Would the klitchko's last in the 70s?

[led]

This thread is very interesting one.

[Schmerzen]

I complain about "opinions based on YouTube snippets" and as an answer you post a 2 minute YouTube snippet.

And Ali's windmakers were useless in this fight, too. Liston retired because of a broken shoulder not because of "explosive combos".

after u said ali cant throw combos, i quickly disproved your laughable claim by posting a video of him successfully landing a 7 punch combo within 2 seconds.
u can clearly see the punches liston took were very powerful.
yet u close your eyes and just continue to display your ignorance as usual.

The judges had no clue how to score Ali's disgusting running away and they scored it 56-58, 58-56 and 57-57. In my view Ali lost every round before Liston retired.

either u have no clue about how to score a fight, or u r just here to troll.
imo u made it clear with that comment that u r a big troll, who is doing nothing but trolling 24/7 in 15 different internet forums.
why dont u do everyone a favor & crawl back to the rat hole u came from, i bet your friends there r missing u already.
they probably cant wait to hear your delusional views on the past heavyweight champions.
i am done arguing with u, this picture says it all though:



good night

[Steak]

Look, technically it's correct that Holmes started in the 1970ies (just like Wlad started in the 90s), although he is generally (and by me) considered an 80s great. If this definition issue ("Holmes is 70s fighter vs Holmes is 80s fighter") is your only problem then, yes, Holmes and Foreman are the only 2 exceptions.


Holmes would do rather well, but he would get schooled by the Klitschkos nevertheless. Norton, who not even once won the world title, would be far less competitive than Holmes.


Not bigger. HEAVIER. But there are always some heavy guys who have weak chins, of course.


Don't try to argue against the obvious. A featherweight will hardly KO a heavyweight. That's a no-brainer. Not even a bummy heavyweight.

WEIGHT MATTERS. That's why there are WEIGHT divisions. And that's why Evan Fields' KOratio decrease with the weight of his opponents (see my post above). There is no arguing around that fact.

Of course if you are outweighed only a little and if you yourself are a quality fighter and if your opponent is not a quality fighter you can still KO him. But it gets harder and harder.

This not only applies to featherfists like The Clay or Evan Fields. Even Vitali Klitschko couldn't KO some of his above-average-weighing guys: Johnson, Hoffmann, Briggs, Lewis.


Valuev does not hit harder than Tyson. I didn't say that the punch power increases with weight. But Valuev wasn't KOed unlike Tyson. That's my whole point: The punch resistance increases.


You are again singling out fights. You can not deduct anything from single fights. It's the whole record/resume. Otherwise you could take a 1-60 bum (= 1 win and 60 losses) and then deduct things from this one win.

Moreover the fight went the distance. Spare me knockdowns as some kind of power proof. Especially at heavyweight KDs can happen without any further meaning.

Holmes, Ali, Foreman, and Norton would all do well in todays division. glad we got that straightened out.

being heavier does not = having a better chin when you already are large to begin with. as evidence by heavier fighters with worse chins than much lighter ones.
being heavier does not = having more KO power. as evidence by heavier fighters not punching as hard as much lighter ones.
being 190lbs does not magically make you a weak puncher or have a bad chin.

Evander Holyfield was not a weak puncher, as evidence by the fact that him before 40 KOed quite a few HWs, as well as dropped Mercer when Lewis couldnt drop him with multiple flush shots.

Im done here. Ive given you multiple examples as to how good the 70s were(such as two of their fighters ending up doing well in the 90s despite being old and way past their best), and if youre not going to respect them at this point, you never will.

[hweightblogger]

after u said ali cant throw combos

Don't lie. I didn't say that. ANYONE can throw combos. I merely stated that Ali's combos were wind makers ("Air wars").

i quickly disproved your laughable claim by posting a video of him successfully landing a 7 punch combo within 2 seconds. Yup,
u can clearly see the punches liston took were very powerful.

Sorry, don't see any power behind them. This is confirmed by Shavers (see my post above), by Ali's whole record and by the outcome of the fight itself.

You are seeing something that isn't there.

why dont u do everyone a favor & crawl back to the rat hole u came from, i bet your friends there r missing u already.
they probably cant wait to hear your delusional views on the past heavyweight champions.

Thank you for supplying me a new quote for my "Typical AliFans behaviour section"

i am done arguing with u, this picture says it all though:



good night

Singling out fights again?

