Was Ali's second tier list better than some first tier lists?

[mr. magoo]

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?

[Senya13]

It's plain awful list, full of mediocrities or shot fighters.

[achillesthegreat]

If you compare guys like them to Tysons or Holmes reign then it could be argued.

[Bummy Davis]

Originally Posted by mr. magoo

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?

In retrospect, Quarry was good but intimadated vs Ali, Quarry was a solid guy who could beat the BIG slow punchers but had trouble with a mover and speed. Ali was older vs Young but did he really win that one? Young was good but for only a short while. Bonavena, Short and Squat gave Ali trouble but Oscar was a good fighter at best. the rest were either shot fighters or never beens

[Mendoza]

Originally Posted by mr. magoo

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?

This is an interesting thread. Ali had many fights vs quality ranked opponents. In terms of who beat who, Ali has TKO wins over Liston, Frazier, and Foreman. The three are in most cases viewed as top all time 15 heavyweights which is why I feel Ali should be #1 overall.

The other fighters you listed ( Norton was omited ) is a legacy by itself. If you factor in that most of the above Ali fights were vs prime or near prime fighters, I do beleive the group is better than the fighters Johnson beat for sure.

I beleive the group is slightly better than the fighters Louis, Dempsey, and Marciano beat. It’s a draw with Holmes competition. In some cases the big names that Louis, Marciano and Johnson beat were vs past their primes or very green fighters.

The fighters I colored in gold that Ali beat could have been champions in more than one era, and most certainly could have beaten some lineal champions. They also could have beaten anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano, or Holmes defeated.

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by Senya13

It's plain awful list, full of mediocrities or shot fighters.

Not really,

although Folley, Williams and Chuvalo may have been pst their best but the rest were fairly decent fighters with a reasonable amount of talent. Jerry Quarry for example was a top rated contender for the best part of 10 years, and times was even ranked as high as #1. He also defeated a lot of other top raters at the time. Shavers was viewed by some as having limited skill, but had one of the hardest punches history. Lyle was another very tough contender who was a great counter puncher and could take a pretty good hit as well. Bonavena, Ellis, Terell and Young were all decent boxers.

I'm not sure why you would label all of these men as shot or mediocre.

[Jbuz]

Originally Posted by Senya13

It's plain awful list, full of mediocrities or shot fighters.

And Roy Jones' was brilliant, right?

[ChrisPontius]

Originally Posted by Mendoza

The fighters I colored in gold that Ali beat could have been champions in more than one era, and most certainly could have beaten some lineal champions. They also could have beaten anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano, or Holmes defeated.

I strongly disagree here.

You claim that Quarry, Lyle, Shavers and Young could beat anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano and Holmes beat.
I beg to differ.

Young is the best fighter out of those in my opinion. I don't see Shavers getting past Walcott (if Walcott comes out like he did against Marciano, he may well knock him out in the 1st), Charles would beat Shavers, Witherspoon would beat Shavers, Cobb (a Holmes opponent) in fact DID beat Shavers and needless to say, Cobb is one of Holmes' worst opponents, so go figure.

Lyle was very limited and it appears to me he gets hyped up a lot because he's on Ali's resume. Sorry but i don't see all that big punching ability that people make him out to have. He knocked out Shavers (who was knocked out even by journeymen several times) and that's it. He went the distance in almost every other big fight. Losing the decision, i might add. He certainly wouldn't get past smart and cagey veterans like Walcott, Charles, Moore or a Witherspoon, etc. He gets called a huge puncher to save Foreman's chin from looking bad, but mind you he was also floored by Young and Ali who didn't carry a big punch either.

Young and Quarry are better and they might beat some, but certainly would lose quite some fights, like they did in reality.


To sum it up, Quarry, Young, Shavers and Lyle as a group have lost fights to: each other, Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Ken Norton, Bob Stallings, Bernardo Mercado, Randall Cobb, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Ellis and George Chuvalo.

These are hardly entities that made the era as great as you think it is. In fact, while most of those fighters were good contenders, they were nothing special. Fighters like that were around in every era and they would've always caused the listed fighters trouble, hence i see no reason to assume they would've been champions in any other era. It's not like Ali and Frazier were in their primes from 72 on, but they still beat them every time.

[JohnThomas1]

Originally Posted by hellfire_508

And Roy Jones' was brilliant, right?

You missed this one a while back

Do you think there were a lot of slicker boxers in history than prime Griffin? The one you have very hard time trying to hit him cleanly to the head, and may miss tens of punches before at least one of them lands?

"History" and "Prime Griffin" makes it sound like Griffin was some sort of historically noteworthy figure.

[mr. magoo]

You claim that Quarry, Lyle, Shavers and Young could beat anyone Johnson, Dempsey, Marciano and Holmes beat.
I beg to differ.

Perhaps he got a bit carried away here, but it's not entirely unreasonable to think that Quarry, Lyle, Shavers and Young could have been among the better opponents for the champions listed. In fact, Shavers actually was one of the best fighters Holmes beat.

Young is the best fighter out of those in my opinion.

Thats debatable. Young certainly defeated a fair number of guys, but lost more than a handful. I'm not sure that I'd rate him above Quarry, who's comp list was a bit longer, and who's loss list was drastically shorter.

I don't see Shavers getting past Walcott (if Walcott comes out like he did against Marciano, he may well knock him out in the 1st),

The same could go the other way if Earnie lands first. Walcott didn't exactly win every fight that he ever had, and arguably never fought a man who could throw a right like Shavers. Besides, even if Walcott was capable of winning, that wouldn't necessarily exclude Shavers as a top contender had he been around in the 40's/50's.

Charles would beat Shavers, Witherspoon would beat Shavers, Cobb (a Holmes opponent) in fact DID beat Shavers and needless to say, Cobb is one of Holmes' worst opponents, so go figure.

I agree with the Charles and Witherspoon claims, but I think you're overlooking the fact that Shavers was a bit past his prime when he faced Cobb, and in fact was leading the fight until he tired in the 8th round.

Lyle was very limited and it appears to me he gets hyped up a lot because he's on Ali's resume. Sorry but i don't see all that big punching ability that people make him out to have. He knocked out Shavers (who was knocked out even by journeymen several times) and that's it.

I think you're criticism focusses mainly on the assumption that Lyle was viewed as a hard puncher, which you obviously disagree with. Punching power was not necessarily Lyle's best asset. He was a great counter puncher with reasonable skills in other areas, and could take a pretty good punch as well. While his power may not have been tremendous per say, he still had enough sting to remind fighters that he was still there. I also disagree with your claim that his name is soley linked to Muhammad Ali's. Lyle was probably best remembered for his all time great meeting with George Foreman, which I need not remind you was an incredible fight. He also had good wins over Jimmy Ellis, Oscar Bonavena, Gregorio Peralta, Boone Kirkman, Earnie Shavers, Buster Mathis, Joe Bugner, and Scott Ledoux. Keep in mind that he knocked out Buster Mathis in 2 rounds, exploding the myth that Shavers was the only rated fighter that he Ko'd.

He went the distance in almost every other big fight. Losing the decision, i might add. He certainly wouldn't get past smart and cagey veterans like Walcott, Charles, Moore or a Witherspoon, etc. He gets called a huge puncher to save Foreman's chin from looking bad, but mind you he was also floored by Young and Ali who didn't carry a big punch either.

True but also speculative.

To sum it up, Quarry, Young, Shavers and Lyle as a group have lost fights to: each other, Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Ken Norton, Bob Stallings, Bernardo Mercado, Randall Cobb, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Ellis and George Chuvalo.

This is quite the mixed bag of half truths, irrelevancies and oversimplifications that you've put together here, and hardly I might add, a summation.

The losses to Lynn Ball, Gerry Cooney, Ossie Ocasio, Mercado and Tex Cobb came when Shavers, Lyle, Young, and Quarry were nearing the end of their careers. Why not discredit Joe Frazier for his draw with Floyd Cummings while we're at it? As for your statment regarding Quarry, Lyle, Young and Shavers beating each other, well frankly, I don't consider this to be a sign of a weak era or a reflection of average talent. In fact, a strong era is defined by multiple top contenders meeting each other often, and usually ending up in mixed results. It happens when you have a large pool of talent. By the way, Johnson, Walcott, Charles, and Moore lost quite a few fights in their day as well, and plenty of those defeats came against what you might define as journeyman or average talent. It works both ways.

These are hardly entities that made the era as great as you think it is. In fact, while most of those fighters were good contenders, they were nothing special.

Subject to opinion. Funny how most experts, historians, fans, analysts and even fighters from all different eras, often point to the seventies as being an exceptional era. Of course, you probably just right this off as misleading propaganda, given that the concencus doesn't support your views.

[ChrisPontius]

Mathis was not ranked when he fought Lyle.

Originally Posted by mr. magoo

Subject to opinion. Funny how most experts, historians, fans, analysts and even fighters from all different eras, often point to the seventies as being an exceptional era. Of course, you probably just right this off as misleading propaganda, given that the concencus doesn't support your views.

That is because most of the people that form general opinion lived through it or have Ali as their hero boy. Yes, it does stand out but that is also because the second half of the 60's was crap (you had Ali, an old Patterson and a lot of mediocreties, a middleweight rising on the rankings) and the second half of the 70's also sucked. The title was held hostage by Ali and he kept on defending against non-entities like Dunn, Evangelista, etc. He kept ducking his mandatory (Foreman) and his fights were complete bores. Frazier was pretty much shot, Foreman was way past it, Ali was shot and Neon Leon Spinks became lineair champion.

Did you see the amount of shit Wlad got for fighting his mandatory Ray Austin? Now imagine him fighting guys like that all the time, but then voluntary while ducking the mandatory challenges, and not only that. Wlad knocked Austin out in 2 rounds never once using his right hands, Ali went the distance or nearly did with bums like Wepner. Sorry but that is not what i call a great era. Sure there were great fights, but there were also a lot of stinkers and little good was on the horizon past '75. I'm not saying it was horrible or anything, i'm exaggarating a bit, i'm just saying that in my opinion it was not that much better than other eras. All eras have their bores and their interesting fights.

[PowerPuncher]

I think the second tier are excellent but not good enough to dominate any era. They may beat champions from 15. Lets look:

Young - Arguably beat Ali and Norton and he beat Foreman. Thats 2 top10 HWs (well Foreman isnt in mine but hes in most) and a top20 HW of all time. Beat Lyle and probably should have got a decision against Shavers. Decent wins against Dunn &Garcia but seemed to go into journeyman mode after his disputed decision loss to Norton, which makes his resume look pretty bad but at his best he was elite. The fact he beat and held his own against the very elite HWs of the 70s, indicates he would have been a champ in another era, maybe he would have pulled off a decision against 1 of the lower tier champs like Charles/Walcott/Tunney/Willard/Carnera/Baer/Hart/Schmelling/Sharkey/Moorer etc

Quarrey - boxing skill, stamina, intense pressure, hand speed, pushed Frazier close, beat Shavers, Patterson & Lyle & Foster & Mathis. Patterson is a top20 HW of all time so that says allot for Quarrey. Given he has similar attributes to Marciano maybe he could have dominated Marcianos era in place of Marciano? Its a possibility although I think he'd pick up losses he'd probably have been a champ in that era.

Lyle - nearly beat Foreman who is in many peoples top5 (not mine) and nearly beat an old Ali top2 of all time on most peoples lists. Beat Shavers, Bonavena, Middleton, Bugner. VERY FAST HANDS FOR A BIG MAN. Strong, powerful, and very good technique considering he was such a late starter

Shavers - definately not elite, but his brutal power gives him a punchers chance against anyone. Bare in mind his power nearly took Ali & Holmes. He decapitated Norton (top20 HW), Young, Ellis and a plentitude of lesser fighters. If he caught Marciano the way Archie Moore did or got Dempsey the way Firpo did or Louis the way Baer did he could have even beaten an ATG HW, such was his power, but would ofcourse lose the rematch

[OLD FOGEY]

Originally Posted by mr. magoo

We all know who the big wins were for Muhammad Ali. His first tier list consists primarily of Foreman, Frazier, Liston and either Norton or Patterson ( depending on who you talk to ).

This thread is designed to discuss who his second tier list of opponents were, and weather or not this secondary list was as good or better than some champion's top list.

Ali's second tier list:
( in no particular order)

1. Jerry Quarry

2. Ron Lyle

3. Oscar Bonavena

4. Jimmy Ellis

5. Earnie Shavers

6. Jimmy Young

7. Buster Mathis

8. Earnie Terrell

9. Zora Folley

10. Mac Foster

11. Cleveland Williams

12. Joe Bugner

Now, what do you guys think? Were these opponents better than the top list of contenders that some lineal champions faced. How about guys like Dempsey, Johnson, Holmes, Louis, or Marciano?

