Page 1 of 1
A Question for those who think Ali was The Greatest.
Posted: 09 Oct 2005, 13:47
by KOJOE90
I have a question for those of you like myself who think that prime vs prime Ali would have got the better of Larry Holmes.
At what point in time do you think a young Larry Holmes would have been able to beat an ageing Ali?
1976 maybe?
Larry Holmes
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=000150
http://www.scandinavian-boxing-rankings ... holmes.jpg
Muhammad Ali
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=000180
http://www.kontaktrunde.de/boxen-weltme ... t/ali2.jpg
Posted: 09 Oct 2005, 13:54
by mrbassie
It's impossible to say a point in time because Ali was anything but consistent, I think Holmes would have beaten Ali on any of the nights he fought Norton for instance, Frazier one and three too, Blinn (SP?), Wepner and so on but I think in the shape he was in for Frazier the second time or Foreman for instance he would be very hard for anyone to beat.
As I say it's impossible to answer because Ali never really had a long period of top form after the ban did he? He trained hard when he thought he needed to and the rest of the time he was below his own standard and Holmes' for that matter.
Good question though nonetheless, thought-provoking...
Posted: 09 Oct 2005, 14:13
by silkov
But Norton gave Holmes a very hard fight as well... I think the Holmes of 1980-/82 may well have been able to beat the Ali of 76 onwards... but then again even when he was fading Ali could bring out just enough to beat his opponent. I think its impressive how Ali beat Shavers in '77... despute his decline and I think had he been matched with Holmes at around that time he would have got himself in good shape as he knew how good Holmes was and he may well have used his guile and experience to bring off a close points victory over Holmes.
I watched Ali against Berbick the other day for the first time in years and was surprised how Ali was able to be competitive at times despite being totally shot, against a really strong and dangerous fighter. His courage and determination even in that fight was really something to see, sad though it was...
Posted: 09 Oct 2005, 14:20
by Tantum
silkov wrote:I think the Holmes of 1980-/82 may well have been able to beat the Ali of 76 onwards...
Don't forget '60-'75
Posted: 09 Oct 2005, 14:48
by silkov
Tantum wrote:silkov wrote:I think the Holmes of 1980-/82 may well have been able to beat the Ali of 76 onwards...
Don't forget '60-'75
I always feel nervous when people start winking at me!...
:x
8)
this
Posted: 09 Oct 2005, 18:04
by wlvrne
If the context is both fighters in their respective primes, then Ali would have beaten Holmes anytime. If you have them fighting then at prime, then you'd have to throw Foreman, Frazier and Norton into the mix and at their primes as well because those 3 and Ali had some great fights between them.
Posted: 09 Oct 2005, 19:38
by Rory McCloskey
i think its ludacrous to say that holmes would beat ali..noone is as accomplished as ali, and noone is as talented as ali.. maybe joe louis, but i dont beleive so. ali is the greatest of all tiem and IMO there is no fighter in the world that beats a 1967 ali, and i think there are VERY few who beat a 1971 ali
Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 01:04
by iceman21287
Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 01:54
by mrbassie
well he did have an awful lot of legs, so it's not too improbable
Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 07:36
by thunderfromdownunder
Rory McCloskey wrote:i think its ludacrous to say that holmes would beat ali..noone is as accomplished as ali, and noone is as talented as ali.. maybe joe louis, but i dont beleive so. ali is the greatest of all tiem and IMO there is no fighter in the world that beats a 1967 ali, and i think there are VERY few who beat a 1971 ali
agreed,
alis prime was in 65 - 67.
larry holmes was good but
no one beats Ali in his prime
Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 09:39
by silkov
mrbassie wrote:well he did have an awful lot of legs, so it's not too improbable
I think Lee only had two legs didn't he???...
Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 10:13
by walshb
Ali at his absolute peak was too damn good for any fighter thru history. A prime Holmes loses a UD to a prime Ali...From 1975 onwards Ali was well on the decline...........
Posted: 10 Oct 2005, 10:35
by BoxBuzz
I'm in complete agreement regarding peak operating times Ali wins. That's ali's nitch in my mind. The best fighter ever at his peak.
However with each day I am coming to believe that Larry has his own nitch at the top. He may (and I say may) be the best sustained HW of all time. In other words take his first days as potential championship material (somewere pre Norton) and keep counting until beyond the McCall fight.
He may have put together the longest lasting truly effective career of any HW. certainly any modern HW.
