my ex-boyfriend told me he wasnt, that he didnt really deserve all the attention, that the other guy he called an uncle tom and also foreman the guy with the grill were both much better. he said the uncle tom guy was the better fighter and beat up ali real good. i believe him cause ali looks like he was beat up alot of times

Being as great as many claim you are, you must not be one dimensional and be able to come back from to defeat to win. Ali was so adaptable, he beat all the greats in his era. Look at it this way, Frazier and Norton would not beat Foreman, Foreman would not beat Ali or Young etc. But Ali would most likely be able to beat all of them atleast once. That is what makes him the greatest imo.

Ali is one of the most overrated fighters Ive ever seen.I dont see what was so good about him. SUCKERS.HAHA,iM KIDDING

Read Joe Frazier's auto-biography, Smokin' Joe, for (probably) the best con-Ali-being-"THEE"-greatest.

And, Frazier, a run-down boxer who was half-blind and had high-blood pressure, was going even (I think even out-pointing) in his re-match with Foreman until the contact he was wearing went into the corner of his eye. Then it turned into Round 14 of the Thrilla, except with a much heavier puncher and at a much earlier point in the fight.

Ali is immensely over rated, he is the one he called himself the greatest, not the public or God himself etc etc lol

There are many fighter's I can name off the top of my head that would have crushed him and or did/ crush him

He is either the #1 or #2 Heavyweight in the history of modern boxing (ie: 3 minutes rounds). The other contender for #1 being Joe Louis.

He is either the #1 or #2 Heavyweight in the history of modern boxing (ie: 3 minutes rounds). The other contender for #1 being Joe Louis.

Yup I rank Ali behind Louis. Louis being my #1 of course. Ali is IMO again I!M!O! only slightly over rated. He had a lot of "gifts" when he was older,...but in his prime (the 60's Ali) he wasnt over rated at all. Where is Butterfly? How could he let his idol be belittled like this on his forum =/ ?!

Yup I rank Ali behind Louis. Louis being my #1 of course. Ali is IMO again I!M!O! only slightly over rated. He had a lot of "gifts" when he was older,...but in his prime (the 60's Ali) he wasnt over rated at all. Where is Butterfly? How could he let his idol be belittled like this on his forum =/ ?!

The 60's Ali didn't fight good competition. It's the 70's Ali who established a legacy

The 60's Ali didn't fight good competition. It's the 70's Ali who established a legacy

True but he was still better then his older self.

Yup I rank Ali behind Louis. Louis being my #1 of course. Ali is IMO again I!M!O! only slightly over rated. He had a lot of "gifts" when he was older,...but in his prime (the 60's Ali) he wasnt over rated at all. Where is Butterfly? How could he let his idol be belittled like this on his forum =/ ?!

I think he is overrated because a lot of people think he IS boxing.

But in the ranking of fighters thtough history, he is either #1 or #2 HW, which *roughly* means he beats everyone, or everyone except #1. So it's a bit hard to overrate someone who should be in that positions.

His resume isn't overrated, it's the fact that so many people genuinely believe that 60's Ali was untouchable. For my money, I'd pick Frazier to beat him around '69-'70.

His resume isn't overrated, it's the fact that so many people genuinely believe that 60's Ali was untouchable. For my money, I'd pick Frazier to beat him around '69-'70.

Hell yeah.

Ali was like the Joe Montana of boxing - he wasn't necessarily the best at anything in particular but he was inevitably courageous and poised and he found ways to win when there really weren't any and faced defeat and difficulty with bravery. Few people would rate him below third best heavyweight or tenth greatest boxer of all time. It's sort of hard to see how he's overrated as a boxer.

Apart his notoriety as a boxer he played a very important - and divisive - role with respect to race, war and religion during a very turbulent time. So he also acted as one of the more socially important Americans of the last century. To me, he's a great American hero even though I hate the way he treated the valiant Frazier and felt his self-promotion wasn't particularly classy. He was a great boxer who as a man had the rare courage to back his convictions fully. He was flawed. Classic hero ;^>

I think he is overrated because a lot of people think he IS boxing.

But in the ranking of fighters thtough history, he is either #1 or #2 HW, which *roughly* means he beats everyone, or everyone except #1. So it's a bit hard to overrate someone who should be in that positions.

Well said I agree with you. I rank Louis ahead of a 60's Ali.

Well said I agree with you. I rank Louis ahead of a 60's Ali.

I personally rank Ali ahead, but I dont have a problem with Louis ahead either. To me it's such a close pick that it enters the realm of opinions.

the 60's ali had a chin made out of butter

the 60's ali had a chin made out of butter

And you, Sir, a brain made of mouldy oatmeal. You're statements on this thread and others leads me to believe you either know NOTHING about boxing or you're an ALT looking to stir up ****.

Poet

And you, Sir, a brain made of mouldy oatmeal. You're statements on this thread and others leads me to believe you either know NOTHING about boxing or you're an ALT looking to stir up ****.

what the hell is your problem? I've tried ignoring you but it seems to me your the one who likes stirring up ****, you do it to other members to:nonono:

you claim Im' a nuthugger to "newer fighters" (in other posts) which you seem to despise and nuthug yourself to old classics.

seriously man, give it a break if you don't agree with me then just lay off.

Maybe a 60's ali's chin isn't made of butter but It definitely wasn't anything great.

what the hell is your problem? I've tried ignoring you but it seems to me your the one who likes stirring up ****, you do it to other members to:nonono:

you claim Im' a nuthugger to "newer fighters" (in other posts) which you seem to despise and nuthug yourself to old classics.

seriously man, give it a break if you don't agree with me then just lay off.

Maybe a 60's ali's chin isn't made of butter but It definitely wasn't anything great.

Stop making outrageous, idiotic, and patently incorrect statements and I'll lay off. Read my signature: Fools are NOT suffered gladly.

Poet

outrageous comments in your opinion, where is the freedom in that forum troll?

I bet your the type of guy who thinks a Joe Louis would KO a prime holyfield or Tyson

IMO thats just as outrageous

outrageous comments in your opinion, where is the freedom in that forum troll?

I bet your the type of guy who thinks a Joe Louis would KO a prime holyfield or Tyson

IMO thats just as outrageous

You have the freedom to make as many moronic statements as you like.....just as I have the freedom to point out their stupidity.

I bet you're the kind of person who thinks the worst tomato can of today would kick the ass of any championship fighter from more than twenty years ago. How outrageously stupid is that? Sorry dude, but the world wasn't just created the day you were born. You're nothing but a typical no-nothing fan who has no appreciation of the past and clue about the future. You could learn a lot from watching a Joe Louis fight: A hell of a lot more than watching Tyson fight and dreaming about sucking his testicles. Personally, I'd rather watch Roberto Duran wash his car than watch five minutes of a Floyd Mayweather fight: Duran and a can of Turtlewax are FAR more entertaining than anything Floyd does in the ring.

I, at least, have balance and perspective: Something you wouldn't know if it bit you on the ass. My all-time lists in all the weight classes have fighters from EVERY era; from 1900 to the present. Great boxers have ALWAYS been around: They didn't just sprout up in the era YOU happen to be watching them in.

Poet

I bet you're the kind of person who thinks the worst tomato can of today would kick the ass of any championship fighter from more than twenty years ago.

Your comment is Justified, but don't make assumptions so fast. While no I can't see a 190-200 lbs Louis knocking out one of the 255 lb bums of today, I won't totally neglect older fighter's..Todays boxing leagues SUCKS and I know that. Oleg Maskaev is a joke and the boxing heavyweight division sucks as it stands now.

but If the weight categories were evened out I can safely say that a prime Joe Frazier or Foreman would most definitely knock the hell out of equal weighted opponents of today who go down to a stiff jab.

I don't think my Era is the best, but I do think fighter's of the 80's did go through much more grueling training than fighters before (ASIDE from fricken Joe Frazier). But you watch a slow fight with guys like Louis or Marciano leaving there heads open, its only common sense to know that a Prime fighter of the 80's AND 70's would most certainly kill them.

Your comment is Justified, but don't make assumptions so fast. While no I can't see a 190-200 lbs Louis knocking out one of the 255 lb bums of today, I won't totally neglect older fighter's..Todays boxing leagues SUCKS and I know that. Oleg Maskaev is a joke and the boxing heavyweight division sucks as it stands now.

but If the weight categories were evened out I can safely say that a prime Joe Frazier or Foreman would most definitely knock the hell out of equal weighted opponents of today who go down to a stiff jab.

I don't think my Era is the best, but I do think fighter's of the 80's did go through much more grueling training than fighters before (ASIDE from fricken Joe Frazier). But you watch a slow fight with guys like Louis or Marciano leaving there heads open, its only common sense to know that a Prime fighter of the 80's AND 70's would most certainly kill them.

Okay. NOW you're making more sense. The weight different can be dealt with logically by norming. A fighter of today were he fighting in say 1950 would weigh considerably less than he does now. A fighter from 1950 were he fighting today would weigh considerably more. To say a 255 pound guy versus a 190 pound guy is an illusion at best. It simply wouldn't happen and shouldn't be used to judge the relative worth of fighters.

You're mistaken about the training fighters underwent then versus now. Essentially boxing training has changed remarkably little over the decades. Nutrition is better to be sure, but that actual training techniques are very similer. More to the point, fighters back then were in training far more often, they fought far more often after all, and tended to be in better shape than those today.

Poet

I personally rank Ali ahead, but I dont have a problem with Louis ahead either. To me it's such a close pick that it enters the realm of opinions.

Yea honestly it depends (who I rank #1) on who I've watched last, and my mood (lol). However I really thought about it one day, wrote down this and that of foot notes per say. Finally came to the conclusion that in a trilogy Louis wins twice against Ali. Saying Ali wins over Louis isnt a insult to Joe, and vise versa. I do respect your opinion, and I DO see why you'd think that. Ali vs Louis is a hard boxing Q IMO because both where ,...just amazing. Other words I agree (cept Ali>Louis) its all a "realm" of opinion. Well said Wmute.

Yea honestly it depends (who I rank #1) on who I've watched last, and my mood (lol). However I really thought about it one day, wrote down this and that of foot notes per say. Finally came to the conclusion that in a trilogy Louis wins twice against Ali. Saying Ali wins over Louis isnt a insult to Joe, and vise versa. I do respect your opinion, and I DO see why you'd think that. Ali vs Louis is a hard boxing Q IMO because both where ,...just amazing. Other words I agree (cept Ali>Louis) its all a "realm" of opinion. Well said Wmute.

Well put! Though I rank Ali at 1 and Louis at 2 I consider them interchangable and couldn't refute either holding the top position. It carries on down my ATG list. I have Johnson, Dempsey, and Holmes at 3-5 and consider THEM interchangable as well. Liston, Holyfield, and Foreman at 6-8 again are interchangable.

So many of these great fighters are close in abilities that any debate over EXACT positioning is quibbling.

Poet

Well put! Though I rank Ali at 1 and Louis at 2 I consider them interchangable and couldn't refute either holding the top position. It carries on down my ATG list. I have Johnson, Dempsey, and Holmes at 3-5 and consider THEM interchangable as well. Liston, Holyfield, and Foreman at 6-8 again are interchangable.

So many of these great fighters are close in abilities that any debate over EXACT positioning is quibbling.

Poet

Exactly anything can happen once the bell dings. I agree.

hi im new to the forum and watchin dicumentarys on ali got me into boxing. i have to say ive never thought about it the way you guys have but i still think ali as the greatest boxer mainly because of the upsets he caused... if you think about it you shouldnt really rate ali on his loses but on his wins. he showed great courage makeing the comeback in zaire when he was again the underdog just like he was against sonny liston. i think that one of his greatest strenghts was being able to analyze his fights like he was wathcing it not fighting it e.g in the "rumble in the jungle" he came out in the first round on the attack and george foreman could take his shots so in the next rounds ali lay back on the ropes and let foreman tire himself out..... then in the "thrilla in manilla" ali tried the rope a dope and fraizer wasnt getting tired so half way through the fite he came out and started dancing again (even if not aswell as he did when he was younger)......but no one can really rate ali because no one has really seen him fite in his prime years as they were taken away from him when he refused induction to the army we dont know the level of skill he would have shown if he had not had his boxing licence revoked....... sorry to go on but one more thing no one can deny ali was a great man at the begging of the gulf war he went to baghdad for 10 days on a mission for peace and came back with 14 americans held hostage for 4 months this is an example of the level of respect he has world wide.

