View Full Version : Ali Was A Great Fighter, But Way Overrated In Terms Of Boxing Ability'' Larry Holmes


Southpaw Great
07-17-2010, 07:41 PM
Holmes said this on a thrilla in manilla doc, i watched.

Thoughts?

bojangles1987
07-17-2010, 09:40 PM
As far as the fundamentals, Ali was certainly no textbook example. He didn't work the body, and basically relied solely on his athleticism. When he came back from the 3 year layoff, he relied a lot on his toughness and handspeed.

Doesn't matter, he was so good he didn't have to fight with a fundamentally solid style.

Vadrigar.
07-18-2010, 02:02 AM
ALi's style was somewhat tailored towards his athleticism, similar to Roy Jones. Look at this picture and notice how he avoids punches:

http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/22/84622-050-B7C3BD4A.jpg

I don't think I've seen anyone do this, it's extremely unique. Ali's boxing ability is unquestionable. He had amazing timing, reflexes, rhythm, footwork, punching technique, adaptability, etc.. These traits are boxing ability, so Holmes is wrong.

Heru
07-18-2010, 03:39 AM
Ability encompasses both skill and talent, so Holmes is completely wrong.

I'll give Larry the benefit of the doubt that he meant strictly skill though.

In that case, he's still wrong. Ali had a great sense for the the #1 skill in boxing: timing. You add some of the best footwork ever for a heavyweight, a great jab, an excellent ability to roll with punches, and other abilities.

It might have been slightly unorthodox skill, but skill nonetheless.

Sam Donald
07-18-2010, 06:56 AM
Holmes said this on a thrilla in manilla doc, i watched.

Thoughts?

you didnt watch this on 138 last night, did you? lol

TheHolyCross
07-18-2010, 07:31 AM
his style was somethin special in the heavy division, where the guys were slow or could'nt cut off the ring, not to mention most would block with their faces back then

p4p ali is getting sodomized by alot of the ATG's, and not even

prinzemanspopa
07-18-2010, 08:19 AM
Ali simply didn't have the level of talent and great competition that old Lar had during his heyday to demonstrate the type of 'slick' African American type skills that Larry Holmes demonstrated so often against such elite competition.



No Greg Page,Michael Dokes,Gerrie Coetzee,Pinklon Thomas for Ali to duck either.

cameronpaul
07-18-2010, 08:34 AM
iv said it for a while. its not that his not good, i mean his probably top 10 all time heavy weight. but its just that his considered the greatest by pretty much anyone who doesnt know too much about boxing. alis biggest strength was his toughness. theres loads of fighters who bring more to the table, roy jones/toney are slicker and have quicker hands, larry homes has arguably better footwork and jab. tua/tyson are fast and powerfull and would stand a chance of taking ali out in the first few rounds. george foreman destroyed alot of guys ali struggled to beat.

Stone Roses!
07-18-2010, 08:38 AM
Just thought I'd give my 2 cents in this thread.

As QUELOQUE was alluding to earlier, boxing ability entails a number of different factors so bitter old Larry Holmes is wrong in this regard.

Larry is referring to Ali's technical ability and in this regard he is also incorrect. Ali is not rated highly by boxing historians as it concerns his technical skills. Infact many boxing observers have criticised Ali's inability to slip punches, punch to the body etc.

If Ali ever had a flaw in his game it was certainly his technical skill and this is just about the only con as apposed to the numerous pros in his arsenal.

His sheer willpower and toughness are severely underrated. He possessed unparalled physical prowess; Fastest heavyweight of all time, terrific footwork, lightning handspeed, piston like jab, judged distance like no other, tremendous ring IQ and defence, not to mention an iron chin.

Ali's Boxing Ability >>>>>>>> Larry Holmes.

Not to mention Ali's ability was tested against a much higher level of competetition than good ol' Larry Holmes.

