The Ali aftertaste....

It is unimaginable what Carlos Takam would have done to Ali or any of his opponents. Unimaginable!

Ali has one of the best heavyweight resumes , he is top 10. Really? HA! Tell me then, who are his BEST wins?? 1. George Foreman.. 218lbs, could barely even BOX! A lummox who outweighed and out-talled every single opponent he bludgeoned with nothing more than standing there swinging left and right wildly until they fell over, accurately described by Ali as a "mummy". Nevertheless, the fight was made and won under highly dubious circumstances. 2. Ron Lyle, good opponent for Ali, crap stoppage! Ali was hurt way worse in many fights but allowed to continue, fixed for Ali. Other than that, Lyle beat the crap out of Ali who was never in the fight! And Lyle was about as slow and crap skilled as Foreman also! Lyle really BEAT Ali! 3. Norton, a glass jawed HW with a basically non-existent punch. Who really BEAT Ali 3-0! Farcial judging was the order of the day. 4. Joe Frazier- a chinny, featherfisted, skilless, chubby punchbag bum midget with absolutely no relevance whatsoever that Ali never convincingly beat also! 5. Sonny Liston- 1 fight was an RTD victory in a fight that was EVEN in the cards, utterly confusing to score because Ali ran the whole time. And the other an obvious dive. Sonny, at 6'1" and only a few lbs heavier than Ali, was among the slowest and most unco champs of all time. Well I am STUNNED! I have got to go and lie down now! Not only are Ali's best wins a selection of some of the most worthless challengers ever to enter the ring in a "championship" fight... But Ali didn't even convincingly BEAT most of them anyway, or did so under fishy circumstances! Pathetic! Absolutely pathetic! Case closed! You can polish a turb, but it is still a turd!

Elroy's in his element right now, he's just warming up :lol1: These are the facts!

What am I not getting? Someone asked you to list guys better than Ali and you could only come up with 2 names. You're saying Ali is not the best boxer ever, number one. I understand that but if you can only say there are two guys better than him, then it's clear Ali is a worthy entrant in any p4p best ever argument. So you're stabbing yourself in the foot with a non-nonsensical argument. And please, tell me why you rank Mayweather so high. A much shorter list would be to list the guys at both heavy and cruiser that Ali would be able to beat. Right now, I can't think of anybody mention worthy.

I could give you so many reasons for Floyd man but I just want to know, why is his offence not great? Once again man, you're not understanding what I am saying. What is the point lol What am I not getting? Someone asked you to list guys better than Ali and you could only come up with 2 names. You're saying Ali is not the best boxer ever, number one. I understand that but if you can only say there are two guys better than him, then it's clear Ali is a worthy entrant in any p4p best ever argument. So you're stabbing yourself in the foot with a non-nonsensical argument. And please, tell me why you rank Mayweather so high.

The aftertaste is similar to the smell. It stinks. And it tastes like ****! And we all know where **** comes from. He was a bum. He was possibly the most manufactured bum in boxing history, worse than Wilder! Fact!

I was wondering what point the OP was trying to make, and it's another 'Let's dickride Floyd by denigrating Past ATGs' - because that's the only way Floyd can ever and will ever be Compared to the true greats. If you think Floyd is even close to Ali, then you are either: A. Stupid B. Biased Or C. Stupid and Biased.

Floyd is 5x as skilled as Ali... and I hate Floyd. You just can't compare the sloppy local nostalgia era with modern athletes. Joe Frazier could not run 100 yards without looking like he was going to die, it's on tape. Back then just being a "tough guy" could take you a long way in boxing, nowadays you'd get exposed within you first 5 fights. Wiith all that skill who did Floyd display that against that were on the level of Ali's opponents ? And Fraizer fought in 15 RD fights and could crack name one HW today that can fight for a full 3 minutes while also moving their head ?