By the way, Holmes had a built in advantage with Ali as Leotis Martin had with Liston. Both knew their opponent very well in the ring. Not that Larry needed that by that time. But it probably gave him an even greater effectiveness. He certainly dominated Ali much better than Berbick did.
Posted: 11 Oct 2005, 04:28
by overhand_right
Compare Alis record to Holmes. Ali beat Foreman, Frazier twice & Liston twice, Patterson twice. SEVEN wins over some of the all time greats.
How many wins does Holmes have over all time greats? ZERO.
Holmes best wins are over Norton, Shavers, Weaver, Cooney, Berbick, L Spinks, Bonecrusher. (no mention of Witherspoon or Truth Williams as controversial)
These are easily over shadowed by Alis 'lower level' wins over Shavers, Lyle, Bonavena, Quarry twice, Ellis, Terrell, Chuvalo, Norton (second fight), Bugner, L Spinks (no mention of Young as controversial)
In short Holmes couldnt carry Ali's gym bag. Ali was never blasted out like Holmes was v Tyson either. Holmes lone chance would have been in 78 when Ali was sliding & Holmes was appraoching his peak but it wouldnt have meant anything.
76 or 77 Ali had much better experience as Holmes had accumulated a big record over stiffs & wouldtn have been ready IMO.
Posted: 12 Oct 2005, 09:30
by Grimm
silkov wrote:mrbassie wrote:well he did have an awful lot of legs, so it's not too improbable
I think Lee only had two legs didn't he???...
He was a spider.
Posted: 12 Oct 2005, 09:31
by Grimm
overhand_right wrote:Compare Alis record to Holmes. Ali beat Foreman, Frazier twice & Liston twice, Patterson twice. SEVEN wins over some of the all time greats.
How many wins does Holmes have over all time greats? ZERO.
Holmes best wins are over Norton, Shavers, Weaver, Cooney, Berbick, L Spinks, Bonecrusher. (no mention of Witherspoon or Truth Williams as controversial)
These are easily over shadowed by Alis 'lower level' wins over Shavers, Lyle, Bonavena, Quarry twice, Ellis, Terrell, Chuvalo, Norton (second fight), Bugner, L Spinks (no mention of Young as controversial)
In short Holmes couldnt carry Ali's gym bag. Ali was never blasted out like Holmes was v Tyson either. Holmes lone chance would have been in 78 when Ali was sliding & Holmes was appraoching his peak but it wouldnt have meant anything.
76 or 77 Ali had much better experience as Holmes had accumulated a big record over stiffs & wouldtn have been ready IMO.
If you're going to count Patterson as a great than you might as well add Norton.
Posted: 12 Oct 2005, 09:34
by Grimm
overhand_right wrote:
In short Holmes couldnt carry Ali's gym bag.Ali was never blasted out like Holmes was v Tyson either. Holmes lone chance would have been in 78 when Ali was sliding & Holmes was appraoching his peak but it wouldnt have meant anything.
Ali was never in the ring with a prime Tyson.
And Larry Holmes beating the hell out of Ali is about the equivilent to Tyson beating Holmes.
Posted: 12 Oct 2005, 09:36
by mrbassie
silkov wrote:mrbassie wrote:well he did have an awful lot of legs, so it's not too improbable
I think Lee only had two legs didn't he???...
They just airbrushed all but four of them out of his films. Conversely he had no arms but with a little makeup and clever lighting legs can look a lot like arms on celluloid.
Re: A Question for those who think Ali was The Greatest.
Posted: 14 Oct 2005, 08:33
by Ambling Alp
If I understand your question correctly, I don't think the Larry Holmes of 1976 would beat the Ali of 1976. He was still too green and Ali still had some gas left in the tank. By 1978, Holmes was the better fighter and would have beaten the 1978 Ali.
Holmes at his best (1978-1982) may have beaten the 1976 Ali, but probably not before that.
Holmes at his best would have given 1970-1975 Ali trouble, but would have lost.
Holmes at his best against 1964-1967 Ali would have lost decisively.
Re: A Question for those who think Ali was The Greatest.
Posted: 14 Oct 2005, 12:09
by KOJOE90
Ambling Alp wrote:If I understand your question correctly, I don't think the Larry Holmes of 1976 would beat the Ali of 1976. He was still too green and Ali still had some gas left in the tank. By 1978, Holmes was the better fighter and would have beaten the 1978 Ali.
Yes AA thats what I mean.
Posted: 14 Oct 2005, 12:14
by Syntax Error
Holmes would have beaten Ali, anytime after Oct 1975.
Ali left a piece of himself in Manila against Frazier; he was never the same again.