Yes, Ali was very good. I would not be considering it overrated if he was the first or second ranked HW of all time. He had a very good resume and he has 5 losses, in which 3 of them were of his last 4 fights. Which means he was washed up obviously, and the 2 other losses he had, he avenged them so I don't see how he should not be mentioned in at least top 3 of all time.

Yes, Ali was very good. I would not be considering it overrated if he was the first or second ranked HW of all time. He had a very good resume and he has 5 losses, in which 3 of them were of his last 4 fights. Which means he was washed up obviously, and the 2 other losses he had, he avenged them so I don't see how he should not be mentioned in at least top 3 of all time.

Love the Liston photo! :)

Poet

Tabatha - Hi, personally I don't think he was overrated but everyones opinion is different. I think that instead of asking these question's, if you like boxing so much and want to discuss it, get yourself some fights sit down and watch them and make your own mind up, that's why you have one love. Don't just ask other people what they think or agree with your ex, who by the way sounds like he don't know what he's on about anyway.

Tabatha - Hi, personally I don't think he was overrated but everyones opinion is different. I think that instead of asking these question's, if you like boxing so much and want to discuss it, get yourself some fights sit down and watch them and make your own mind up, that's why you have one love. Don't just ask other people what they think or agree with your ex, who by the way sounds like he don't know what he's on about anyway.

Spot on! Watch as many fights as physically possible. It's how you learn about boxing and boxers. And it isn't that hard! My personal fight collection has over six hundred fights and it only took me four months to accuire them: From March of this year through June. Start downloading!

Poet

I certainly don't believe Muhammad Ali was overrated. The man had everything. I am truly honoured to have seen his fight's. Great fighter and a Godsend to the World of Boxing.

Im pretty sure anyone that knows boxing will tell you Ali was one of the best. But I still think Joe Louis had a better career.

Poet - that's not bad mate 600 in four months. I started collecting in the mid 80's, just recording onto VHS and then buying loads from the magazines. I've currently got about 10,000 and must have at least 1000 magazines. I should start cataloging them again though and get all my favourites put onto DVD. Most of them are in boxes in my garage, and I lost interest in the fight game a few years back with all these multiple titles, which none of them mean **** anymore. I now really only watch the big fight's and the up and coming british fighters. Don't have sky anymore and have only just got a computer again after years without one, and am slowly getting back into it again.

Poet - that's not bad mate 600 in four months. I started collecting in the mid 80's, just recording onto VHS and then buying loads from the magazines. I've currently got about 10,000 and must have at least 1000 magazines. I should start cataloging them again though and get all my favourites put onto DVD. Most of them are in boxes in my garage, and I lost interest in the fight game a few years back with all these multiple titles, which none of them mean **** anymore. I now really only watch the big fight's and the up and coming british fighters. Don't have sky anymore and have only just got a computer again after years without one, and am slowly getting back into it again.

Me too I've got a good collection of fights on VHS- mainly from a UK angle but I've downloaded tons over the last couple of years. Poet has a very good, strong collection.

The internet is a godsend as I see alot more fights now than I ever did.

It's very difficult to "overrate" Muhammad Ali. lol Yes he was great. But, he was not "the Greatest." In the top 3 or 4.

Well put! Though I rank Ali at 1 and Louis at 2 I consider them interchangable and couldn't refute either holding the top position. It carries on down my ATG list. I have Johnson, Dempsey, and Holmes at 3-5 and consider THEM interchangable as well. Liston, Holyfield, and Foreman at 6-8 again are interchangable.

So many of these great fighters are close in abilities that any debate over EXACT positioning is quibbling.

Poet


What did Sonny Liston do that that was better than Tyson?

What did Sonny Liston do that that was better than Tyson?

Fight better fighters for one. Liston had one of the three best jabs in Heavyweight history for second, while Tyson's jab was a range finder at best. Third, Liston wrote the book on intimidation while Tyson mearly copied pages from it. Fourth, while no one knows his true age, it's estimated by more than a few boxing historians that Sonny was around 40 when he one the Heavyweight title: By comparison Tyson was getting his ass kicked by Kevin McBride in his mid 30s. Finally, Sonny Liston was an all-time great and Mike Tyson is a near great who ranks below Larry Holmes, Evander Holyfield, and Lennox Lewis among the top Heavyweights of the past 25 years. In consolation, he DOES rank ahead of Riddick Bowe.....barely.

Poet

Fight better fighters for one. Liston had one of the three best jabs in Heavyweight history for second, while Tyson's jab was a range finder at best.

I agree with the rest of the paragraph, but saying he fought better fighters is entirely biased, and definitely not true. Maybe he fought more well known fighters because of old time nut-hugger's hyping them up, but most assuredly they weren't "better" fighters. Sonny Liston dominated the division because he was ahead of his time, he was big, strong and had a buff build (common trademark for a hard puncher). Ali comes along, he then takes over the dominating because he to, was ahead of his time. But like everything else, someone comes a long who does it better than the last guy. Ali "floated like a butterfly, stung like a bee" (aka. not slugging it out) only because nobody else did at the time, 15-20 years later many fighter's were doing that and doing it better than Ali.

Joe Frazier, amazing in his prime -- was also ahead of his time (there had been bob-and weavers before this, but not to the same extent).
Tyson, is a stronger and faster Frazier basically. Some people are automatically going to say Frazier is better (aka poet) on the sole bases of him being around in the 70's. I've watched nearly all of Frazier's and Tyson's fights, Tyson is faster, he lifts guys off the ground with his punches and has superior body movement.