And what has this 180+ lbs guy (40-14 bum Cooper) to do with anything? I already posted that The Clay's KOratio against sub-200 opponents was good.

[cupocity303]

I generally agree with the notion that single division fighters can get underrated in comparison to weight climbers, especially with day before weigh-ins which has got weight-classes partially porous, if thats what you were getting at?

Underrated, Yes, but not quite.

Yes one weight fighters's legacies are largely judged by amount of title defenses. Because if you look at any of their resumes, you can nitpick at the quality of their opposition (I.E. this guy was great but too small, this guy was great but past prime, this guy was young but a never-was nobody).

This happens because it's hard for two fighters to build up their resume while fighting at the same class, at the same time. Therefore you can overlook the fact that The Champion just might've beaten a potentially great fighter - One who just doesn't have the Record/Resume to prove it.

That fighter either gives The Champ fits or gets dominated or brutally Ko'd. IF he were considered great (which again is based on his established resume), The Champ struggling against him and winning or The Champ Ko'ing him would be a boost to his resume. But because it was just another Contender amongst the bunch, the win gets overlooked. Especially if that fighter never goes on to accomplish anything else.

I.E. Eddie Chambers just in this era - a solid defense, great technical ability poor-man's James Toney. Got Ko'd but will probably end up beating some more contenders.

Or if we dig into the past, plenty of articles on Great fighters who never became Champs. At least they got the benefit of doubt and the writers called them "Great" because of the era they fought in. Chamber of course would never get this type of treatment, because again, there is a Historical Bias in play here.

Bums of the past >>>> then Present Bums.

B level fighters of past >>> Current B level.

Therefore A-Level of past must be >>>> Current A-Level, because they beat the better amount of Bums & B-Level guys, than today's A-Level fighter did.

So it is assume automatically, without any basis to back it up whatsoever.

[cupocity303]

And what has this 180+ lbs guy (40-14 bum Cooper) to do with anything? I already posted that The Clay's KOratio against sub-200 opponents was good.

Speaking of Cooper, didn't he put Ali on his ass?

I agree with your stance on Ali's style of throwing, you just didn't phrase it quite right perhaps.

Ali had a few fights where he was in Rare Top form and displayed the total package. Just before retiring, he fought a guy (who's name I don't remember) where he displayed it all, the shuffle, the combos, "what's my name, what's my name". He seemed to have had Manny Pacquiao stamina, to throw 1000 punches in the fight.

But that's not what we usually got out of him. The usual would be him floating around for 14 to 15 rounds, throwing one jab at a time. When he did throw fast combos, he didn't do it with a completely closed fist. He landed those with the inside of his glove, I.E. kind of what Joe Calzaghe does, but not as bad, where I can call it slapping.

[Joeyzagz]

You're nothing if not entertaining. You mentioned Jack Johnson, who had two KO losses early in his career. But since he was pre prime, no one counts them. Tyson loses to a 43 to 1 underdog at 23 years old, but people like to say that he was past his "true prime." The same people like to bring up a more than 12 year old loss to discredit Wlad. You then forgive any losses that happen post 35.

My point is there are many boxers who have fought several years past their prime and dont have as many total KO losses as Wlad has now. He is already behind the 8 ball and will be absolutely phucked if he gets laid out again.

And Ive ALWAYS maintained that Tyson has to accept responsibility for the L he took against Buster. He was as PRIME as a human being can get at 23 years old. No excuses whatsoever.

[Joeyzagz]

Its no shock that Ali, Wlad and Joe Louis's toughest KO wins were against the smallest opponents.

-Pesky Bert Cooper
-Pesky Billy Conn
-Pesky Byrd/Chambers

Meanwhile Big George Foreman, Big Tony Galento and Big Ray Austin go down from just a few flurries. I give credit to Ali for fighting men who were physically fit, while the Klitschkos prey on fat-asses dying of obesity.

[bojangles1987]

Definitely. They wouldn't be half as dominant as they are now but people are fooling themselves if they don't think the Klitschkos are winning some belts and making life hell for most heavyweights then.

[hweightblogger]

Speaking of Cooper, didn't he put Ali on his ass?

On his ass is an understatement.

First Ali insulted Cooper ("a tramp, a bum and a cripple") and then gets viciously knocked down (first fight). Wobbly makes it to his corner where he needs to get revived by smelling salts. It's unclear whether smelling salts were actually illegal there and then (UK 1963)

Cooper to this very day claims that Ali's corner delayed the break to 2 or 3 minutes.