LMAO at Prinze's post. Good one.


iv said it for a while. its not that his not good, i mean his probably top 10 all time heavy weight. but its just that his considered the greatest by pretty much anyone who doesnt know too much about boxing. alis biggest strength was his toughness. theres loads of fighters who bring more to the table, roy jones/toney are slicker and have quicker hands, larry homes has arguably better footwork and jab. tua/tyson are fast and powerfull and would stand a chance of taking ali out in the first few rounds. george foreman destroyed alot of guys ali struggled to beat.
A retarded post if I ever read one. ^^^^

BennyST
07-18-2010, 08:48 AM
his style was somethin special in the heavy division, where the guys were slow or could'nt cut off the ring, not to mention most would block with their faces back then

p4p ali is getting sodomized by alot of the ATG's, and not even

Huh? They were slow then? Really? News to me. I seem to remember Floyd Patterson, arguably the fastest HW after Ali etc was before Ali's time. Nor would I call Holmes, Norton, Quarry, Moore, Charles, ..... slow.

If I look in comparison to todays HW's, they seem ridiculously fast in fact.

Blocked punches with their faces? Geez, if guys back then blocked punches with their face, what do the champs of today do?

Ahh forget it....trolling. What's the point?

BennyST
07-18-2010, 08:51 AM
iv said it for a while. its not that his not good, i mean his probably top 10 all time heavy weight. but its just that his considered the greatest by pretty much anyone who doesnt know too much about boxing. alis biggest strength was his toughness. theres loads of fighters who bring more to the table, roy jones/toney are slicker and have quicker hands, larry homes has arguably better footwork and jab. tua/tyson are fast and powerfull and would stand a chance of taking ali out in the first few rounds. george foreman destroyed alot of guys ali struggled to beat.

Yeah, and there are the other people who don't know much about boxing that can't recognise that toughness was a small part of Ali's game. If it was only toughness, then how in hell did he beat so many great fighters? Frazier was tough, Foreman was tough, Cooney was really tough, Patterson was really tough, Tyson was tough, Jones Jr was tough, Holmes was tough ......

....Tex Cobb was really tough, Chuck Wepner was really tough, Margarito was really tough, The Big Klitoris is really tough......:nonono:

TheHolyCross
07-18-2010, 09:02 AM
Huh? They were slow then? Really? News to me. I seem to remember Floyd Patterson, arguably the fastest HW after Ali etc was before Ali's time. Nor would I call Holmes, Norton, Quarry, Moore, Charles, ..... slow.

If I look in comparison to todays HW's, they seem ridiculously fast in fact.

Blocked punches with their faces? Geez, if guys back then blocked punches with their face, what do the champs of today do?

Ahh forget it....trolling. What's the point?

where did i say fighters of back then were slower than fighters of today?

i'll wait

cameronpaul
07-18-2010, 09:14 AM
if you was a heavyweight fighter, would you rather fight ali or george foreman?

BennyST
07-18-2010, 09:15 AM
his style was somethin special in the heavy division, where the guys were slow or could'nt cut off the ring, not to mention most would block with their faces back then

p4p ali is getting sodomized by alot of the ATG's, and not even

Taken in context and by 'back then' it is saying you are comparing it to today. "Back then, chicks were real ugly man" immediately conjuring up the context that they were uglier than today.

Maybe I misunderstood because you can't string a proper sentence together. :dunno:

It seems to me though that you are saying he was something special 'back then' when guys were slow, couldn't cut off the ring and would block punches with their face. Or did you not write all that? Maybe I'm hallucinating. :thinking:

Stone Roses!
07-18-2010, 09:22 AM
if you was a heavyweight fighter, would you rather fight ali or george foreman?

Correction: 'If you were a heavyweight fighter'. Not, 'If you was'.

That came as no surprise to me as I read your initial post in the first page of this thread. You not only lack boxing knowledge but happen to possess a level of grammatical aptitude equivalent to that of a 5th grader.

Furthermore, your silly question has no relevance to this thread.

TheHolyCross
07-18-2010, 09:39 AM
Taken in context and by 'back then' it is saying you are comparing it to today. "Back then, chicks were real ugly man" immediately conjuring up the context that they were uglier than today.

Maybe I misunderstood because you can't string a proper sentence together. :dunno:

It seems to me though that you are saying he was something special 'back then' when guys were slow, couldn't cut off the ring and would block punches with their face. Or did you not write all that? Maybe I'm hallucinating. :thinking:

maybe your stupid, think of that? "No, could'nt be, BennyST bothers with full stops, checking his spelling, re-checking his spelling, utilizing full stops and proper usage of capitals." but who the **** cares? it's the internet not english class

anyway, ignoring the retard that is BennyST(who didn't realise who was roy jones favourite fighter and thought he was special when he found out, personally i thought him finding himself special to be kinda funny)

Ali's style was special in the heavyweight division where fighters are plodding, flat footed and can't cut off the ring, adding insult to injury he faced alot of face blocking chumps. Lucky he had no Tyson, Holmes or someone fast of foot to face, all one-dimensional ali had to do was jab and move, no slickness required, just be on the backfoot and these guys can't catch you.
Use his talent which was his athleticism and durable chin(which came into player later on)
well to show a little love for the man, he did know how to pull down on necks of fighters to neutralize their power and soften them up for the ko

my favourite fight is ali cleveland :lol1:

T.McGrady
07-18-2010, 11:02 AM
Holmes is dead wrong. Ali has a great jab, footwork, timing, and the thing that seperate from any other fighter his "Intelligence". It wasn't about toughness.

them_apples
07-18-2010, 12:15 PM
Well Holmes was open to a counter right hand all night so he should be one to talk. At least Ali at his peak didn't really get hit too much.

Ali did have flaws though. No body attack, and his defense couldn't keep up later on in his career once his lateral speed had slowed down.

People need to know this though, at a high leverl of boxing, being fundamental too a T isn't even always the best thing. fundamentals have fundamental counters, this is why being unorthodox screws things up for a lot of fighters.

a fundamental counter: opponent a throws a double jab and then a right hand, oponent b slips the right hand and counters with a left hook followed by a straight right.

You'd never land that on Roy Jones because he'd never do a jab jab - right. Same goes for Ali. Strict fundamentals are what you learn in the ams.

Ziggy Stardust
07-18-2010, 02:22 PM
Well Holmes was open to a counter right hand all night so he should be one to talk. At least Ali at his peak didn't really get hit too much.

Ali did have flaws though. No body attack, and his defense couldn't keep up later on in his career once his lateral speed had slowed down.

People need to know this though, at a high leverl of boxing, being fundamental too a T isn't even always the best thing. fundamentals have fundamental counters, this is why being unorthodox screws things up for a lot of fighters.

a fundamental counter: opponent a throws a double jab and then a right hand, oponent b slips the right hand and counters with a left hook followed by a straight right.

You'd never land that on Roy Jones because he'd never do a jab jab - right. Same goes for Ali. Strict fundamentals are what you learn in the ams.

Exactly! The bottom line isn't whether the technique is text-book perfect but rather how EFFECTIVE it is. Fighters such as Ali and Jones probably wouldn't have been as effective as they were if they fought in a techniqually "correct" style, while other fighters would not have been as effective as they were had they fought in the unorthodox manner of Ali and Jones. The bottom line is a fighter should fight in a way that makes the best use of his unique natural talents. If textbook does that (and for the majority of fighters it does) then great! But if doing things "all wrong" as I've heard it called makes you more effective then go for it.

Poet

Vadrigar.
07-18-2010, 03:02 PM
Exactly! The bottom line isn't whether the technique is text-book perfect but rather how EFFECTIVE it is. Fighters such as Ali and Jones probably wouldn't have been as effective as they were if they fought in a techniqually "correct" style, while other fighters would not have been as effective as they were had they fought in the unorthodox manner of Ali and Jones. The bottom line is a fighter should fight in a way that makes the best use of his unique natural talents. If textbook does that (and for the majority of fighters it does) then great! But if doing things "all wrong" as I've heard it called makes you more effective then go for it.

Poet

Excellent point, you've pretty much sealed this up. Archie Moore tried to change Ali's style and ALi got annoyed. As I said in my post ALi used a style that was tailored towards his natural athleticism. If Ali used a textbook style his natural abilities would be "bottlenecked".

boxing boy
07-18-2010, 03:23 PM
Going by the book Muhammad Ali did everything wrong.Holding your hands or guard down is a big no no.Pulling your head back from punches is another big no no,and considered suicide.But Muhammad Ali's lightning fast reflexes not only allowed him to get away with this,but he was almost impossible to hit with a clean punch in his prime.His unreal footspeed in his prime also helped him to stay out of range from his opponents punches.So his speed and quick reflexes made up for everything he was doing wrong.

You can say"He did it his way"

Obama
07-18-2010, 03:48 PM
Man never threw a body punch in his life. Quite frankly the **** is just sad. Guy won his hardest fights on sheer conditioning and durability. A guy with fast hands or good timing or high workrate and great conditioning never really had problems hitting him.

Ziggy Stardust
07-18-2010, 04:04 PM
A guy with fast hands or good timing or high workrate and great conditioning never really had problems hitting him.

In the mid to late 1960s when he was prime?!?! In the 1970s sure: His reflexes had slipped after his three year layoff. In none of his prime fights from the 1960s have I ever seen him get tagged consistantly.

Poet

TheMagicMan
07-18-2010, 05:51 PM
Huh? They were slow then? Really? News to me. I seem to remember Floyd Patterson, arguably the fastest HW after Ali etc was before Ali's time. Nor would I call Holmes, Norton, Quarry, Moore, Charles, ..... slow.

If I look in comparison to todays HW's, they seem ridiculously fast in fact.

Blocked punches with their faces? Geez, if guys back then blocked punches with their face, what do the champs of today do?

Ahh forget it....trolling. What's the point?

Uhh Floyd PAtterson weighed 188 pounds...good job Ali, beating a Light HW. Of course a 188 pound guy was faster than someone like 250 lbs Vitali Klitshko.

Ziggy Stardust
07-18-2010, 05:54 PM
Uhh Floyd PAtterson weighed 188 pounds...good job Ali, beating a Light HW. Of course a 188 pound guy was faster than someone like 250 lbs Vitali Klitshko.

The Light-Heavyweight limit is 175. If you're going to troll a thread at least get your facts right retard :bullsh1t9:

Poet

Obama
07-19-2010, 03:07 AM
In the mid to late 1960s when he was prime?!?! In the 1970s sure: His reflexes had slipped after his three year layoff. In none of his prime fights from the 1960s have I ever seen him get tagged consistantly.

Poet

In his youth his opposition was pretty sub-par to be honest. But Doug Jones battered him around the ring. He happened to be one of Ali's faster an more energetic opponents.

Stone Roses!
07-19-2010, 03:19 AM
In his youth his opposition was pretty sub-par to be honest. But Doug Jones battered him around the ring. He happened to be one of Ali's faster an more energetic opponents.
Jones didn't batter anyone around the ring. Ofcourse you are entitled to your opinion so I will give mine too.

It was a close fight, but I believe Ali outpointed Jones.

them_apples
07-19-2010, 03:25 AM
When Ali was young his chin wasn't as good. He was only 200-210 lbs and physically looked lighter. This gave him great mobility but he didn't have quite the same strength or durability as in his comeback.

His prime was either when he fought Liston or when he fought Frazier the first time. I'm curious how the lighter Ali would have done against Frazier in the first fight. Frazier was a monster that night and had great speed as well.

bojangles1987
07-19-2010, 09:22 AM
When Ali was young his chin wasn't as good. He was only 200-210 lbs and physically looked lighter. This gave him great mobility but he didn't have quite the same strength or durability as in his comeback.

His prime was either when he fought Liston or when he fought Frazier the first time. I'm curious how the lighter Ali would have done against Frazier in the first fight. Frazier was a monster that night and had great speed as well.

I doubt it would have looked that different, just based on styles. Most likely if you took Frazier from that night and Ali from '64 or '65 it's a fight that is too close for anyone to claim they won convincingly.

Ali might not get up from that left hook with his '64 chin though. :boxing:

boxing boy
07-19-2010, 05:10 PM
In his youth his opposition was pretty sub-par to be honest. But Doug Jones battered him around the ring. He happened to be one of Ali's faster an more energetic opponents.

