Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Least Skilled ATG?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If you stuck say frazier or liston into marciano's era they would have been undefeated too, if you stuck marciano into the golden era of the late 60s/early 70's he'd have at least a couple of losses. You can't say somebody is the best unless they have beaten the best ... to take a modern example look at Bute, people were saying he could be the best after him beating a bunch of lesser fighters, but the minute he came up against somebody who'd been hanging with a much higher calibre eg froch (or say an ali/frazier) he took a loss.

    taking the beaten the best philosophy to the heavyweights its pretty clear who has the ATG record and thats Ali.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Scott9945 View Post
      It wasn't my question to begin with. I just felt the response to it was totally evasive. But this forum is largely based on speculation to begin with, so it was a legit question here.
      I don't think to ask under what circumstances and who someone lost against is being vague. It's in how you lose and who you lost to. Talk about being evasive. At least give me a name and a result...

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Mintcar923 View Post
        I don't think to ask under what circumstances and who someone lost against is being vague. It's in how you lose and who you lost to. Talk about being evasive. At least give me a name and a result...
        Ok, fine. I'll give you two scenarios. He loses the La Starza decision. Or Walcott goes the distance and wins the fight, then loses by 1st round KO in the rematch. With either of those losses, can he be considered the #1 heavyweight all time by any reasonable standards?

        Comment


        • I'd have to go with foreman on this one. for a boxer to be an ATG, and not be skilled, he'd have to have some extraordinary natural ability and foreman had that in his power.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Scott9945 View Post
            Ok, fine. I'll give you two scenarios. He loses the La Starza decision. Or Walcott goes the distance and wins the fight, then loses by 1st round KO in the rematch. With either of those losses, can he be considered the #1 heavyweight all time by any reasonable standards?
            I don't think he'd be considered the GOAT but he'd still rate quite high. Then again, had Ali been kayoed by Cooper and lost Frazier III I'm sure he wouldn't be as highly regarded as he is.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by House of Stone View Post
              If you stuck say frazier or liston into marciano's era they would have been undefeated too, if you stuck marciano into the golden era of the late 60s/early 70's he'd have at least a couple of losses. You can't say somebody is the best unless they have beaten the best ... to take a modern example look at Bute, people were saying he could be the best after him beating a bunch of lesser fighters, but the minute he came up against somebody who'd been hanging with a much higher calibre eg froch (or say an ali/frazier) he took a loss.

              taking the beaten the best philosophy to the heavyweights its pretty clear who has the ATG record and thats Ali.
              Yeah Ali, but I still give Louis a slight edge ahead of Ali, for his 25 title defenses.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by AntonTheMedium View Post
                I'd have to go with foreman on this one. for a boxer to be an ATG, and not be skilled, he'd have to have some extraordinary natural ability and foreman had that in his power.
                he threw wrinkles into his game during his comeback, though

                but the key to winning was still the fact that his power could still change fights(and he could take a lot of punishment in his comeback.)

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Anthony342 View Post
                  Yeah Ali, but I still give Louis a slight edge ahead of Ali, for his 25 title defenses.
                  What about 3-time champ Lennox Lewis? The '90's were arguably the 2nd strongest era behind the '70's and the man who clearly dominated it was Lennox. How would he match up with Louis and why does he not get more respect than he does??

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mintcar923 View Post
                    What about 3-time champ Lennox Lewis? The '90's were arguably the 2nd strongest era behind the '70's and the man who clearly dominated it was Lennox. How would he match up with Louis and why does he not get more respect than he does??
                    Getting KTFO by two journeymen in his prime doesn't exactly help his cause.

                    Poet

                    Comment


                    • No offense Oliver, but Lennox was only knocked down in the McCall fight. The WBC ref stopped it when Lennox was on his feet with his hands up. The Rahman win was just a lucky punch pure and simple. Both losses were more than avenged and there wasn't a pro opponent he ever failed to beat.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP