Ali vs. Louis- Tale Of The Tape (Comparisons)

[butterfly1964]

butterfly is getting emotional lol. Im gonna own you again if you dont mind.

You just said Ali wasn't in his prime because he didn't fight for a few years. That's called not training. Tyson didn't train for the Douglass fight as he rather had a party in Japan the day before lol. 3 years not training or months not training, its still not prime. Mike Tyson was never the same fighter after the Bruno fight unlike Ali beating Frazier, Foreman, (NOT Norton), and some other great fighters after prison, plus he TRAINED!! That's not prime? Lewis was a diffirent fighter in his younger days but he was a much better fighter in the end of his career. Is he not in his prime then?

You have said Louis can't beat bigger guys, but he could beat up little white guys? Do i remember correctly butterfly? hehe.
It doesn't matter he never faced a bigger dancing fighter like Ali because the little guys he fought were quicker than him and he still got them. He destroyed most of them so how could he not catch Ali?

Joe Louis UD15 after giving Ali a verocious beating throughout the whole fight PERIOD.

listen, when you are not in your prime, it means that you cannot get back to the way you were before. tyson was only 23, so if he trained and if kevin rooney came back at that time, he would have been the same way he was when he was 20. ali didn't fight in nearly 4 years, and he lost speed he would never get back. he could never be the same again, so he was not in his prime.

again, find a post that i said louis didn't or couldn't beat bigger guys? you can't, all i said is that louis couldn't beat big guy who moved very fast. sure he could beat little guys who were fast, and he could beat slow, big guys, but could he beat a combination of a guy who is big and fast such as ali, or even holmes and tyson? nope, he sure couldn't. get your facts straight. and you say he could catch ali? and if he did you know what would happen? ali would laugh in his face, cause he has a granite chin. the bums louis fought had terrible chins. no way ali could be hurt, cause ali would only be hit a little bit, and that wouldn't be enough for louis to ko ali. however, ali would dazzle and confuse louis throughout the fight, and stop him in the middle rounds with ease.

[hellfire508]

Nah, i can also just say ****** things like
Joe Louis KO1 hellfire508's mama

Of course he would. My mum never boxed, is a woman, and is getting on in years. On the other hand, Tyson is regarded by his nuthuggers as the greatest - and Louis would clean his dial.

[hellfire508]

LondonRingRules - Langford had amazing longetivity, and consistantly fought the best of his era, and reguarly won. It was an amazing feat, especially considering he was fighting guys well out of his prime weight. But if you read my post on the previous page - I still don't believe it matches Ali's LEVEL of competition. Langford fought them alot more, but I feel Ali fought alot better. But - neither of us are going to change each other's minds...so it doesn't matter.

Yaman - Ali didn't go to prison. He was exiled. Also - he beat Norton convincingly in the second fight, so why deny it? And if you watched Ali in his early career - you would know his skills were not what they once were in his second career. The fact of the matter is - Ali had been exiled, and lost three and a half years of his prime. Tyson had fought seven months before his lost to Douglas, and was coming of three of the most impressive victories of his career - especially his first round KO of Michael Spinks, only about 18 months prior to Tokyo. Tyson was primed - but he just didn't take the fight seriously.

[LondonRingRules]

=========- I still don't believe it matches Ali's LEVEL of competition.=============

** I agree that Frazier and Foreman in their primes were better than anyone in Sam's era. However, it was like Sam had a smorgasborg of HOF fighters in the ring every month, plus he had a storied heavy and overrated great JJohnson ducking Sam for the entire time he held the title. Put it all together, and honestly, Sam was on another planet. Ali could never have maintained that kind of schedule. Nobody but Sam could.

[LS-Injection]

Whatya going on about hellfire508…?

[Brassangel]

Ali lost three years from his prime. It's not the same as Tyson's failure to take boxing seriously. Ali trained during his off years, but it's not true training, because there were no fights. Also, he spent lots of time with family and the worthless NoI which distracted him from proper training. Nothing prepares a fighter for a fight better than a fight. In fact, Tyson was at his best when he was fighting frequently. Without frequent bouts, he lost focus, fired his (good) corner, and flushed his career down the toilet.

What separates their conditions? Ali bounced back from three years off. While his footwork slowed, he still had fast hands and the ability to feel out his opponents. Tyson failed to bounce back from a one year, downward spiral of events. Even so, he had a chance to set up a rematch or even fight Holyfield. Had Douglas stayed in top condition, and Tyson focused, that may have made for a great trilogy. Instead, Tyson makes mistakes outside of the ring and he too, has to take a few years off. Given another chance to reclaim greatness, he still failed to prepare and looked rediculous against Holyfield.

Ali bounced back successfully.
Tyson didn't.
In a style matchup, I think that both Ali and Tyson would beat Joe Louis. Ali would do it by decision, and very convincingly. Joe's only hope would be in fight number one. The element of surprise is the only way to catch him (a la Bonavena). Different angles, awkward approaches, and fast hands are the only ways to put decent pressure on Ali. I don't believe that Louis could do all of these things like Frazier, Bonavena, or even Tyson could. Ali wins by decision in fight one; he stops Louis in 9 during fight two.

[DaddysBoy]

Ali lost three years from his prime. It's not the same as Tyson's failure to take boxing seriously. Ali trained during his off years, but it's not true training, because there were no fights. Also, he spent lots of time with family and the worthless NoI which distracted him from proper training. Nothing prepares a fighter for a fight better than a fight. In fact, Tyson was at his best when he was fighting frequently. Without frequent bouts, he lost focus, fired his (good) corner, and flushed his career down the toilet.

What separates their conditions? Ali bounced back from three years off. While his footwork slowed, he still had fast hands and the ability to feel out his opponents. Tyson failed to bounce back from a one year, downward spiral of events. Even so, he had a chance to set up a rematch or even fight Holyfield. Had Douglas stayed in top condition, and Tyson focused, that may have made for a great trilogy. Instead, Tyson makes mistakes outside of the ring and he too, has to take a few years off. Given another chance to reclaim greatness, he still failed to prepare and looked rediculous against Holyfield.

Ali bounced back successfully.
Tyson didn't.
In a style matchup, I think that both Ali and Tyson would beat Joe Louis. Ali would do it by decision, and very convincingly. Joe's only hope would be in fight number one. The element of surprise is the only way to catch him (a la Bonavena). Different angles, awkward approaches, and fast hands are the only ways to put decent pressure on Ali. I don't believe that Louis could do all of these things like Frazier, Bonavena, or even Tyson could. Ali wins by decision in fight one; he stops Louis in 9 during fight two.

Tyson would have his ass handed to him by both Louis and Ali. He was a fake punk and would be in for a severe beating. Both Louis and Ali was more skilled with better stamina and more heart.

I think Ali of the 60s decisions Louis, and that the Ali of the 70s gets tkoed.

[Brassangel]

Tyson was a fake? Hmm. While I'm not a Tyson nuthugger who will stand here and claim he was the greatest, only a fool makes a statement like, "..he was a fake." Especially when followed up by ignorant comments that have no backing, or observational data.

Boy, the Tyson haters are more rediculous than the Tyson huggers.

Ali was smarter in the 70's than he was in the 60's. He wasn't as fluid, but let's be realistic: he still had speed. He looked as good in 1974 against George Foreman as he looked in any fight. That was pretty much the last time he looked that good, however. Ali in 1967, and 1974 beats Louis handily. Any other time, it's up for grabs.

[butterfly1964]

Tyson was a fake? Hmm. While I'm not a Tyson nuthugger who will stand here and claim he was the greatest, only a fool makes a statement like, "..he was a fake." Especially when followed up by ignorant comments that have no backing, or observational data.

Boy, the Tyson haters are more rediculous than the Tyson huggers.

Ali was smarter in the 70's than he was in the 60's. He wasn't as fluid, but let's be realistic: he still had speed. He looked as good in 1974 against George Foreman as he looked in any fight. That was pretty much the last time he looked that good, however. Ali in 1967, and 1974 beats Louis handily. Any other time, it's up for grabs.

i think it's slightly possible for '41 louis to beat '74 ali, louis does have a pretty good chance. but against '67 ali, it would be no contest.

[Brassangel]

Just because Ali hit his peak in 1967 doesn't mean that he would be unbeatable. Any fighter could have been beaten by something as silly as a style matchup. He still breathes air, so he didn't have unlimited stamina; he still moved on two legs, so he wasn't too fast for everybody; he still swung with hands, so he could still miss or be counterpunched.

He was an amazing fighter in 1967, but he didn't get a chance to prove his greatness at that time of his career because it was over in a flash. One could assume all he/she wants to, but it's still just speculation.