Muhammad Ali vs. Brian London

Round One: 54 punches; almost all of them land

Round Two: 49 punches; almost all of them land

Round Three: 17 punches and the knockout

Marvellous contribution to this forum and amazing precision in compiling those stats. They should just do punches landed that way today.

i for one always find punch stat overrated. only
tells so much of a story. in the end the number
of punches is not the point in a fight. i prefer if
fighters throw to hurt and not to score.

man wrote:i for one always find punch stat overrated. only
tells so much of a story. in the end the number
of punches is not the point in a fight. i prefer if
fighters throw to hurt and not to score.

The amazing part about that is that Ali didn't throw punches with bad intentions until the third round; he threw 17 hard, lightning fast punches and London didnt move until the count of eight lol. Makes one assume had Ali done that from the beginning he probably would have kayoed London in the first.

man wrote:i for one always find punch stat overrated. only
tells so much of a story. in the end the number
of punches is not the point in a fight. i prefer if
fighters throw to hurt and not to score.

Agree with this line of thinking.

Must fast forward to the 1970's, against a similar opponent, in Richard Dunne. The thought occured to me that if Ali is the measuring stick in which all other heavyweights are to be measured, then Brian London is certainly superior to Richard Dunne who went five rounds with a well passed his prime Ali as opposed to London going three with arguably the best version possible of Ali. Ali would, in the build up to this fight, call Dunne "Frankenstein's Monster" as a rib against Dunne's limited movements. This fight would mark the end of an era, as these were the last knockdown's of Ali's career. Ali was also 220 pounds for this contest.

Muhammad Ali vs. Richard Dunne

Round One: 33 punches thrown; most landed

Round Two: 38 punches thrown; most landed

Round Three: 28 punches thrown; most landed

[Round Four wasnt in the video I watched]

Round Five: 31 punches & knockdown; 3 punches & knockout

Conclusion? Quite a drop in the punch rate from the 1960's. This was in 1976. What I find amazing is even a C level fighter like Dunne landed almost at will against Ali, and seemed to have Ali rocked at times. It's amazing that Ali would hold on to the title until 1978, then regain it again. Dunne may of been Frankenstein's Monster but Ali looked like the Mummy in this fight.


Just for shits and giggles, I figured I would do the punch stats of an exhibition match Ali did in 1979 against Oakland Raider's football star (and ex amateur boxing standout) Lyle Alzado. While an exhibition doesn't necessarily mean anything, and the two men from time to time clowned around, it is interesting to see how much of a drop in punch rate Ali had from the London fight, to the Dunne fight, and to this exhibition match that occured a year before the Holmes fight.


Muhammad Ali vs. Lyle Alzado (exhibition)

Round One: 20 punches thrown; most land

Round Two: 28 punches thrown; most land

Round Three: 26 punches thrown; most land

Round Four: 20 punches thrown; most land

[Rounds Five Through Seven were not in the video I watched]

Round Eight: 29 punches thrown; most landed

I've never heard anyone mention Brian London as Ali's best performance, I doubt I ever will again. His performance against Williams has to be the most overrated in history and a real disservice to Ali, he had so many great performances against real opposition.

HomicideHenry wrote:Must fast forward to the 1970's, against a similar opponent, in Richard Dunne. The thought occured to me that if Ali is the measuring stick in which all other heavyweights are to be measured, then Brian London is certainly superior to Richard Dunne who went five rounds with a well passed his prime Ali as opposed to London going three with arguably the best version possible of Ali. Ali would, in the build up to this fight, call Dunne "Frankenstein's Monster" as a rib against Dunne's limited movements. This fight would mark the end of an era, as these were the last knockdown's of Ali's career. Ali was also 220 pounds for this contest.

Muhammad Ali vs. Richard Dunne

Round One: 33 punches thrown; most landed

Round Two: 38 punches thrown; most landed

Round Three: 28 punches thrown; most landed

[Round Four wasnt in the video I watched]

Round Five: 31 punches & knockdown; 3 punches & knockout

Conclusion? Quite a drop in the punch rate from the 1960's. This was in 1976. What I find amazing is even a C level fighter like Dunne landed almost at will against Ali, and seemed to have Ali rocked at times. It's amazing that Ali would hold on to the title until 1978, then regain it again. Dunne may of been Frankenstein's Monster but Ali looked like the Mummy in this fight.


Just for shits and giggles, I figured I would do the punch stats of an exhibition match Ali did in 1979 against Oakland Raider's football star (and ex amateur boxing standout) Lyle Alzado. While an exhibition doesn't necessarily mean anything, and the two men from time to time clowned around, it is interesting to see how much of a drop in punch rate Ali had from the London fight, to the Dunne fight, and to this exhibition match that occured a year before the Holmes fight.


