why mohamaad ali considered as the best ?

[billeau2]

I don't have to say he cherry picked anyone...however break down his 60's era,and then you will see how I can easily break down Hascups blueprint of Ali.



Using statistics as hascup did,yes Ali ranks high percentage wise but that counts little with ther actual relevance of the quality of the Resume,i see guys like Lewis and Wlad over him ,exclude the quality of the time frame then ali looks to be number one,but that's not realistic.


Example...Ali never defeated a prime Frazier in 71 it can be argued he slowed while Ali remained fairly strong and mobile in the rematches.All fighters he fought were decent but really how good were they at the time he fought them?questionable Norton fights and the cooper incident,a win is a win so I cant really count questionable circumstances since we are going by resumes.


Ali beat ONE undefeated prime guy his entire career and that was Foreman,who I do consider overatted not statistically but skillfully these are not included in hascups breakdowns,losing to J.young and retiring after that fight,hurts alis standings.

What about Liston?

[billeau2]

Alis best prime guys he fought in his prime was chuvalo who when ali fought him,heChuvalo was 34 and 14,and didn't fight really anyone worth of note and win.Patterson was not a real Hw any way you look at it if we are playing the number statistics that includes everything.

Heavyweights can be prime, or just past prime in their early thirties...just something to keep in mind. many people think Vlad is just hitting his stride.

[billeau2]

Alis best prime guys he fought in his prime was chuvalo who when ali fought him,heChuvalo was 34 and 14,and didn't fight really anyone worth of note and win.Patterson was not a real Hw any way you look at it if we are playing the number statistics that includes everything.

Heavyweights can be prime, or just past prime in their early thirties...just something to keep in mind. many people think Vlad is just hitting his stride. many people think Vlad is just hitting his stride. There was no indication that Ali fought guys past it...the battles with Frazier should tell anyone that Frazier was not past it. Patterson was past it but Ali does not need this win to prove anything.

[jiopsi]

Nostalgia, he's not the best ever, you could make the case as the greatest ever with his "on paper" resume and "three times" World Champion. Best ever is Tyson, quite comfortably.

With football analogy that would be Pele and Messi. Pele with his "3 World Cup's", one in which he played 1 and half matches, and 0 in which he was the actual best player of Brazilian team. And "over 1000 goals", which 40% were in friendlies and 50% against regional competition. Messi is clearly not only the better goal scorer, but a better passer and dribbler, a better overall player, 9 years already in top of the World.

[juggernaut666]

What about Liston?

Liston was far from his prime with so much contraversy involved its an x to me.Liston is not remotley Wlad he had clearly slowed ,flat footed and punches you saw a mile away,fighters of yesterday past eras then simply did not age as slow one can even see this with Ali there is no comparison of a 220 Ali to a 240 Wlad at age 30 plus.Fraziers take multiple hits to land one style clearly did not benefit him 3 years later in a rematch,one because his style and two Ali started sitting down on his punches and enjoyed the outside style and became more accurate in the process ,three Frazier was not a one punch,k.o fighter so this would further give Ali another edge with his bigger frame gave him more durability .I dont really consider Ali of the 60's all around that great outside hand speed but he was 210 and overall he looked great when facing weak opposition and good against competitive ones ,the years 71 to 75 for me is when he put everything together the best for me ,some like his foot work more but i'll take the actual offensive ability of the 70's with decent foot work over it.

Wlad has not taken much punishment in his career and is an athlete year round and a perfect specimen at age 40 theres no one ever other than Lewis or Vitali that looked remotley close in looks and abilities at HW.Guys in the 60's at 30 would certainly be past there primes it was considered the end point of your career as time moved on fighters got better with age and lasted longer ,you can see this in almost any sport ,30's became the 20's.

[juggernaut666]

There was no comparison between Ron Lyle and Leapai if you saw them both fight. Two entirely different levels that record stats don't show.

When Frazier fought Bonavena he had been pro for just a year. In a rematch he won decisively and was never in trouble. Frazier was so much faster than Leapai it's ridiculous. He'd go through him like a hot knife through butter.

This has drifted way off topic so that's all from me for the Frazier/Leapai debate.

We are talking about records ? The video is a plus ,you had mentioned my Leapai /Frazier match up as though he is walk thru ,the vid says otherwise !

[AddiX]

I don't have to say he cherry picked anyone...however break down his 60's era,and then you will see how I can easily break down Hascups blueprint of Ali.



Using statistics as hascup did,yes Ali ranks high percentage wise but that counts little with ther actual relevance of the quality of the Resume,i see guys like Lewis and Wlad over him ,exclude the quality of the time frame then ali looks to be number one,but that's not realistic.


Example...Ali never defeated a prime Frazier in 71 it can be argued he slowed while Ali remained fairly strong and mobile in the rematches.All fighters he fought were decent but really how good were they at the time he fought them?questionable Norton fights and the cooper incident,a win is a win so I cant really count questionable circumstances since we are going by resumes.

.

This is nuts to me. Trying to make it sound like Ali didn't fight greats. This is from hascaps post.

Ali beat Foreman, Frazier 2 out of 3 times, Liston twice, Norton 2 out of 3 times, Patterson twice, Quarry twice, Bonavena, Ellis, Folley, Terrell, Chuvalo twice, Lyle & Shavers. I can go on, BUT I think you know what I mean.

Over half the list is in the HOF.

His resume is as full proof as it gets IMO. And honestly, of you like Wlad that's cool, but I dunno how you can say with a straight face you out him over Ali in any category.

[juggernaut666]

This is nuts to me. Trying to make it sound like Ali didn't fight greats. This is from hascaps post.



Over half the list is in the HOF.

His resume is as full proof as it gets IMO. And honestly, of you like Wlad that's cool, but I dunno how you can say with a straight face you out him over Ali in any category.

Ali fought average guys who were not great fighters in the 60's,they were good for their time period,how good were they with others?not that good in reality ...the 70's changed and so did the level of fighters,he has good wins there.Wlad or Vitali would have a field day in any era,the slower footed 70's fighters would almost be like feeding time for them.Do you really think the 6'3 220 foreman is going to be scarier than the athletic technical 6'7 240/250 pound giants because if so ,I would say im the one whos not crazy.


HOF is not a skill.

[Scott9945]

Your wrong to claim, "Frazier won decisively and was never in trouble".. i have that particular fight and the way it went was: Frazier winning the first 9 rounds fairly convincingly. Bonavena then started his charge from rounds 10-15. Ringo's pressure was incredible and Frazier was badly staggered in the final round, with the final bell being a god-send`for Frazier"....a truly great fight.

This Youtube clip indicates otherwise. Especially about Frazier being "badly staggered in the final round". You may want to refresh your memory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taLgLVjqrZs

[SBleeder]

Nostalgia, he's not the best ever, you could make the case as the greatest ever with his "on paper" resume and "three times" World Champion. Best ever is Tyson, quite comfortably.