Muhammad Ali vs The Supersized Heavyweights

[GJC]

the heavys i was talking about beating ali were lewis,wlad,and vitali.

What version of Ali 60's or 70's?

Thing you have to take into account when you are throwing these guys up against Ali is to ask yourself who they have beaten that Ali wouldn't comfortably beat.
The Klit brothers opponents haven't been up to much surely you would concede that? You can deride Buster Mathis, who I never rated too highly but if he was mooted as an opponent for Wlad but I can assure you that they would be building him into a world beater.

Lewis got outboxed against Bruno, who was a pretty pedestrian fighter, but ko'd him, he isn't going to dig out a KO against Ali IMO.
Ali wasn't a heavy hitter but would he need to be to KO Wlad? Could Wlad KO Ali? Doubt it. So he has to outbox Ali, can't see it.
I rate Vitali far higher than Wlad and he lost to an out of shape Lewis. Ali might not knock out Vitali but he could certainly cut him up.

[GJC]

norton lives off that ali win.

Quarry & Young? Also fought a pretty decent fight against Holmes.

Norton had problems if he was backed up but problem for Wlad is that Wlad doesn't like getting hit. Norton would be quite a step up in class from what he has fought before.

[r.burgundy]

Buster Mathis had very good boxing skills and was very agile on his feet..Big George was not `grossly outa shape` when he lost to Muhammad Ali, in fact George looked incredible..you are having a laugh if you think Brewster, Rahman or McCall could beat Ken Norton.. Norton lost the closest verdict in heavyweight history to Larry Holmes in 1978 yet 17yrs later Holmes lost by only a single point to a prime Oliver McCall, if Oleg Maskaev & Lennox Lewis can level Rahman then Norton would decapitate him as he would with Brewster..Ali lost to Norton on points suffering a broken jaw, Lewis and Wlad got poleaxed by mediocre journeymen..
your talking as if Muhammad Ali had `feather-fists` yet he stopped the vast majority of fighters from `The Golden era`Patterson, Liston, Folley, Williams, Frazier, Foreman, Bonavena, Quarry, Lyle, Ellis, Cooper..who all took a rap better than Lewis or Wlad.. The one thing for sure is that Muhammad Ali punched harder than Rahman, McCall or Brewster as none of them was to replicate their KO of Lewis and Wlad against any other opponent they fought before or after, which points to Lewis & Wlad having poor resistance to punches.

Size, weight & height are not power -- Speed is power and Muhammad Ali was the fastest in heavyweight history.. Ali clowned & played with lots of his opponents so as to put a show on for the paying fans, Lewis & Wlad turned fans away from this sport by repeatedly putting on snoozers that bored the paying fans and turned them off the sport

please stop rating buster for the sake of twisted logic.he was a decent fighter.he wasnt big.he was only 6'3 and he was always in horrible shape.if george was in great shape he wouldnt have gassed out in 6 rounds.

brewster,rahman an mccall would mangle norton,who was utterly heartless when it came to punchers.that ****** ass defense he used was a dream for anybody with a decent punch
you make it seem like larry was a k.o artist and mccall was a superb boxer.larry had great skills and a great chin,which is the recipe to be a great fighter.oleg an lennox would flatten norton.and rahman,like norton is famous for 1 win.he was a solid contender just like rahman.he got a buncha shots but always came up short

ali had respectable power but lets not get carried.your quick to say ali ko'd these greats but dont talk about the stories behind them.patterson was 137 years old,lyle was very chinny,and liston is the most dubios k.o in history

no ali, did not punch harder than those guys.he had a harder jab but thats about it.guys like brewster you give a punchers chance in any fight.you wouldnt give ali a punchers chance cause he's not a puncher.he's a boxer 1st and 2nd,puncher 3rd

if speed is power meldrick taylor would have 30 k.os on his record,same with malignaggi,whitaker,byrd,etc etc.speed is speed.power is power.your quick to call the klits slow,but what the hell was foreman??.foreman was slow as heinz ketchup and he is 1 of the hardest punchers in history.k.os arent always about the hard punch,moreso than the right punch.ali had timig and accuracy and he was durable.he had a host of great attributes but power wasnt 1 of them

[r.burgundy]

Quarry & Young? Also fought a pretty decent fight against Holmes.

Norton had problems if he was backed up but problem for Wlad is that Wlad doesn't like getting hit. Norton would be quite a step up in class from what he has fought before.

and you think norton would want to try and run in on wlad?the look on his face when shavers started throwing bombs his way is priceless.young was a good 1 but i really hate when guys act like quarry would be a contender today.he was a decent c level fighter

[r.burgundy]

What version of Ali 60's or 70's?