Joe Frazier, amazing in his prime -- was also ahead of his time (there had been bob-and weavers before this, but not to the same extent).
Tyson, is a stronger and faster Frazier basically. Some people are automatically going to say Frazier is better (aka poet) on the sole bases of him being around in the 70's. I've watched nearly all of Frazier's and Tyson's fights, Tyson is faster, he lifts guys off the ground with his punches and has superior body movement.

frazier lifted buster mathis off the canvas with body shots (mathis looked like a tub of lard though). Frazier is better in the ATG list, but in a head to head match up tyson would pull a foreman on frazier and knock him down a bunch, but tyson is nowhere near as tough,and doesnt have fraziers chin or heart.

The reason why Ali was so good is that he was adaptable. If one thing didn't work he could try another. Guys like Tyson and Louis were great at what they did, but they could change course if they had to. If one thing didn't work, they were sunk! Ali is different. Fastest pair of legs and hands, granite chin, great jab, size, and great conditioning is what made Ali great and IMO the greatest of all-time!:fing02:

Fight better fighters for one. Liston had one of the three best jabs in Heavyweight history for second, while Tyson's jab was a range finder at best. Third, Liston wrote the book on intimidation while Tyson mearly copied pages from it. Fourth, while no one knows his true age, it's estimated by more than a few boxing historians that Sonny was around 40 when he one the Heavyweight title: By comparison Tyson was getting his ass kicked by Kevin McBride in his mid 30s. Finally, Sonny Liston was an all-time great and Mike Tyson is a near great who ranks below Larry Holmes, Evander Holyfield, and Lennox Lewis among the top Heavyweights of the past 25 years. In consolation, he DOES rank ahead of Riddick Bowe.....barely.

Poet

On point about the jab even though Tyson had much shorter arms so it is only logical that Liston had the better jab. However, you won't see Tyson's left hook and right uppercut too low on the all time great punches list. Especially as an all around puncher. One of the fastest of all time, one of the most effective etc. IMO Tyson is ahead of Liston on punching ability.

Second, Foreman also "copied" the intimidation, this doesn't matter at all and has no real argument on who's better/greater.

Third, Mike Tyson was the type of fighter that didn't last in the long run because of his style. You know about this like I do, so Liston having a longer career because of his style also does not prove who is the better man. I'll also add the fact that Tyson was fighting much bigger and phisically stronger(pushing, clinches etc) fighters while Liston was the giant of his time beating up on smaller opponents(Wich I take no credit away from Liston, but this is an important factor when we're comparing Tyson who held this disadvantage troughout his career).

It's hard to say who was the greater fighter. Liston had advantages over his opponents with fear and size. Tyson only with fear, yet many fought back(Also the case with Sonny Liston). Liston lost the title quitting on his stool(Yes, Tyson has also quit but that was at the end of his career, he never did it when he was the Champ, and he also didn't blind his opponent. IMO Tyson had the bigger heart), while Tyson fought till the end almost knocking Buster Douglass out. Liston's best win is better than Tyson's best win. Liston did maintain his skills 'till the end of his career while Tyson was becoming more and more of a puncher. Very similar fighters if you think about it.

frazier lifted buster mathis off the canvas with body shots (mathis looked like a tub of lard though). Frazier is better in the ATG list, but in a head to head match up tyson would pull a foreman on frazier and knock him down a bunch, but tyson is nowhere near as tough,and doesnt have fraziers chin or heart.

Lifting an opponent off the canvas with a punch is an illusion. But alright, Tyson had his fair share of brutal ko's as well so again, I do not see what you mean with this. Tyson has a better chin but not as much heart, Frazier had 75% heart & 25% chin. This is what kept him up when he was rocked.

On point about the jab even though Tyson had much shorter arms so it is only logical that Liston had the better jab. However, you won't see Tyson's left hook and right uppercut too low on the all time great punches list. Especially as an all around puncher. One of the fastest of all time, one of the most effective etc. IMO Tyson is ahead of Liston on punching ability.

Second, Foreman also "copied" the intimidation, this doesn't matter at all and has no real argument on who's better/greater.

Third, Mike Tyson was the type of fighter that didn't last in the long run because of his style. You know about this like I do, so Liston having a longer career because of his style also does not prove who is the better man. I'll also add the fact that Tyson was fighting much bigger and phisically stronger(pushing, clinches etc) fighters while Liston was the giant of his time beating up on smaller opponents(Wich I take no credit away from Liston, but this is an important factor when we're comparing Tyson who held this disadvantage troughout his career).

It's hard to say who was the greater fighter. Liston had advantages over his opponents with fear and size. Tyson only with fear, yet many fought back(Also the case with Sonny Liston). Liston lost the title quitting on his stool(Yes, Tyson has also quit but that was at the end of his career, he never did it when he was the Champ, and he also didn't blind his opponent. IMO Tyson had the bigger heart), while Tyson fought till the end almost knocking Buster Douglass out. Liston's best win is better than Tyson's best win. Liston did maintain his skills 'till the end of his career while Tyson was becoming more and more of a puncher. Very similar fighters if you think about it.

Foreman was orginally Sonny's sparring partner so he got to learn directly from the master. Yes, Tyson had a better right than Liston but I would maintain Liston's left hook was better than Tyson's. Liston did quit on his tool.....against Muhammad Ali; Tyson quit on his stool against Kevin McBride. Quality of opposition favors Liston as well. Pre-Prison Tyson's toughest opponent was Donovan Ruddock with whom Tyson fought two grueling fights with. The Liston opponent that compare closest to Ruddock is Cleveland Williams, who Liston destroyed twice.

Poet

Foreman was orginally Sonny's sparring partner so he got to learn directly from the master. Yes, Tyson had a better right than Liston but I would maintain Liston's left hook was better than Tyson's. Liston did quit on his tool.....against Muhammad Ali; Tyson quit on his stool against Kevin McBride. Quality of opposition favors Liston as well. Pre-Prison Tyson's toughest opponent was Donovan Ruddock with whom Tyson fought two grueling fights with. The Liston opponent that compare closest to Ruddock is Cleveland Williams, who Liston destroyed twice.

