[quote=mr. magoo][quote=OLD FOGEY][quote=mr. magoo]
Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
I never said Johnson wasn't impressive, but he's definately not in Ali's league. A "Long run" like the one the one you're illuding to, is typically the result of weak or lackluster opposition. One of the things that made the 70's such a hallmark in heavyweight history, was the incredible log jam of talent, and the rivalrys that came from it. Johnson was a good fighter, I'm not saying that he didn't have a legacy worth mentioning. He simply however, cannot be rated anywhere close to Muhammad Ali.
1. I rate Ali #1, followed by Louis, Marciano, Johnson, and Lewis.
2. I rate Ali #1 basically because he did fight the best opposition, in my judgement, but I would also say that Louis, Marciano, and Johnson did better against the best men of their time than Ali did against the best of his.
3. I think one has to be very careful about golden era talk. The seventies were dominated by a fighter well past his prime, obviously slipping, and who towards the end may even have had health problems. If this really the most competitive era? Yes, heavyweights in the '70's were on the whole bigger than in earlier eras, but they were also not as big as the heavyweights to come. They are merely a point on an upward curve.
In contrast, in the Louis era the champion was in his prime and so were the contenders.