Muhammad Ali vs. Lyle Alzado (exhibition)

Round One: 20 punches thrown; most land

Round Two: 28 punches thrown; most land

Round Three: 26 punches thrown; most land

Round Four: 20 punches thrown; most land

[Rounds Five Through Seven were not in the video I watched]

Round Eight: 29 punches thrown; most landed

He was never " almost rocked" by Dunn. He was never the slightest bit hurt. Dunn was a vastly inferior opponent that Ali played around with. Ali knew Dunn could not hurt him and let him hit him. He was certainly his best by this time, but he was far superior to Richard Dunn.

He looked great against London. London while better than Dunn, was the weakest opponent that Ali defended his title against in his first title reign.

Homocide- Glad that you understand the concept that often you can tell when a fighter looks great even if the opponent is not great. Some people can't grasp this concept. Ali looked phenomenal in this fight. He never looked sharper. His accuracy, speed, and combinations were truly amazing.

Good ole passive aggressive Alp.

Ambling Alp II wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:Must fast forward to the 1970's, against a similar opponent, in Richard Dunne. The thought occured to me that if Ali is the measuring stick in which all other heavyweights are to be measured, then Brian London is certainly superior to Richard Dunne who went five rounds with a well passed his prime Ali as opposed to London going three with arguably the best version possible of Ali. Ali would, in the build up to this fight, call Dunne "Frankenstein's Monster" as a rib against Dunne's limited movements. This fight would mark the end of an era, as these were the last knockdown's of Ali's career. Ali was also 220 pounds for this contest.

Muhammad Ali vs. Richard Dunne

Round One: 33 punches thrown; most landed

Round Two: 38 punches thrown; most landed

Round Three: 28 punches thrown; most landed

[Round Four wasnt in the video I watched]

Round Five: 31 punches & knockdown; 3 punches & knockout

Conclusion? Quite a drop in the punch rate from the 1960's. This was in 1976. What I find amazing is even a C level fighter like Dunne landed almost at will against Ali, and seemed to have Ali rocked at times. It's amazing that Ali would hold on to the title until 1978, then regain it again. Dunne may of been Frankenstein's Monster but Ali looked like the Mummy in this fight.


Just for shits and giggles, I figured I would do the punch stats of an exhibition match Ali did in 1979 against Oakland Raider's football star (and ex amateur boxing standout) Lyle Alzado. While an exhibition doesn't necessarily mean anything, and the two men from time to time clowned around, it is interesting to see how much of a drop in punch rate Ali had from the London fight, to the Dunne fight, and to this exhibition match that occured a year before the Holmes fight.


Muhammad Ali vs. Lyle Alzado (exhibition)

Round One: 20 punches thrown; most land

Round Two: 28 punches thrown; most land

Round Three: 26 punches thrown; most land

Round Four: 20 punches thrown; most land

[Rounds Five Through Seven were not in the video I watched]

Round Eight: 29 punches thrown; most landed

He was never " almost rocked" by Dunn. He was never the slightest bit hurt. Dunn was a vastly inferior opponent that Ali played around with. Ali knew Dunn could not hurt him and let him hit him. He was certainly his best by this time, but he was far superior to Richard Dunn.

He looked great against London. London while better than Dunn, was the weakest opponent that Ali defended his title against in his first title reign.

Homocide- Glad that you understand the concept that often you can tell when a fighter looks great even if the opponent is not great. Some people can't grasp this concept. Ali looked phenomenal in this fight. He never looked sharper. His accuracy, speed, and combinations were truly amazing.

"Some people can't grasp this concept".

Ambling Alp II wrote:

He was never " almost rocked" by Dunn. He was never the slightest bit hurt. Dunn was a vastly inferior opponent that Ali played around with. Ali knew Dunn could not hurt him and let him hit him. He was certainly his best by this time, but he was far superior to Richard Dunn.

He looked great against London. London while better than Dunn, was the weakest opponent that Ali defended his title against in his first title reign.

Homocide- Glad that you understand the concept that often you can tell when a fighter looks great even if the opponent is not great. Some people can't grasp this concept. Ali looked phenomenal in this fight. He never looked sharper. His accuracy, speed, and combinations were truly amazing.

Um.... I cant tell if you are being sarcastic or dead serious. Ali looked like complete shit in this match.

I was serious. I think you have misunderstood me. The last paragraph was about the London fight, not the Dunn fight. Ali was in his absolute prime vs London and looked great.
Ali was certainly past his best vs Dunn, though he certainly did not look like "poo". He was playing with a hapless opponent.

Ambling Alp II wrote:I was serious. I think you have misunderstood me. The last paragraph was about the London fight, not the Dunn fight. Ali was in his absolute prime vs London and looked great.
Ali was certainly past his best vs Dunn, though he certainly did not look like "poo". He was playing with a hapless opponent.

I think he looked sub-par. But then again, we all have the right to agree to disagree.

Btw, I only chose to do punch stats on these certain fights (and plan to do more) because they were only a few rounds. I dont got the time to sit down and count punches for fifteen, twelve, ten, etc. round fights.