Highest ratings achieved in Ring Yearly ratings:
Champions---0
1. Ellis, Terrell, Folley
2. Quarry, Young
3. Lyle, Bonavena
4. Williams
5. Shavers, Foster, Bugner
Never rated in Ring's yearly ratings--Buster Mathis
No Hall-of-Famers

Tommy Loughran-challenger from 1930's
Champions--Baer, Sharkey, Braddock
1. Stribling, Hamas
2. Schaaf, Godoy
3. Uzcudun, Renault
4. Levinsky, Griffiths
5. Walker, Risko
6. Ray Impellitiere
7. Jack London
8. Sonny Walker
9. Ettore
10. Campolo, Lenglet
Five Hall-of-Famers

Jimmy Bivins-challenger from 1940's
1. Mauriello, Bettina
2. Pastor, Savold
3. Murray, Sheppard, Maxim, Thompson, Henry
4. Flynn
5. Walker
6. DeJohn
7.
8. Valentino, Payne
9. Agramonte
10. Scott, Wallace
I left off Charles and Moore because Bivins defeated them at lightheavy.

Archie Moore--challenger from 1950's
1. Bivins, Valdes
2. Baker
3. Sheppard, Maxim, Henry
4. Lovell, Dunlap, Lavorante
5. Walker
6. Satterfield
7.
8. Rischer
9. Norkus
10. Muscato, Slade
Moore is hurt because Harold Johnson, with wins over Godoy, Bivins, Valdes, Henry, Charles, and Machen, among others, was never rated at heavyweight.
Two Hall-of-Famers

Harold Johnson--not a challenger in the fifties
Champion--Charles
1. Bivins, Valdes, Moore, Machen
2. Godoy, Jones
3. Henry
4.
5.
6. Satterfield
7.
8. Bethea
9.
10. Slade
Interestingly, Johnson beats Machen & Jones from the sixties.
Three Hall-of-Famers

Comment--I don't see see that much outstanding about this list of second level Ali opponents-I would rate Loughran, Moore, Johnson, and Bivins all higher. Someone like Quarry can be built up, but would he really be a favorite over these four, or someone like Stribling or Henry or Thompson. I think not. I think it useful to mention that Loughran actually has wins over two bigger men, Impellitiere and Campolo, than Ali does.

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY

Highest ratings achieved in Ring Yearly ratings:
Champions---0
1. Ellis, Terrell, Folley
2. Quarry, Young
3. Lyle, Bonavena
4. Williams
5. Shavers, Foster, Bugner
Never rated in Ring's yearly ratings--Buster Mathis

Tommy Loughran-challenger from 1930's
Champions--Baer, Sharkey, Braddock
1. Stribling, Hamas
2. Schaaf, Godoy
3. Uzcudun, Renault
4. Levinsky, Griffiths
5. Walker, Risko
6. Ray Impellitiere
7. Jack London
8. Sonny Walker
9. Ettore
10. Campolo, Lenglet

Jimmy Bivins-challenger from 1940's
1. Mauriello, Bettina
2. Pastor, Savold
3. Murray, Sheppard, Maxim, Thompson, Henry
4. Flynn
5. Walker
6. DeJohn
7.
8. Valentino, Payne
9. Agramonte
10. Scott, Wallace
I left off Charles and Moore because Bivins defeated them at lightheavy.

Archie Moore--challenger from 1950's
1. Bivins, Valdes
2. Baker
3. Sheppard, Maxim, Henry
4. Lovell, Dunlap, Lavorante
5. Walker
6. Satterfield
7.
8. Rischer
9. Norkus
10. Muscato, Slade
Moore is hurt because Harold Johnson, with wins over Godoy, Bivins, Valdes, Henry, Charles, and Machen, among others, was never rated at heavyweight.

Harold Johnson--not a challenger in the fifties
Champion--Charles
1. Bivins, Valdes, Moore, Machen
2. Godoy, Jones
3. Henry
4.
5.
6. Satterfield
7.
8. Bethea
9.
10. Slade
Interestingly, Johnson beats Machen & Jones from the sixties.

Comment--I don't see see that much outstanding about this list of second level Ali opponents-I would rate Loughran, Moore, Johnson, and Bivins all higher. Someone like Quarry can be built up, but would he really be a favorite over these four, or someone like Stribling or Henry or Thompson. I think not. I think it useful to mention that Loughran actually has wins over two bigger men, Impellitiere and Campolo, than Ali does.

Do you at least think that some of them might be competitive in the various eras that you listed?

[groove]

Quarry, Ellis, Young and Lyle - those fighters are as good as the 50s contenders - light heavies Moore and Charles - look at what happened to a great light heavy in Bob Foster when he fought top class heavies like Frazier or Ali - no fucking contest. Old Walcott and Louis. Man Rocky would've had tougher fights against that bunch as they were proper heavies apart from Ellis and at their peak - Rocky fought no fighter at their peak and definitely no proper heavy. They all would beat Don Cockell. Shit Chuvalu, Bonavena, Terrell, Shavers, even Bugner would've beaten him up.