Was ali as good as they say?

[StarshipTrooper]

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 ******ity.

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 ****** 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

[them_apples]

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.

[StarshipTrooper]

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

[Lubutheimmortal]

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.

[StarshipTrooper]

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

[Lubutheimmortal]

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.

[A.Jay]

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.

[Ironside]

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.

[StarshipTrooper]

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

[-CANE-]

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.