Poet

I still don't see how being the first(He might not even be the first, as someone else before him could have tried intimidating opponents) Boxer to intimidate opponents has any relevance to being a greater fighter than Tyson.
Liston's left better than Tyson's huh. I don't know about that. Tyson could duck and then throw it so fast his opponent wouldn't know what hit him. Step side to side to throw it, also throw multiple hooks like his signature left to the body left to the head.
Liston quit when he was the champion. Tyson quit when he had no more desire and heart to fight 10 or even 15 years ago in his very last fight. If we compare how they lost their title, it is obvious Tyson had much more heart while Liston was being pathetic trying to blind Ali, and quitting..maybe even twice.
Liston may have fought some better fighters but overall Tyson may have had just as good or a better resume. And again, I think Tyson was more impressive because he was beating bigger fighters.
And Ruddock is not Williams.

I still don't see how being the first(He might not even be the first, as someone else before him could have tried intimidating opponents) Boxer to intimidate opponents has any relevance to being a greater fighter than Tyson.
Liston's left better than Tyson's huh. I don't know about that. Tyson could duck and then throw it so fast his opponent wouldn't know what hit him. Step side to side to throw it, also throw multiple hooks like his signature left to the body left to the head.
Liston quit when he was the champion. Tyson quit when he had no more desire and heart to fight 10 or even 15 years ago in his very last fight. If we compare how they lost their title, it is obvious Tyson had much more heart while Liston was being pathetic trying to blind Ali, and quitting..maybe even twice.
Liston may have fought some better fighters but overall Tyson may have had just as good or a better resume. And again, I think Tyson was more impressive because he was beating bigger fighters.
And Ruddock is not Williams.

IMO Williams was better than Ruddock. He was a slick boxer who also possesed one punch KO power. Ruddock was a one-armed bandit who through his "smash" and couldn't wipe his ass with his right.

Poet

Tyson hooks and upper cuts definitely pack more power than Listons. Liston might have the stronger jab, that's notorious for long armed guys, but over all Tysons power is superior to Listons.

Doesn't matter how bad the fighter is you gotta have power to send a Carl Williams flying across the ring.

People do this in Hockey and Football to, they like to pick on guys like Gretsky and say he was going through a crappy era.

IMO Williams was better than Ruddock. He was a slick boxer who also possesed one punch KO power. Ruddock was a one-armed bandit who through his "smash" and couldn't wipe his ass with his right.

Poet

Tyson fought other opponents who resembled Williams much more than Razor Ruddock. Of cource they weren't as great as Williams, this is not what I mean. Tillis, Tubbs, Tucker, Carl Williams and even Thomas and Biggs were good slick fighters, and Tyson beat and destroyed some of them too. Notice how Tyson has a consistent record of variety of opponents.
Tell ya what, how about you compile Liston's best opponents he beat, and I'll do Tyson?

Tyson hooks and upper cuts definitely pack more power than Listons. Liston might have the stronger jab, that's notorious for long armed guys, but over all Tysons power is superior to Listons.

Doesn't matter how bad the fighter is you gotta have power to send a Carl Williams flying across the ring.

People do this in Hockey and Football to, they like to pick on guys like Gretsky and say he was going through a crappy era.

If I've said this once, others on this site have said a hundred times: Tyson was NOT repeat NOT the hardest punching Heavyweight ever, not even close. Nuthuggers do this all the time: pump up a near-great fighter until (in their besotted minds) he's the greatest ever. Drink some more KoolAid dude.

Poet

If I've said this once, others on this site have said a hundred times: Tyson was NOT repeat NOT the hardest punching Heavyweight ever, not even close. Nuthuggers do this all the time: pump up a near-great fighter until (in their besotted minds) he's the greatest ever. Drink some more KoolAid dude.

Yes and I don't think I've once said he was the hardest punching heavyweight ether. If it is its probably some bum with no skill like mighty mo, from the k1 division.

But your only evidence for Liston's punching power is watching the videos, and if your going to go by the tapes then Tyson will win 100% of the time.

EDIT: you might want to look at yourself to sometimes, you have frequently made up Joe Louis as an unstoppable war machine.

Yes and I don't think I've once said he was the hardest punching heavyweight ether. If it is its probably some bum with no skill like mighty mo, from the k1 division.

But your only evidence for Liston's punching power is watching the videos, and if your going to go by the tapes then Tyson will win 100% of the time.

EDIT: you might want to look at yourself to sometimes, you have frequently made up Joe Louis as an unstoppable war machine.

Dude. I have EVERY Tyson fight on video (except the elusive Sims fight) I certainly don't see Tyson winning the video evidence but then I'm not watching with a nuthugger's eyes. I'm not one of these fake boxing fans who just show up to see the KO. A decision is just as satisfying to me. Point is, I'm NOT one of these "fans" who overrate big punchers because they LIKE watching KOs. As for Louis, he was frequently called at the time "the perfect fighting machine". I've watched enough Louis video to know that aside from Ali I'd take Louis over everyone else.

PS. A good number of boxing historians view Louis in the same light.

Poet

PS. A good number of boxing historians view Louis in the same light.

PS. a good number of Historians also grew up in the "old days" watching there favorites. I wouldn't doubt if at least 70% of those historians are 50 years of age or more.

When someone new comes along thats better than everyone else It's going to be the huge Tyson fans left rambling on about the old days...and the cycle continues.

PS. a good number of Historians also grew up in the "old days" watching there favorites. I wouldn't doubt if at least 70% of those historians are 50 years of age or more.

When someone new comes along thats better than everyone else It's going to be the huge Tyson fans left rambling on about the old days...and the cycle continues.

Yeah and never trust anyone over 30. These same boxing historians also consider Evander Holyfield and Bernard Hopkins all-time greats: Hardly products of the "good-old-days". I see too much of this crap from younger poster who assume if it happend before they were born it HAD to have sucked.

Poet

Tyson was smallish heavy that thrived on intimidation, overblown hype, and beating on sub-par fighters. In his early career he did establish himself as a man to be feared by knocking out a few proven, prime fighters, but most of his fights thereafter were relegated to the money making spectacle of knocking out sub-par or over-the-hill competition.

When he finally took the plunge to go after one of his contending peers, he was handily whipped by Evander Holyfield. After that, the fraud was exposed and Tyson's career slowly, but eventually, melted down.

