Greatest heavyweight ever...realistically?

[bojangles1987]

so you've got no evidence to the contrary, but we're supposed to believe you over a published author and boxing historian?


the "i was wrong, goodbye," line would be your best bet.

"I have no evidence, I have no knowledge, but I know I'm right."

He should be Pope or something.

[New England]

I don't even post in the lounge. Maybe 1-2 times then forgot. Are you on drugs?

again, you joined last month, and have two pictures of justin bieber as your profile. your name is "total stud."

you're an alt.

[////]

so you've got no evidence to the contrary, but we're supposed to believe you over a published author and boxing historian?


the "i was wrong, goodbye," line would be your best bet.

A PUBLISHED AUTHOR you say??!?!?

What you posted wouldn't qualify as evidence under any definition of evidence I'm familiar with.

It doesn't seem like there would be any falsifiable methodology to count the total number of boxers in the world with varying licensing standards country to country and decade to decade -- he just needs to sell books.

If you find a serious source rather than a guy pumping his book and dropping a statistic neither you nor I actually believe I'd be interested. I would actually be interested in comparing the real numbers of fighters over the years.

[shinobi108]

Ali would have seriously struggled with the Klitschkos and Lennox Lewis. The Klitschkos(particularly Wlad) would have struggled with Frazier/Tyson. Lennox stylewise is possibly the greatest heavyweight ever as I can see him beating the biggest variety of styles, however I think the Klitschkos could beat him based on styles. Tyson, Dempsey, Marciano etc are not even worth mentioning because theres too many styles that could demolish them

[////]

"I have no evidence, I have no knowledge, but I know I'm right."

He should be Pope or something.

Do you honestly seriously believe that the number of boxers in New York City in the 1920s (population about 5 million) was greater than that of the entire world today (population over 7 billion)? This would be despite massive exponential growth in financial incentive and exposure via global television. It's also a claim being made despite it being virtually impossible to number total global licensed boxers (ie it's made up).

Or more plainly: That's a population increase of 140,000%.

I get that you're trying to pat your forum buddy on the back but a yes/no answer is preferred here. Do you really actually believe that. When you jump in you inherit their dumb argument by proxy.

[Boxing Goat]

Please show me a heavyweight with a greater skill set.

Max Schmelling? I'm just joking but seriously, Louis was great for his time but he would not be a champion anytime past Ali's era.

[Elroy1]

Ali would have seriously struggled with the Klitschkos and Lennox Lewis. The Klitschkos(particularly Wlad) would have struggled with Frazier/Tyson. Lennox stylewise is possibly the greatest heavyweight ever as I can see him beating the biggest variety of styles, however I think the Klitschkos could beat him based on styles. Tyson, Dempsey, Marciano etc are not even worth mentioning because theres too many styles that could demolish them

Finally a relevant post.

Except you underrate Tyson, and godify Frazier tsk tsk tsk.

Frazier would be a first round KO for both Klitschko's with no exceptions. They have never faced a weaker opponent than Frazier which I have seen.

I agree however that Tyson might have them, especially Wladimir if he lets Tyson in. Then again Wladimir would be the most difficult for Tyson to get in on.

And later you underrate Tyson further by lumping him in with Dempsey and MArciano. Come on, that was a low blow even for a Tyson detractor.

On the contrary there are not many HW's that could beat a great version of Tyson who was very effective against ANY style.

[Elroy1]

Do you honestly seriously believe that the number of boxers in New York City in the 1920s (population about 5 million) was greater than that of the entire world today (population over 7 billion)? This would be despite massive exponential growth in financial incentive and exposure via global television. It's also a claim being made despite it being virtually impossible to number total global licensed boxers (ie it's made up).

Or more plainly: That's a population increase of 140,000%.

I get that you're trying to pat your forum buddy on the back but a yes/no answer is preferred here. Do you really actually believe that. When you jump in you inherit their dumb argument by proxy.

Although I am sickened by your Justin Bieber display, the poster you replied to here is somewhat of a simpleton.

The talent pool of boxing today is the largest it's ever been.

The popularisation of boxing through the health industry and the globalisation of boxing and the total increase in population cite this.

[Elroy1]

Max Schmelling? I'm just joking but seriously, Louis was great for his time but he would not be a champion anytime past Ali's era.

Exactly right GOAT.

Of course the entire retirement village will be on your case now for that outburst

[joeandthebums]

Max Schmelling? I'm just joking but seriously, Louis was great for his time but he would not be a champion anytime past Ali's era.

You meant Max Baer?

So all post-Ali champions had a better skill set then Louis?