If Ali never fought again after 1967

[boxingbuff]

When Muhammad Ali refused induction into the Army in 1967 and was stripped of his Title there were many prople who believed he would never fight again.

If Ali had never fought again after his fight with Zora Folley in 1967,where do you believe he would be ranked today?

[Sugarj]

Still pretty highly, he'd have plenty of defenders of his unbeaten record, the fact that he had only been down twice up to this point and his sheer speed and form in 1966/67. He would have far more doubters though and Louis would top rather more ATG top tens.

If Mike Tyson didn't return after his **** conviction, he would...........I'm sure be rather more immortalised. Alot of modern fight fans seem unimpressed with Mike because of the Holyfield and Lewis fights. He was past prime in 1991, let alone 1996-2002. If he hadn't come back some folks may have been more inclined to watch his peak form and admire the considerable skills he had.

[boxingbuff]

Still pretty highly, he'd have plenty of defenders of his unbeaten record, the fact that he had only been down twice up to this point and his sheer speed and form in 1966/67. He would have far more doubters though and Louis would top rather more ATG top tens.

If Mike Tyson didn't return after his **** conviction, he would...........I'm sure be rather more immortalised. Alot of modern fight fans seem unimpressed with Mike because of the Holyfield and Lewis fights. He was past prime in 1991, let alone 1996-2002. If he hadn't come back some folks may have been more inclined to watch his peak form and admire the considerable skills he had.

I agree with you.Prime Tyson is my #2 Heavyweight of all-time.I see Tyson fighting Ali 3 times and Mike winning the 1st bout,and Ali the rematch and rubber match.I believe all 3 fights are very close.

Tyson's fights after his jail time should not even enter into the discussion when talking about fighters in there prime.

I also agree with your take on Ali.

[Sugarj]

The peak Ali, Tyson and Holmes for me are heavyweight perfection.

I love Louis, Foreman, Liston, Bowe, Tunney, Holyfield, Dempsey, Lewis and Johnson too, but those three stand alone.

Good topic idea though Boxingbuff. I suppose the post prime Ali showed more chin, grit, guile and heart as his skills slowly eroded. Real old timer qualities, but peak Ali was art.

[TheGreatA]

Not as highly. His wins over Liston would be easy to diminish (fix, past it, quitter, overrated) and other than that he didn't really have many great wins during his first reign.

The Terrell win, Ali's second best at the time, is underrated now but critics could point out that he was overhyped since he lost to Spencer and Ramos afterwards.

Patterson injured his back, Chuvalo was a journeyman coming off a loss, D. Jones was a robbery, Williams was (literally) shot, Folley was washed up, Moore was a 50 year old man, London, Mildenberger and Cooper were European level opposition. I imagine this is how people would pick apart his resume.

Add Foreman, Frazier, Norton, Bonavena, Quarry, Shavers, Lyle, Bugner and Ellis to that and it's tough to argue against, although some try.

[Obama]

Not as highly. His wins over Liston would be easy to diminish (fix, past it, quitter, overrated) and other than that he didn't really have many great wins during his first reign.

The Terrell win, Ali's second best at the time, is underrated now but critics could point out that he was overhyped since he lost to Spencer and Ramos afterwards.

Patterson injured his back, Chuvalo was a journeyman coming off a loss, D. Jones was a robbery, Williams was (literally) shot, Folley was washed up, Moore was a 50 year old man, London, Mildenberger and Cooper were European level opposition. I imagine this is how people would pick apart his resume.

Add Foreman, Frazier, Norton, Bonavena, Quarry, Shavers, Lyle, Bugner and Ellis to that and it's tough to argue against, although some try.

Well said. I'd add that he ducked Harold Johnson.

[Mersey]

Then we'd be in the same situation as we are with Tyson. We would never know how good Ali really was or could have been because he would have never been tested against a great fighter (excluding Liston).

Same thing with Tyson, he was never tested, it's hard to say how good he was. He looked great beating OK fighters, very exciting to watch. But we will never know what he could have done.