Ali doesn't even consider himself to be the best of all time. He says its this guy... https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtBRt4rU6bSMAKUYroEMDprahXOneAECWz5s2SAsNJxQ1BBYte

Floyd is 5x as skilled as Ali... and I hate Floyd. You just can't compare the sloppy local nostalgia era with modern athletes. Joe Frazier could not run 100 yards without looking like he was going to die, it's on tape. Back then just being a "tough guy" could take you a long way in boxing, nowadays you'd get exposed within you first 5 fights.

Ali's ring IQ and Mentality is what separated him from his peers ..It wasn't just boxing with Ali it was that mental warfare is where he also excelled at ..

I gotta bounce. Just want to say, I disagree with the premise of this thread that to consider Ali the greatest boxer of all time is somehow completely insane or misguided. Ali deserves mention with anyone due to his incredible movement in the ring, his ring generalship, his speed (look at that invisible KO punch of Liston!), his grace, his jab, his versatile and devastating use of the 1-2 combo...and his great, great resume of defeating truly great fighters in their prime. I'd put Leonard up there, too...but that's about it. Robinson was incredible but didn't beat truly great fighters to the same degree. Those are my made-up criteria; you have to share your own. But the original premise -- "Gosh, it seems idiotic to rate Ali as the best boxer, because really he was just a charismatic dude outside of the ring" is totally off base. You really need to put like 10 dudes above him in order for that to be true.

In terms of boxing alone, I think Ray Leonard and Floyd have only just surpassed him. That's it -floyd could have fought cotto when he was undefeated, but he fought him after two knockout losses - he could have fought pacman when he was on his legendary run, but he fought him after he got knocked out -he could have fought paul williams when he was an undefeated welterweight, he never even got near paul williams dont get me wrong he has good wins, but he really has no one to blame but himself if he doesn't get the respect like Ali did, not just personality, but fighting people at the right time, not when they are past it. Ali fought frazier when he was undefeated and beat him twice, faced norton in his prime and beat him, beat sonny liston with ease, faced George Freaking foreman who was undefeated and the prime of his career. Knocking out Foreman would be the equivalent of floyd going to 160 with no catch weight and knocking out golovkin, which we all know wouldn't happen.

Yes anyone CAN. No one has even come close to stopping Floyd. Imagine if Floyd lost to a fighter who was 6-1. Once again this is boxing, it's about winning. Not knocking someone out. I was responding to your question, "what's wrong with Floyd's offense?" Nothing. But it's not a stellar offense, either. Back to the topic of the thread, you think one fighter -- Floyd -- was a better boxer than Ali. Right? Fine. Most intelligent people would probably disagree, but there's no way of knowing. You have to define your criteria. Skill-wise defensively, nobody is more impressive than Floyd; I agree. But I don't think his resume matches up to lots of fighters. He simply didn't beat great fighters in their prime. This may not be his own fault; I'm not totally up to speed on whether he "retired" to duck guys such as Williams. I really don't care WHY he didn't fight some of those guys.

Nobody stopped Ali! But as for Floyd, I like his KO win against Hatton, but I don't consider Hatton to be on par with the opponents Ali (and other fighters such as Leonard or Duran) beat in their prime. Sorry. Knocking out a prime Oscar De La Hoya or a prime Sugar Shane would have put Floyd up there, but he didn't fight them them in their primes, and he didn't knock them out even when they were old. Yes anyone CAN. No one has even come close to stopping Floyd. Imagine if Floyd lost to a fighter who was 6-1. Once again this is boxing, it's about winning. Not knocking someone out.

