Tweet
I can tell you: Sheer dominance. There is hardly any round they convincingly LOSE. Something that cannot be claimed about Ali.
You have reached the pre-last step of your Ali-delusion:
You are so predictable.
No, those ARE actual performances by Vitali and they push down his record, of course. Everything else would be revisionism.
I already answered it: Wlad was KOed by Sanders in his 45th heavyweight fight. Ali hasn't even faced so many heavyweight opponents. Approx 50% of Ali's fights were against cruisers or Ali himself being a cruiser. Ali has had 32 real heavyweight fights (both opponents 200+ lbs). Ali's opponents (whole career) were median 205lbs. IN OTHER WORDS: Ali's MEDIAN OPPONENTS are LIGHTER THAN WLAD's LIGHTEST opponent. 34 of Ali's opponents are LIGHTER than Wlad's LIGHTEST opponent. Only 1 of Ali's opponents was heavier than Wlad's AVERAGE opponent (fatty Mathis).
OF COURSE Ali got KOed LESS with such little and such light opponents. That's a no-brainer. Shows you again what a crap the 70ies heavyweight division was.
Insane Laughter will be the only thing you will have left. Facts tend to creep in.
Because they, too, make no heavyweight toplists, but p4p toplists that include Ali's cruiser wins. That's why they have Langford and others in their top 10 who don't belong there. And that's why Marvin Hart is above Foreman. Moreover they value a 0-0 fighter (= his first fight) as basically worthless (= a win over Vitali Klitschko in his first fight would be worthless). I value the whole career record.
Please also note that right now Wlad (1578) would be at #2 (directly behind Ali, 2119) in their toplist (as far as I understand their point system). And Wlad is still active.
Moreover boxrec makes a record toplist, while threads in forums are usually "Who beats Who" topics. In other words: On the "Military ATG toplist" Genghis Khan could be #1 (since he invented new forms of attack, instant soup and written language) while he would have no chance against Ronald Reagan in a real world clash.
You have reached the pre-last step of your Ali-delusion:
You are so predictable.
No, those ARE actual performances by Vitali and they push down his record, of course. Everything else would be revisionism.
I already answered it: Wlad was KOed by Sanders in his 45th heavyweight fight. Ali hasn't even faced so many heavyweight opponents. Approx 50% of Ali's fights were against cruisers or Ali himself being a cruiser. Ali has had 32 real heavyweight fights (both opponents 200+ lbs). Ali's opponents (whole career) were median 205lbs. IN OTHER WORDS: Ali's MEDIAN OPPONENTS are LIGHTER THAN WLAD's LIGHTEST opponent. 34 of Ali's opponents are LIGHTER than Wlad's LIGHTEST opponent. Only 1 of Ali's opponents was heavier than Wlad's AVERAGE opponent (fatty Mathis).
OF COURSE Ali got KOed LESS with such little and such light opponents. That's a no-brainer. Shows you again what a crap the 70ies heavyweight division was.
Insane Laughter will be the only thing you will have left. Facts tend to creep in.
Because they, too, make no heavyweight toplists, but p4p toplists that include Ali's cruiser wins. That's why they have Langford and others in their top 10 who don't belong there. And that's why Marvin Hart is above Foreman. Moreover they value a 0-0 fighter (= his first fight) as basically worthless (= a win over Vitali Klitschko in his first fight would be worthless). I value the whole career record.
Please also note that right now Wlad (1578) would be at #2 (directly behind Ali, 2119) in their toplist (as far as I understand their point system). And Wlad is still active.
Moreover boxrec makes a record toplist, while threads in forums are usually "Who beats Who" topics. In other words: On the "Military ATG toplist" Genghis Khan could be #1 (since he invented new forms of attack, instant soup and written language) while he would have no chance against Ronald Reagan in a real world clash.
Comment