It's funny how a few people mention Tyson as talk as if he was 18-32 journeymen. He was the UDISPUTED HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION.

It's funny how a few people mention Tyson as talk as if he was 18-32 journeymen. He was the UDISPUTED HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION.

It's funny how a few Tyson nuthuggers talk about Tyson as if he 100-0 with 100 1st round KOs and was truly the GOD of boxing :rollingeyes:

Poet

It's funny how a few Tyson nuthuggers talk about Tyson as if he 100-0 with 100 1st round KOs and was truly the GOD of boxing :rollingeyes:

Poet



Actully his record is 50-6 44'KO's


By the way you werent refering to me as one of those "nuthuggers" where you?

It's funny how a few people mention Tyson as talk as if he was 18-32 journeymen. He was the UDISPUTED HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION.

Actully his record is 50-6 44'KO's


By the way you werent refering to me as one of those "nuthuggers" where you?

No. You come off as a reasonable guy. Versatile does as well. You two are fans rather than nuthuggers. There's a HUGE difference between the two.

Poet

considering his wins over the greatest fighters of the greates era
i would he was as good as they say

hey Poet, did you ever wonder why people nuthug Tyson? It must be because Tyson sucks so much*sarcasm*

People nuthug Tyson because he knocked the hell out of everyone in the division. He knocked guys out with one punch, his speed was incredible and his defense was superb.

and Poet..you are the biggest Joe Louis nut hugger on this forum, so stop being a hypocrite. Your opinion is so Biased towards older fighters that I bet you think John L. Sulivan would knock Tyson out.

i actually think tyson in his prime coulda knocxked out the best heavyweights of the 90's,00's,even the 40's and 50's
no way he woulda survived the 70's tho
hell no

hey Poet, did you ever wonder why people nuthug Tyson? It must be because Tyson sucks so much*sarcasm*

People nuthug Tyson because he knocked the hell out of everyone in the division. He knocked guys out with one punch, his speed was incredible and his defense was superb.

and Poet..you are the biggest Joe Louis nut hugger on this forum, so stop being a hypocrite. Your opinion is so Biased towards older fighters that I bet you think John L. Sulivan would knock Tyson out.

Hmmm. Considering I rarely talk about Louis I'm not sure how you arrive at that. Must be my picture. My opinion is biased toward great fighters REGARDLESS of era.

As for you nuthugging Tyson: I don't care how good a fighter is nuthugging is an unreasonable position. I also refer to them as KoolAid drinkers: ie. fanatical cultists like those who followed Jim Jones. And no, Tyson could NOT spell defense: His own trainers said it best that his offense WAS his defense. It's a little hard for fighters to land punches when they're running for their lives. Tyson is a typical case of a fighter who generates a lot of offense ALWAYS being overrated. In Tyson's case he cleaned up a Heavyweight division that was the worst I've ever seen.

BTW. You are NOT a boxing fan. I think it's plainly clear you're a KO fan. You're the type that shows up for the KO but gags at a fight that goes the distance. Pathetic.

Poet

BTW. You are NOT a boxing fan. I think it's plainly clear you're a KO fan. You're the type that shows up for the KO but gags at a fight that goes the distance. Pathetic.

No I'm actually a FIGHT fan, yea it's true I don't like watching 12 rnd decisions, I like seeing people beat each other up. I want to see who's the most dominant fighter, not who can put the most points down (this was the original Idea of boxing). Knockouts are exciting, and If you like decisions more than KO's then you must be one hell of a boring - trying to be intellectual type of person.

You have frequently bashed newer fighters, and boasted about how older fighters such as Joe Louis were the best. Every single one of your posts is on how the old fighters were better and the new ones suck. If I recall correctly you even tried telling me that historians will agree with you about Joe Louis. Historians are in the same boat as you, still caught up in the old days.

I don't nuthug, But it pains me to see old geezers flaming the Tyson generation and saying it was a crappy era, when in fact it was not, he just made it look bad.

ali is 1st or 2nd best heavy ever, I do think that his win over Williams is a bit overrated as Williams had been shot and was ill and couldn't move his left leg properly he was nothing like he was when he had the fights with Liston.

yea it's true I don't like watching 12 rnd decisions, I like seeing people beat each other up.

That's sick and a symptom of a society that gets off on violence. Maybe you should be seeing a shrink and possibly watching MMA instead of boxing; or better yet stick to your obscene video games.

Knockouts are exciting, and If you like decisions more than KO's then you must be one hell of a boring - trying to be intellectual type of person.

I don't have to try: I'm a college graduate with an academic degree. As for boring, I suppose that's in the eyes of the beholder. I guess I WOULD be boring to someone who gets his rocks off watching violent things happen to people.

You have frequently bashed newer fighters, and boasted about how older fighters such as Joe Louis were the best. Every single one of your posts is on how the old fighters were better and the new ones suck. If I recall correctly you even tried telling me that historians will agree with you about Joe Louis. Historians are in the same boat as you, still caught up in the old days.

You obviously haven't read many of my posts. Prehaps it's because you're only drawn to Tyson threads? I've made many posts extolling the greatness of Larry Holmes. I've made posts talking of how much of a fan of Lennox Lewis I am. I've made posts talking about how Evander Holyfield is an all-time great. Boy, those are REAL old-timers aren't they? My belief is that EVERY era has it's greats AND it's bums. Some have more of one than the other.

I don't nuthug, But it pains me to see old geezers flaming the Tyson generation and saying it was a crappy era, when in fact it was not, he just made it look bad.

Yes, you DO nuthug. Boy, you have a REAL problem with your elders don't you? For myself I have a problem with punk kids who think they know it all when they don't know a goddamn thing and who think every thing that came before THEIR era was crappy. Dude, just because YOU haven't personally watched a fighter on HBO doesn't mean he sucks. I certainly don't like having to read adolescence slag off on fighters whose only sin was having fought before the little crumb cruncher was born.

Get over yourself dude, and more importantly get over your generation: Your lot are nothing special.

Poet

ali is 1st or 2nd best heavy ever, I do think that his win over Williams is a bit overrated as Williams had been shot and was ill and couldn't move his left leg properly he was nothing like he was when he had the fights with Liston.

