Muhammad Ali vs The Supersized Heavyweights

[r.burgundy]

Surely you wouldn't argue that the HW division was far deeper in the 70's and 90's than today?

lets take a logical look.is it more dominant because it didnt have a dominant champ,or is the opposition really that much better?i choose to believe that it was better at the top,had 2 great A'S in ali and foreman,a solid B in frazier,the rest are all C class.C as in guys who can give a tough fight but not good enough for a sustained run.

in this era,vitali an wlad are A class but thier isnt really a great B guy like a frazier.i put guys like povetkin,peter,byrd,chambers,arreola as good B to C class opposition.these guys are good enough to win,but not good enough for a sustained run.this division suffers at the top because the dominant A guys wont fight each other,and thier physical advantages make the B guys all look like C's.

for example,foreman is an A who beat the hell out of a great B in frazier therfore making frazier look much worse than he actualy was,especially being that he retired shortly after.

[r.burgundy]

They moved faster than the Ukrainian spastic does

Poet

sure they did buddy

[Poet682006]

sure they did buddy

My Grandmother moves faster than Wlad and she's been dead for 25 years. Wlad can throw a jab and I have time to run take a dump and be back before it lands.

Poet

[GJC]

lets take a logical look.is it more dominant because it didnt have a dominant champ,or is the opposition really that much better?i choose to believe that it was better at the top,had 2 great A'S in ali and foreman,a solid B in frazier,the rest are all C class.C as in guys who can give a tough fight but not good enough for a sustained run.

in this era,vitali an wlad are A class but thier isnt really a great B guy like a frazier.i put guys like povetkin,peter,byrd,chambers,arreola as good B to C class opposition.these guys are good enough to win,but not good enough for a sustained run.this division suffers at the top because the dominant A guys wont fight each other,and thier physical advantages make the B guys all look like C's.

for example,foreman is an A who beat the hell out of a great B in frazier therfore making frazier look much worse than he actualy was,especially being that he retired shortly after.

I'm more of the view that Wlad and Vitali arn't A class or their opponents B class.
I don't press Buster Mathias claims as strong as Sonnyboy but whether or not you believe that the likes of Jimmy Young, Quarry, Lyle, Shavers etc would beat say Wlad I think the majority of neutrals would certainly favour them over Wlad's opposition.
I rate Vitali as far superior to his brother BTW

[Holtol]

Its hard to say exactly how good Ali's was. Compared to fighters in diffrent era's. But prime Ali looked like the fastest most agile smartest heavyweight I have seen with one of the best chins, and he would not be much smaller then guys like Lewis or Klitschko.

It is hard to say exactly how good Ali is. But I think he is the best boxer ever and would mop the floors with any boxer ever when he was in his prime. Look at what Ali did to Gorge Forman past his prime. Now Gorge Forman took 10 years off to be a preacher came back to boxing. Beat the Heavy weight champ Moore Gave Hoylfeild a good fight should have won against Briggs all this after being a preacher for 10 years. And Ali a shell of his former self knocked out Forman,Prime Ali beats the hell right out of Forman. Prime Forman kicks Holyfeild's a**, beats Moore even worse and would beat Lewis and the Klitschkos. Prime Ali is likely 1 in 100 billion or more we will be lucky if we ever see a boxer as good as him again.

[EzzardFan]

lets take a logical look.is it more dominant because it didnt have a dominant champ,or is the opposition really that much better?i choose to believe that it was better at the top,had 2 great A'S in ali and foreman,a solid B in frazier,the rest are all C class.C as in guys who can give a tough fight but not good enough for a sustained run.

I mostly agree with this.

in this era,vitali an wlad are A class but thier isnt really a great B guy like a frazier.i put guys like povetkin,peter,byrd,chambers,arreola as good B to C class opposition.these guys are good enough to win,but not good enough for a sustained run.

But for the present era I'd rate the Klits as D class and most other as being worse than that.

[them_apples]

Often on this forum i read topics where members claim Muhammad Ali was overated, Lewis vs Ali would be a 50/50 fight, The Klitschko brothers would be to big for him and to powerful.. lets take a look at their careers and make our case:

Wlad Klitschko - 6ft 6in Vitali - 6ft 7ins Lennox Lewis 6ft 5ins

Fighters Ali fought who measured up to the Super-sized heavies of today in height and power.
George Foreman - 6ft 4in + power
Ron Lyle 6ft 31/12in + power
Earnie Shavers power
Mac Foster 6ft 4in + power
Cleveland Williams 6ft 4in + power
Buster Mathis 6ft 4in + power + skills
Alvin Lewis 6ft 3in
Joe Bugner 6ft 5in
Ernie Terrell 6ft 7in
Ken Norton 6ft 4in + power
Chuck Wepner 6ft 7in

Fighters The Super-sized fought who measure up to Muhammad Ali in skills or height - Ali was 6ft 4in

Michael Grant - 6ft 6in
Henry Akinwande 6ft 7in
Shannon Briggs 6ft 5in
Tyrell Biggs 6ft 5in
Tony Tucker 6ft 5in
Jameel McCline 6ft 6in
Cory Sanders 6ft 5in + power - no skill

Height & weigh are completely meaningless it is skill and brutality which count..

Ali was on a completely different level skillwise as the Klitschko brothers & Lennox Lewis and Ali had zero trouble beating fighters who was just as big & tall as those 3 super-sized heavyweights... Muhammad Ali used speed & skills along with a lightening fast jab to beat Ernie Terrell to a pulp leaving his face looking like a plate of meat yet Terrell was taller than the super-sized

Ali took bombs on the chin from Foreman, Lyle, Norton, Williams, Shavers, Frazier, Foster all of who punched far harder than any of the super-sized - Muhammad Ali was never knocked-out, yet Lewis & Wladimir have been poleaxed by mediocre journeymen.

Ali punched hard enough to be the only man to knock out iron-chinned Oscar Bonavena & George Foreman.

The Super-sized are vastly overated in power as they repeatedly struggled to KO opponents other fighters KOd easily..

The argument cannot be made that the super-sized are "HEAVIER" as weight is a hindrance.. in the case of Lennox Lewis he looked a world beater when weighing 225lbs against Ruddock & Mason yet looked nothing like that when weighing 235 - 255lbs and repeatedly struggling or getting KOd by opponents

Both Klitschko brothers have black marks against them as likely steroid users.

please do not call into question the height and weights i have stated, i do not go by Boxrec for my statistics as they are always incorrect... do your homework and you will see that i am correct.

Lets here your case:

you got your heights all messed up. but yea. Ali and Williams def aren't 6'4/ your the only person in the world who thinks Ali was 6'4. Norton wasn't 6'4 either. Foreman is the only guy who was really probably 6'4, since in his comeback he was listed as that.

regardless, size doesn't win fights, skills do.

aside from Lewis and The k bros though, not too many Hw's are really that big. They are just fat.

[sonnyboyx2]

lets take a logical look.is it more dominant because it didnt have a dominant champ,or is the opposition really that much better?i choose to believe that it was better at the top,had 2 great A'S in ali and foreman,a solid B in frazier,the rest are all C class.C as in guys who can give a tough fight but not good enough for a sustained run.

in this era,vitali an wlad are A class but thier isnt really a great B guy like a frazier.i put guys like povetkin,peter,byrd,chambers,arreola as good B to C class opposition.these guys are good enough to win,but not good enough for a sustained run.this division suffers at the top because the dominant A guys wont fight each other,and thier physical advantages make the B guys all look like C's.

for example,foreman is an A who beat the hell out of a great B in frazier therfore making frazier look much worse than he actualy was,especially being that he retired shortly after.

Ali - A+
Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Liston, Patterson - A
Quarry, Lyle, Williams, Norton, Bonavena, Folley - B+
Chuvalo, Cooper, Mildenberger, Ellis, Foster, Bugner,
Terrell, Mathis, Lewis, Young, Shavers - B

[sonnyboyx2]

you got your heights all messed up. but yea. Ali and Williams def aren't 6'4/ your the only person in the world who thinks Ali was 6'4. Norton wasn't 6'4 either. Foreman is the only guy who was really probably 6'4, since in his comeback he was listed as that.

regardless, size doesn't win fights, skills do.

aside from Lewis and The k bros though, not too many Hw's are really that big. They are just fat.

The heights i stated are all correct, here is a link

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/15/sp...l?pagewanted=1

[sonnyboyx2]

you got your heights all messed up. but yea. Ali and Williams def aren't 6'4/ your the only person in the world who thinks Ali was 6'4. Norton wasn't 6'4 either. Foreman is the only guy who was really probably 6'4, since in his comeback he was listed as that.

regardless, size doesn't win fights, skills do.

aside from Lewis and The k bros though, not too many Hw's are really that big. They are just fat.

i was going to put Lennox Lewis height as 6ft 4in like it claims in the Lewis v McCall fight programme which was published by Lewis promotional company