[Sugarj]

Hi Merseysideblood, great signatures. I met Earnie Shavers a few years ago and had a good chat. Very nice guy and a true inspiration, he was kind enough to let me have the one copy of his own biography he was travelling with for PR purposes! Great man. I gather he is based in Merseyside or was for a while.....I hope he is doing well.

Anyway back on topic sometimes the only way to measure some of the great's title reigns is by how supreme they were over what there was to face at the time. I didn't rate Dempsey's title challengers bar Firpo.....and of course Tunney (who beat him post prime), I thought Louis fought many guys below his level until the late 40s when he too was post prime, Marciano fought post prime ex champs and and a blown up light heavy. Ali simply fought what there was and beat what there was in his prime........often convincingly and artistically. Tyson too!

I dont mean the above comments to be in anyway derogatory, a champ can only face what is around at the time and Harry Wills aside the legends above fought the best around in their prime and thats all you can ask of them. Their utter dominance or lack of ATG competition shouldn't always be a reason for doubting their legendary status.

Some guys like Holmes and Holyfield deserve special mention too for their resumes. Real warriors who fought everyone.

As for Ali, critics could probably have a go at his title defenses in the 60s but they were the best guys around, the guys that the public were shouting for and most were completely dominated. He would be top ten on most heavyweight ATG lists even without the 70s.

[Mersey]

Hi Merseysideblood, great signatures. I met Earnie Shavers a few years ago and had a good chat. Very nice guy and a true inspiration, he was kind enough to let me have the one copy of his own biography he was travelling with for PR purposes! Great man. I gather he is based in Merseyside or was for a while.....I hope he is doing well.

He actually lives on my street lol I keep saying this on other threads but it's weird. He's lived here for years now and I have not once dared to speak to him. He's married to my friends Aunt, she said she'd introduce me to him but I haven't seen her for a few months now.

[TheGreatA]

Hi Merseysideblood, great signatures. I met Earnie Shavers a few years ago and had a good chat. Very nice guy and a true inspiration, he was kind enough to let me have the one copy of his own biography he was travelling with for PR purposes! Great man. I gather he is based in Merseyside or was for a while.....I hope he is doing well.

Anyway back on topic sometimes the only way to measure some of the great's title reigns is by how supreme they were over what there was to face at the time. I didn't rate Dempsey's title challengers bar Firpo.....and of course Tunney (who beat him post prime), I thought Louis fought many guys below his level until the late 40s when he too was post prime, Marciano fought post prime ex champs and and a blown up light heavy. Ali simply fought what there was and beat what there was in his prime........often convincingly and artistically. Tyson too!

I dont mean the above comments to be in anyway derogatory, a champ can only face what is around at the time and Harry Wills aside the legends above fought the best around in their prime and thats all you can ask of them. Their utter dominance or lack of ATG competition shouldn't always be a reason for doubting their legendary status.

Some guys like Holmes and Holyfield deserve special mention too for their resumes. Real warriors who fought everyone.

As for Ali, critics could probably have a go at his title defenses in the 60s but they were the best guys around, the guys that the public were shouting for and most were completely dominated. He would be top ten on most heavyweight ATG lists even without the 70s.

I'm not really sure if Ali's first title reign is any better than Marciano's or Louis's (certainly not as good as Louis').

The only title defenses that the public truly demanded were against Ernie Terrell and Floyd Patterson, and I'm not sure if that's any better than facing Walcott, Charles, LaStarza and Moore or Schmeling, Farr, J.H. Lewis, Pastor, Conn, Nova, etc.

Henry Cooper, Karl Mildenberger, Brian London and yes, George Chuvalo (the man was coming off a loss to Eduardo Corletti) were surely not any better than many of the "bums" of the month.

Ali would probably be rated top 10 still mostly due to his talent and skill but at the time there weren't many who would have. By 1967 Joe Frazier, Jimmy Ellis, Jerry Quarry and Oscar Bonavena were all top 5 so there would have been questions about how he would have done against them if not for an early retirement.