True enough, but remember Williams was still dangerous: He had legitimate one-punch KO power and you didn't want to make a mistake against him ill or not.

Poet

boxing is a violent sport, it involves hitting people and knocking people out. Who are you trying to kid poet?

Other than that, I can't argue with me liking knockouts, you did say I'm only attracted to Tyson threads..this is after all..an Ali thread.

Cheers

boxing is a violent sport, it involves hitting people and knocking people out. Who are you trying to kid poet?

Other than that, I can't argue with me liking knockouts, you did say I'm only attracted to Tyson threads..this is after all..an Ali thread.

Cheers

Boxing fans are attracted to the sport for a variety of complex reasons. You, on the other hand, are there for the violence. And THAT is sick. You are the lowest common denominator of people watching boxing. And the name IS "boxing" NOT "KOs" aka the "manly art of self defense" not "self offense". Somehow people with your mentality turn the "sweet science" into the "sweet splatter movie". Give me a break. It's "fans" like you that make people want to ban the sport. As I said in the previous post you need to go watch MMA or play video games to get your gratuitous violence fix and leave boxing alone. What do you do? Sit there and jack off when someone gets knocked the **** out? You are one sick sick dude.

Poet

Your last post is just mindless flaming, you proved no points only to trigger more argument. If your intelligent why not act that way, your just as sick as the people you are "disgusted" about.

A small denominator watches boxing for the knockout? Seriously man, it's a lot bigger than you think. My dad, he's around 48 years old, he remembers all the glorious knockouts from back in the 70's without any "disgust". It's part of the sport, and it's entertaining. Your going way, wayy to far calling me a sicko for liking knockouts.

If I was a sicko obsessed with violence I'm sure I'd have a dog and 3 rabbits.

I don't mind having a competitive argument with you, but you seem to like to go overboard and get aggressive about things, let's try to keep that to a minimum.

peace

Your last post is just mindless flaming, you proved no points only to trigger more argument. If your intelligent why not act that way, your just as sick as the people you are "disgusted" about.

A small denominator watches boxing for the knockout? Seriously man, it's a lot bigger than you think. My dad, he's around 48 years old, he remembers all the glorious knockouts from back in the 70's without any "disgust". It's part of the sport, and it's entertaining. Your going way, wayy to far calling me a sicko for liking knockouts.

If I was a sicko obsessed with violence I'm sure I'd have a dog and 3 rabbits.

peace

Actually I wouldn't be shocked if you're a dog fighter like Michael Vick. Been to any **** fights lately too?

Sick mother****er.

Poet

Are you 4 years old? poet

I can't believe you are stooping this low

Are you 4 years old? poet

I can't believe you are stooping this low

One has to stoop low to talk to a mental midget like yourself. Please let me know when you hit puberty because clearly your balls haven't dropped yet. Until then consider yourself on my ignore list.

Poet

LOL^ he definitely showed me didn't he. He's 39 years old to, and he acts like a preschooler.

C'mon Them Apples. All boxing historians are not old geezers dreaming over the past. The fact is that today's game can be criticized and you know it. Tyson's whole career is marred with controversy, I don't care how many over the hill and subpar fighters he blasted. The whole concept of spectacle in sport has degenerated to nothing more than a money making affair. It's sad.

C'mon Them Apples. All boxing historians are not old geezers dreaming over the past. The fact is that today's game can be criticized and you know it. Tyson's whole career is marred with controversy, I don't care how many over the hill and subpar fighters he blasted. The whole concept of spectacle in sport has degenerated to nothing more than a money making affair. It's sad.

Don't take me to serious in that respect, I was using it for Poets sake, before he somehow ended up labelling me as an animal pit fighter..but yea:boxing:

I don't think Tyson was the greatest ever, but I do think he was better than fighters from the 30's and 40's, I mean come on, tony galento and max Baer?

cheers

Don't take me to serious in that respect, I was using it for Poets sake, before he somehow ended up labelling me as an animal pit fighter..but yea:boxing:

I don't think Tyson was the greatest ever, but I do think he was better than fighters from the 30's and 40's, I mean come on, tony galento and max Baer?

cheers
Max Baer was an animal. Don't just immediately throw HIM in as Tyson fodder. That SOB could knock you back into the stone age.

u cant blame anyone for liking knockouts alot
but for favoring the ko artists who wouldnt last with a good boxer is stupid
and in the 80's(tyson era and before) only real threats were Norten,Holmes,Mike spinks and ........... anybody know whoelse?
the guys tyson beat all beat eachother n looked bad
but tyson had had a couple good names on his record
spinks is his best win ever,holmes(of old tho),too bad tyson-foreman never happened
even in the 90's
golada was real good,tyson destroyed em

Max Baer was an animal. Don't just immediately throw HIM in as Tyson fodder. That SOB could knock you back into the stone age.

I wouldn't pay him any mind. He thinks everything and everyone before his own time automatically sucks.

Poet

and vice versa to you Poet

The reason why Ali was so good is that he was adaptable. If one thing didn't work he could try another. Guys like Tyson and Louis were great at what they did, but they could change course if they had to. If one thing didn't work, they were sunk! Ali is different. Fastest pair of legs and hands, granite chin, great jab, size, and great conditioning is what made Ali great and IMO the greatest of all-time!:fing02:

Ali said that Sugar Ray Robinson was the greatest p4p and that he was the greatest heavyweight. So I guess Ali though Robinson was the greatest overall of all time

Poet is why I stopped replying here.

Poet is why I stopped replying here.

Yea he's such a Tyrant isn't he:nonono:

Boxing fans are attracted to the sport for a variety of complex reasons. You, on the other hand, are there for the violence. And THAT is sick. You are the lowest common denominator of people watching boxing. And the name IS "boxing" NOT "KOs" aka the "manly art of self defense" not "self offense". Somehow people with your mentality turn the "sweet science" into the "sweet splatter movie". Give me a break. It's "fans" like you that make people want to ban the sport. As I said in the previous post you need to go watch MMA or play video games to get your gratuitous violence fix and leave boxing alone. What do you do? Sit there and jack off when someone gets knocked the **** out? You are one sick sick dude.

