WAS Muhammad Ali truly the greatest of all time?

Is time over?

SMJO wrote:

Is time over?

Basically, boxing is past its glory days.

Of course Ali's prime would have been 68-70. Precisely the years where he was effectively banned from boxing. Because Americans hated him. Until they didn't. In any case, its hard to say how great he was when he we never saw him fight at his peak. He was totally dominant around 66-67. But also didn't fight anyone that great either. Still, I think its agreed on that the Ali of the mid to late 60s was a better version of Ali than the one who fought Frazier in their first epic fight.

Vitali Klitschko would have beaten any of those 60's and 70's guys including Foreman. He was murdering Lennox Lewis when he got robbed by the doctor. He boxes perfectly, is nearly impossible to attack and can default to winning on points if necessary. Not entertaining, maybe no ko's, but he would win.

If he ever becomes president of Ukraine then he will be President Ironfist.

You have to keep in mind how much more competitive boxing was decades ago. It was one of the most popular sports and the average boxer was so much more skilled than today. Don't be fooled by the muscles and height of a Klitscho or speed of a Tyson -- they fight chumps most days.

Also Ali wasn't the greatest. Joe Louis is the greatest heavyweight of all time and Ray Robinson the greatest overall fighter. GOAT isn't solely who wins against who in their prime. It's about consistency and quality of opponent too.

Ummm... Ever heard of Gerry Clooney?

Ali, in his prime, was extremely fast, an accurate puncher, a shrewd tactician, very elusive, and - most important - could take a punch.

At other stages in his career, he was entirely beatable. But, at his best, I don't think anyone was better.

Ryan Foreman wrote:

Of course Ali's prime would have been 68-70. Precisely the years where he was effectively banned from boxing. Because Americans hated him. Until they didn't. In any case, its hard to say how great he was when he we never saw him fight at his peak. He was totally dominant around 66-67. But also didn't fight anyone that great either. Still, I think its agreed on that the Ali of the mid to late 60s was a better version of Ali than the one who fought Frazier in their first epic fight.

Ali didn't fight anyone that great? That's crazy and I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and assume you mean just between 1966 and 1967 (because if you mean throughout his entire career, you'd have to be a troll).

But between 1966 and 1967, Ali fought the best guys he could face after having already beaten Doug Jones, Floyd Patterson, and Sonny Liston in the preceeding years. In 1966 and 1967, Ali fought and beat George Chuvalo, Henry Cooper, Brian London, Karl Mildenberger, Ernie Terrell, and Zora Folley. The only one of those fighters who probably didn't deserve a shot was Brian London. Thad Spencer should have gotten a shot instead of London, but anyway

Everybody else on that list was legitimate, either a Top 5 contender in 1966 or 1967 with the exception of Cooper, who had already fought and had Ali in trouble in previous fight so rematch was marketable.

His resume at heavyweight is, without question, better than anyone else's.

And he did beat some good fighters pre-exile. Liston, Chuvalo, Terrell, Patterson and Foley were all significant wins.

Post exile the list is nearly endless. And all of those wins were past his prime, some far past his prime.

Definitely the greatest heavyweight. Not the greatest of all time. That honor belongs to Robinson. Ali is probably top 5 though.

I don't think any modern heavies could beat him. Holyfield is about the best counter puncher you will ever see, but struggled against boxers with good jabs. He would lose a wide decision to Ali.

Tyson was a mental midget.

Lennox Lewis and Larry Holmes, due to their size and jabs, would give him tough fights. But neither had Ali's stamina, chin, or speed. He wins decisions against those guys.

And don't get me started on Mayweather. Doesn't belong in the top 20 yet, much less in any conversation for being the greatest.

ddfhkldsfhdskl wrote:

And don't get me started on Mayweather. Doesn't belong in the top 20 yet, much less in any conversation for being the greatest.

You are the only person to have brought up Mayweather in the thread.. you started yourself on him..?

Muhammad Ali Boxing Legend wrote:

I can't help but wonder if Ali WAS really the greatest. Don't get me wrong, he's got insane boxing skills, good size, and the best speed. However, I wonder if someone like Holyfield or Lewis who were later tot he scene would have given Ali real trouble. Even a guy like (don't laugh) Vitali Klitschko could have given Ali real troubles. Though I do believe Ali would have beaten Tyson pretty soundly.

I sort of equate Ali to a Henry Rono, running crazy times and dominating his competition, but then some EL G 3:26 guys come along later with better training/nutrition/supplements.

I am a big boxing fan and I think he was the GOAT. Prior to the 80s, every major city had dozens of gyms with great athletes dreaming of becoming a boxing champ. You have to understand the era Ali boxed in...a heavy weight championship was bigger than the superbowl. During the 1st and 2nd Ali-Fraizer fights, time pretty much stood still. Nowadays, A 250 pound athlete is most likely to become a tight end...the level of competition is no where near the same.

Obviously the life of Ali goes beyond fighting, but when he easily beat Sunny Liston, it was like beating Usain Bolt in the Olympics easing up at the finish line. Ali wasn't just talker, he could back it up.

yes

even overweight ali could run

~1'52.85

for 800

numbskull

ali

is the

greatest of all time

idiot

Being a track person, I never did quite buy into the weight categories.

I mean, there may well be a guy who throws the shot put great for weighing 140 pounds. Pound for pound he might be better, but he'll throw nowhere's as far as the top shot putter - who may be twice his weight.

So, when I think of boxing, I think which fighter would be able to beat any other fighter without weight being a factor.

The best fighter I ever saw in person fight was Sugar Ray Leonard. He was amazing. I think he was a superior fighter to, say, Joe Frazier, but I think had they fought Joe Frazier would have beat him - simply on the size and power edge.

Agreed?

If we had weight categories in track, it would turn the sport on its head.

Oh give me a break, Mike Tyson would beat his face in. It would be like stacking up Abebe Bikila against Haile Gebrselassie.

I don't think he was the greatest. He was the self-proclaimed greatest (which many agreed with too). Very talented, great bombastic personality, influential, and he was no doubt great. He is way up there on the list. Most "greatest" debates are next to impossible. Also, I never hear of Gerry "Clooney".

Before even thinking about the actual fight between Ali and Tyson, I would have loved to have seen the pre-fight stuff with Ali in his prime against Tyson in his prime. With Ali yelling, and saying poetry and Tyson all serious. It would have been great. I think Ali would have won that stuff and got into Tyson's head.

Ali was so bright and witty--and ultimately, as was shown, Tyson had a lot of insecurities and was prone to losing his cool (biting Evander)...when things were not going his way Tyson did not have a great ability to overcome it and rise up.

That really would have been great.

In the fight---especially if it was 15 rounds like back in the day---I would take Ali over Tyson. Ali would dance (and talk smack) in the early rounds, make Tyson miss, and tire him out---and score with the jab.

I say Ali over Tyson, KO in the 13

NJ Possible wrote:

Also Ali wasn't the greatest. Joe Louis is the greatest heavyweight of all time and Ray Robinson the greatest overall fighter. GOAT isn't solely who wins against who in their prime. It's about consistency and quality of opponent too.

If it's about quality of opponent, Archie Moore is the GOAT, winning the LH title at 36 and spending the next 9 years fighting heavyweights like Marciano, Patterson and Ali.

ali really loast to jimmy young, and norton should have gotten all 3 against ali, leon spinks beat ali in spinks 7th pro fight, berbick beat ali every round, holmes made ali quit.

ali retired at 38 or 39, so he was always in his prime, if you look at the heavyweight rankings wladimer klitchko is late 30's, his brother was champion when he gave up the belt to concentrate on politics is 42.

heavyweights tend to be older than other weight divisions, yet welterweight mayweather is 37, middleweight champion sergio martinez is 39 and light heavyweight champion bernard hopkins is 49.

so no one can honestly say ali was old when he lost those fights, and the fact he was a devout muslim who never smoked, did illegal drugs or alcohol and was a super hard trainer kept him young for his age.

Yes, that is what I meant. Only in that 66-67 which I think people agree was his all around peak where he was allowed to fight. You forgot Cleveland Williams. I think that fight was in 66'. That is widely believed to be Ali's greatest performance. I wasn't suggesting Ali was dodging anyone. Just that there wasn't anyone else that great to challenge him. Cleveland Williams for example was apparently great at one time, but he was over the hill and had recently been shot. Frazier hadn't quite emerged yet. I would say Chuvalo was the best contest for Ali. But a lot of that was just from his amazing toughness. Ali I believe had good control fo that fight throughout.