Thing you have to take into account when you are throwing these guys up against Ali is to ask yourself who they have beaten that Ali wouldn't comfortably beat.
The Klit brothers opponents haven't been up to much surely you would concede that? You can deride Buster Mathis, who I never rated too highly but if he was mooted as an opponent for Wlad but I can assure you that they would be building him into a world beater.

Lewis got outboxed against Bruno, who was a pretty pedestrian fighter, but ko'd him, he isn't going to dig out a KO against Ali IMO.
Ali wasn't a heavy hitter but would he need to be to KO Wlad? Could Wlad KO Ali? Doubt it. So he has to outbox Ali, can't see it.
I rate Vitali far higher than Wlad and he lost to an out of shape Lewis. Ali might not knock out Vitali but he could certainly cut him up.

i didnt say ali beating them is out the scope of possibility.i think he could out point the klits,but lewis was a fine boxer and his skill isnt being acknowledged.he lost 2 journeymen but he got caught with some bombs from those guys.ali didnt have a bomb in his arsenal

i debate logically.im not calling anybody the klits beat world beaters,but they are a serious matchup problem for anybody.you have guys comparing them to 6'2 and 6'3 fat guys.thats not logical.

if i were to rank heavys by letter i woud say there were only 7 or 8 A level guys in heavy history.everybody else is B and C

[GJC]

the look on his face when shavers started throwing bombs his way is priceless.

Really funny considering how feather fisted Shavers was when compared with Puritty etc.
Also take a look at Lyle getting up against Shavers and tell me he was very chinny

[GJC]

i didnt say ali beating them is out the scope of possibility.i think he could out point the klits,

You don't think he could KO iron jawed Wlad?
You don't think he could cut Vitali?

i debate logically.im not calling anybody the klits beat world beaters,but they are a serious matchup problem for anybody.

The Klits or their opponents? Vitali is a good fighter but when I see the likes of Chagaev made out to be a world beater to beef up Wlad's record I do despair. Wlad I don't rate too highly but unfortunately there arn't any fighters around to test him

if i were to rank heavys by letter i woud say there were only 7 or 8 A level guys in heavy history.everybody else is B and C

I wouldn't argue with that, Lewis is A or pretty near it, the Rahman and McCall losses do give me doubts.
But unfortunately for the Klit'z beating F grade fighters no matter how many of them you beat can't project you to being an A level fighter.

[EzzardFan]

and you think norton would want to try and run in on wlad?

Personally I think Norton would run rings round him. The only reason Wlad's punch looks impressive (to you) is because it hits a lot of glass. Norton wouldn't need his guard to fight something as slow and lumbering as Wlad. He'd have more chance of getting hit by a passing glacier.

if george was in great shape he wouldnt have gassed out in 6 rounds.

Try hitting a punchbag (or in your case a paperbag) non-stop for 6 rounds as hard and fast as you can. My guess is you're gassed in 60secs or less. There was nothing wrong with George's cardio, he just got duped into punching himself out instead of pacing himself. As far as stamina goes what he accomplished is very impressive.

[Sugarj]

I dont think the point of 'reach' has been made yet. Ali had 82 inches which sits very well amongst the current crop of oversized heavyweights. With his speed he would surely out jab the likes of the Klitschkos.

I guess there has to be a point at which size and weight does become an advantage. Or there would be a greater number of light heavyweights/cruiserweights that make the step up to heavyweight successfully.

I dont think we have yet found a fighter who I think would have defeated peak Ali though. Peak versions of Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe and Lewis would surely give him difficult fights. But I like to think that when I do see a heavyweight that would probably beat Ali..............and we eventually will at some point, I'll be honest enough and not too pig headed to admit it!!

[r.burgundy]

You don't think he could KO iron jawed Wlad?
You don't think he could cut Vitali?

The Klits or their opponents? Vitali is a good fighter but when I see the likes of Chagaev made out to be a world beater to beef up Wlad's record I do despair. Wlad I don't rate too highly but unfortunately there arn't any fighters around to test him

I wouldn't argue with that, Lewis is A or pretty near it, the Rahman and McCall losses do give me doubts.
But unfortunately for the Klit'z beating F grade fighters no matter how many of them you beat can't project you to being an A level fighter.

well,if we agree that ther have been only 7 or 8 A fighters in heavy history then we can also agree that outta so called great fighters or contenders from the golden era are B and C level fighters.with that being said,all of these A guys have lost to lesser opposition,but that shouldnt cloud judgement on how they would perform against 1 another.for instance,i rate ali,and foreman as the A guys of the 70's.they both lost to B nnd C guys in norton and young.were most of these debates take a turn for this worse is when guys act like C guys from that time were better than C guys from this time.i think thats completly false