Poet

...what is wrong with video games? Srry I know this has no relation to boxing (less,...talking about boxing VG's), or this forum topic. Just a little cat being curious.

my ex-boyfriend told me he wasnt, that he didnt really deserve all the attention, that the other guy he called an uncle tom and also foreman the guy with the grill were both much better. he said the uncle tom guy was the better fighter and beat up ali real good. i believe him cause ali looks like he was beat up alot of times

You guys fed this troll for 9 pages. Well done.

...what is wrong with video games? Srry I know this has no relation to boxing (less,...talking about boxing VG's), or this forum topic. Just a little cat being curious.

My point was that a lot of video games have excessive gratuitous violence in them.....something them_apples seems to get his rocks off over.

Poet

Poet is why I stopped replying here.

Then clearly I've accomplished SOME good here. If morons stop posting their ignorant opinions (which, like *******s everyone has) then this forum is much the better for it. It's idiots like you that make people with more than half a brain NOT want to post here.

Come back when you actually KNOW something about boxing, until then join the other ignorant nimrods on my ignore list.

Poet

Then clearly I've accomplished SOME good here. If morons stop posting their ignorant opinions (which, like *******s everyone has) then this forum is much the better for it. It's idiots like you that make people with more than half a brain NOT want to post here.

Come back when you actually KNOW something about boxing, until then join the other ignorant nimrods on my ignore list.

Poet

I agree, but i'll tell you right now. You're not gonna last very long around here.

I agree, but i'll tell you right now. You're not gonna last very long around here.

And the reason for this is?

Poet

And the reason for this is?

Poet

They ban people that get into too many arguments. I got it too once:confused:

I agree, but i'll tell you right now. You're not gonna last very long around here.

They ban people that get into too many arguments. I got it too once:confused:

Not that big a deal. I post on three other forums but they don't seen to attract ignorant juveniles like the ones who get into it with me here. If I have a problem I guess it's that I don't suffer fools gladly and I suffer nuthuggers not at all! LOL!

Poet

My point was that a lot of video games have excessive gratuitous violence in them.....something them_apples seems to get his rocks off over.

Poet

Why does he keep saying that^ I never once I said I love violence or dog fighting, All I said was I enjoy KO's, and apparently that makes me sick.

apparently anyone that doesn't agree with him is an ignorant juvenile.

geeze:nonono:

Actually I wouldn't be shocked if you're a dog fighter like Michael Vick. Been to any **** fights lately too?

Sick motherf**ker.

Poet


Poet, I see your using the same kind of language on this site as you did on the other sites. PLEASE, if your a College man like you said, act like one and start talking (writing) like one and stop using such language. It just makes you look like someone who is very uneducated. I told you on the other site, I have been a Deacon in my Church in Lodi, New Jersey for over 20 years and I for one, don't like it. We really don't need that do we?

Poet, I see your using the same kind of language on this site as you did on the other sites. PLEASE, if your a College man like you said, act like one and start talking (writing) like one and stop using such language. It just makes you look like someone who is very uneducated. I told you on the other site, I have been a Deacon in my Church in Lodi, New Jersey for over 20 years and I for one, don't like it. We really don't need that do we?

If you think my language is bad, hang around on this forum for a while and you'll hear a lot worse. I'm positively mild compared to a lot of posters here. Especially if you take a gander at "The Thunderdome" section. There are people here than can't go a single post without using MF. I, at least, have to be in a complete rage at someone before the profanity comes out.

Welcome to Boxing Scene by the way!

Poet

If you think my language is bad, hang around on this forum for a while and you'll here a lot worse. I'm positively mild compared to a lot of posters here. Especially if you take a gander at "The Thunderdome" section. There are people here than can't go a single post without using MF. I, at least, have to be in a complete rage at someone before the profanity comes out.

Welcome to Boxing Scent by the way!

Poet


Thanks Poet, BUT I have been a member since January 2005.

All I am saying is, try to act like men and not babies when using these forums.

It was ALI and not BRUCE LEE who invented (or at least made popular) the ONE INCH PUNCH when he put SONNY LISTON down and out. Some of this stuff aint gonna never find its way to boxers of today. It's too hi-tech....Such as the 1-inch punch. Blackburn trained JOE LOUIS in those INCH PUNCHES too. Contrary to popular belief, MUHAMMAD ALI hit hard too. It was all in the hand speed and velocity. See most boxers try to load up too much with their punches or force them. Not Ali. The Jab was meant to flick, punish and cut ya up....I could go on with a lot of stuff. But as coaches, fighters and what not we've really got to start studying the SPIRIT of fighters who have gone on before us if we're gonna start producing other all time great champion boxers.

ali was the greatest h/w of all time! he fought frazier and foreman past his prime and beat them! and when age caught up wit so he couldnt dance he invented the rope a dope and he had one of the best chins ever! broken jaw against norton and carried on, got up from a joe frazier clean shot, and many shots didnt even budge him

ali was the greatest h/w of all time! he fought frazier and foreman past his prime and beat them! and when age caught up wit so he couldnt dance he invented the rope a dope and he had one of the best chins ever! broken jaw against norton and carried on, got up from a joe frazier clean shot, and many shots didnt even budge him

Agree , Ali was very special .

It was ALI and not BRUCE LEE who invented (or at least made popular) the ONE INCH PUNCH when he put SONNY LISTON down and out. Some of this stuff aint gonna never find its way to boxers of today. It's too hi-tech....Such as the 1-inch punch. Blackburn trained JOE LOUIS in those INCH PUNCHES too. Contrary to popular belief, MUHAMMAD ALI hit hard too. It was all in the hand speed and velocity. See most boxers try to load up too much with their punches or force them. Not Ali. The Jab was meant to flick, punish and cut ya up....I could go on with a lot of stuff. But as coaches, fighters and what not we've really got to start studying the SPIRIT of fighters who have gone on before us if we're gonna start producing other all time great champion boxers.

your 100% wrong, the one inch punch has been practiced in martial arts since like the beginning of time, and Bruce lee never claimed he invented it.