So Floyd doesn't knock people out? I thought this was called 'Boxing', not KOing. Please remember that everyone loses power respectively as they climb weights, especially 5. Floyd hasn't KO'd recently 1) He is so skilful he does not need to take the risk 2)He's been fighting larger fighters E.g. Canelo, Maidana, Cotto. The young Floyd that fought fighters at lower weights hurt people. Remember Corrales, Hatton, both unbeaten but had been stopped by Floyd? And remember, at Heavyweight, anyone can stop someone Nobody stopped Ali! But as for Floyd, I like his KO win against Hatton, but I don't consider Hatton to be on par with the opponents Ali (and other fighters such as Leonard or Duran) beat in their prime. Sorry. Knocking out a prime Oscar De La Hoya or a prime Sugar Shane would have put Floyd up there, but he didn't fight them them in their primes, and he didn't knock them out even when they were old.

You just clarified why he'll never surpass Ali. "....he does not need to take the risk". This is why there is so little respect for his accomplishments and for the man himself. Winning for the sake of winning degrades the appeal of boxing, which is the fight. Without the fight you have a chess match, which no one wants to watch. Floyd it's at a pinnacle right now but don't be fooled into thinking that history will look favorably upon him. Conservative fighters are never remembered fondly. Which styles of boxing are appealing depends on person preference. Boxing is about winning, you fight to win. Whether fans want to watch it is a completely different thing, that's all down to which styles fans find appealing. What really matters is the ability and effectiveness of the fighter. Not how fun they are to watch.

I also wondered this myself a lot I mean Ali is and probably will forever be the most popular boxer ever. So many casual will by default call him the best but same casual think Tyson is an ATG. But you would think hardcore fans would know better. Simply put Ali is the best heavyweight ever but guys like Hagler, Leonard, Pep, Manny, Chavez, and Duran are better p4p boxers and their resumes are much deeper. It's really unfair a lot of boxers aren't judged sorely on their abilities but also their popularity. This is exactly what I mean. Judged sorely on abilities, Ali just isn't the best fighter ever in my view.

So Floyd doesn't knock people out? I thought this was called 'Boxing', not KOing. Please remember that everyone loses power respectively as they climb weights, especially 5. Floyd hasn't KO'd recently 1) He is so skilful he does not need to take the risk 2)He's been fighting larger fighters E.g. Canelo, Maidana, Cotto. The young Floyd that fought fighters at lower weights hurt people. Remember Corrales, Hatton, both unbeaten but had been stopped by Floyd? And remember, at Heavyweight, anyone can stop someone You just clarified why he'll never surpass Ali. "....he does not need to take the risk". This is why there is so little respect for his accomplishments and for the man himself. Winning for the sake of winning degrades the appeal of boxing, which is the fight. Without the fight you have a chess match, which no one wants to watch. Floyd it's at a pinnacle right now but don't be fooled into thinking that history will look favorably upon him. Conservative fighters are never remembered fondly.

"Greatest" and "best" are best are different things. Technically, he was good but clearly not the best. He should have 3 losses to Kenny Norton on his record. But, being the most beloved and socially significant boxer makes him the "greatest". I don't care for Ali but his story got me into boxing as a kid and that makes him the most important to me. People in my generation are often shocked when I tell them that Tyson was not the best ever, nor close to it. It's all down to your perception, your generation, etc. We can argue about who the technical best were but there is no right answer as to who was the greatest. That's a personal thing. Agree, there's no single "best" in terms of historical boxing skills. You have to define what you mean, and even then there's no way of really knowing. About Tyson, I've heard very few people say he was the best ever -- outside of very, very casual fans. But I actually think that at Tyson's best -- still with Rooney in 1987 or 88 -- he was as good as anyone, and would have defeated as many HW boxers in history as any other fighter. But there's no way to prove it. Late 60s Ali is way up there too. I also agree that "Greatest" was Ali's word to mean more than just boxing. Most charismatic, most memorable, smartest, best looking, and most culturally significant all wrapped up with an extremely outstanding talent in the ring. Still, even as a boxer, Ali was hard to match, and might well be the "best". I think his ring generalship was unsurpassed, as was his chin. His jab was as good as anyone's. His overall movement was a sight to behold. And he defeated great fighters in their prime.