Doug Jones fought a young Cassuis Clay in 1963 with only 17 professional fights.

I just watched the fight again,and had Cassius Clay winning 6-4 in rounds.

The fight was fought in Doug Jones back yard,and every punch he threw got alot of noise,whether they landed or not.Jones landed a couple good "clean" punches in the entire fight.And this was not a Prime Muhammad Ali.

Remember this was in 1963,3 or 4 years "before" Muhammad Ali's prime of 1966/67.Yes,Ali beat Sonny Liston 3 years BEFORE his prime.That's how good he was.

In his Prime Muhammad Ali was almost impossible to hit with a clean punch.He never even had a scatch on his face after 9 title defenses!!

Ali's jab was timed faster than the great SRR's jab.Faster than the fastest Middleweights!!

sonnyboyx2
07-20-2010, 03:48 AM
Muhammad Ali was 10 times the boxer that Larry Holmes ever was.. Holmes is bitter towards everyone.. Holmes made a quote after losing to Mike Tyson, he said," i could never have beat Mike Tyson"..

cameronpaul
07-20-2010, 05:44 AM
holmes just talks honestly, neither him or ali could beat tyson.

Toney616
07-20-2010, 03:46 PM
Muhammad Ali was 10 times the boxer that Larry Holmes ever was.. Holmes is bitter towards everyone.. Holmes made a quote after losing to Mike Tyson, he said," i could never have beat Mike Tyson"..
Im surprised if this part is true, he rarely says anything nice about anyone. I remember him "saying" on his forum a while back that if his hand didn't get caught between the upper ropes (round 4 with Tyson), then his uppercut would of knocked Tyson out.

F l i c k e r
07-20-2010, 03:49 PM
his style was somethin special in the heavy division, where the guys were slow or could'nt cut off the ring, not to mention most would block with their faces back then

p4p ali is getting sodomized by alot of the ATG's, and not even

Hit the nail on the head with this one.

Ziggy Stardust
07-20-2010, 04:38 PM
Hit the nail on the head with this one.

You need to stick to NSB and the Dumb-Jock Training & Meat-Head Nutrition Forum: It's seriously embarressing to have a mental troglodyte you posting in here. Have a nice day! :)

Poet

boxing boy
07-20-2010, 04:56 PM
Muhammad Ali was 10 times the boxer that Larry Holmes ever was.. Holmes is bitter towards everyone.. Holmes made a quote after losing to Mike Tyson, he said," i could never have beat Mike Tyson"..

Holmes has also said many times that he is the greatest fighter of all-times!!

He's talking just about heavyweights.

The_Demon
07-20-2010, 06:24 PM
Ali was the most gifted HW of all time,and he fought to his strengths-holmes is just bitter

sonnyboyx2
07-21-2010, 12:56 AM
Im surprised if this part is true, he rarely says anything nice about anyone. I remember him "saying" on his forum a while back that if his hand didn't get caught between the upper ropes (round 4 with Tyson), then his uppercut would of knocked Tyson out.

Holmes said it in the ring after getting KOd by Tyson.. he came out with your comment years after reflecting on the fight... first impressions are always right`

GJC
07-21-2010, 08:39 PM
I will put my hands up here as being in the "he'll get found out" camp when Ali started, hands to low leans away from punches etc etc. If I was going to teach someone to box then I wouldn't use Ali as an example.
That said greats in any sport take the rule book and rip it up or certainly put a new chapter in it.
A good point was made about how fundamentals always have a fundamental counter.

Jim Jeffries
07-21-2010, 09:11 PM
Ali wasn't very fundamentally sound in his first incarnation, but he got away with it due to his phenomenal speed and athleticism. After the ban however, he added elements to his game to make up for the loss in reflexes, and always found a way to win, if not in the first fight, then in the second and third.

Holmes still sounds bitter though having followed the greatest HW of all time, and because he fought in a rather weak era, never got the chance to prove he was on Ali's level.

louis54
07-25-2010, 08:20 PM
nobody would teach someone to box like ali. you would teach them to box like pep or tunney. but he could still box like hell, had the reach and could use it- and had the chin and willpower to be maybe the best heavyweight ever.