1967 Muhammad Ali vs. 2007 Wladimir Klitschko

Southpaws are always awkward for an orthodox fighter. And no, he did not expose flaws Norton exposed because he was fighting a totally different fight. He was following Ali around the ring eating jabs and rights, getting dropped on a couple of occasions. Norton fought a much slower version of Ali, but his strategy was to jab when Ali jabbed. I've seen both these fights plenty of times and you don't know what you're talking about. Besides being a southpaw Ali had little trouble with Mildenberger.

 

Give me a ****ing break glover. He threw the ****ing fight so he could avoid Lewis.

 

Ya you are right . Lewis's win over Tyson is much greater than it seem. Right on. People forgot that many experts were picking Tyson to KO Lewis.

 

I'm gonna regret positng this as I'll convert none of them, but I genuinely struggle to hold my contempt for some posts from clearly young boxing "fans" who 100% must never have boxed professionally. Its impossible they have. No pro I've ever met would even suggest Ali would get KO'd easy by Wlad.
If you are reading this and you think Ali ran round scared and you and your "mates" think Wlad beats Ali you are on glue.
If you are reading this and you think Ali was a blown up Cruiserweight you are on glue.
If you read this and you think Ali's chin, because tested by Cooper, would not stand up to Wlad you are on glue.(Foreman/Liston/Shavers/Frazier)
It is NOT and NEVER will be widely agreed worldwide that Wlad would be a prime Ali.
I'm no old timer, I'm in my 30's and Ali had a few flaws but this lack of respect of older HW greats as small, weak and puny compared to today's so called "uber athlete" is so off the mark it breathtaking!!
This is about fighting, speed, timing, heart, agility, punch absorbtion. It is only ever attempted to be evidenced That Wlad is too big and too athletic by commenting on weight and strength. Ali would have embarassed Wlad even in plyometric training. I'm 280lbs and fought at 250lbs, yet I can tell you categorically that although slightly stronger, my extra muscle helped me in no way when sparring. In fact it was a hindrance, it put more stress on the calves and back, creates more lactic acid and impares mobility. Anyone over 200lbs can knock any man stone cold, especially with the benefit of quicker footwork to close the gap and counter as well as maintain the speed and stamina in the later rounds even at a high tempo.
At the least please read a book such as "The Arc of Boxing by Mike Silver". Do you really think all the older people have rose tinted glasses and hark back to the old days with bias? What a clueless generalisation.
Wlad was a mere 3 inches taller and had 3 inch reach advantage and never punches his height, he has a wide bent knee crouch when he sets his punches. Watch his feet, how on earth would he have the mobility to move away from a prime Ali?? Wlad rarely bring his jab back to his side after throwing it. Hell, nearly every ATG would capitalise intensely on that one error.
Some things are worth debating and opinionising on. But something so inherently basic about Pro boxing, such as anyone who thinks Wlad beats a prime Ali due to "size" and "power" are ****wits or trolls. Then to label Ali's oppopnents as "small" or call him a cruiserweight, well..ignorance knows no bounds. History is full of 6"6 18 stone HW, even in the 1920's. The reason they were not lauded like Wlad is becasue the "smaller" faster hard men knocked the granny out of their robotic asses.

 

Glover, Paper and Skinchecker are the same no-life demented troll. One man talking to himself through 3 different accounts.
This place has truly gone to hell.

 

I'm not Glover.Even remedial ******s know how to spot me by now.. and yet you still fail time after time.

 

Dont you have anything else to do with your sad ,pathetic empty life other than make new accounts on a forum that wants nothing to do with you....You're a born loser son.

 

Ali UD or late stoppage over Wlad. Its a no brained!

 

Enough of the bull****. Even putting Ali to one side as he was a phenomenon who did lots of things technically wrong but his superior speed, timing and pain threshold moved him to the top.

Let's deal in FACTS about Wlad and the older, poorer skilled boxers...

I'll make it simple for the likes of Glover, etc.
TELL ME WHAT "MUCH BETTER FUNDEMENTAL BOXING SKILLS" today's HW boxers have over the older fighters. You keep repeating the "bigger" moniker and the modern better skills. Name those skills.

Tell you what, I'll start:

Defence - putting your gloves to your face and blocking shots is not defence. When has Wlad bent his left knee, put his bodyweight over that knee and performed the classic defensive body roll, to be able to slip the shot whilst going forward, thus negating range and being able to afford a fighter the chance to throw either hand on target. This is taught in every boxing gym, even today.
The parry - the basic defensive skill. Either catch the opposing jab as it extends and step forward for the counter. Or parry the opposing punch away from yourself, thus putting the opponent off balance and leaving that arm outstretched, meaning you can counter over the top.
The forward shoulder slip - As the aggressor jabs the fighter put his bodyweight forward and takes one hidded step towards the opponent's left. The head slips to the left at the same time as the left foot, thereby bringing you out of the frontal range of your opponent and to his lateral side, exposing his body and the right side of his face for a hook.

Stay with me..these were fundamental boxing skills used by fighters even out of the top 20 many decades ago and are taught by some of the older and wiser coaches *(including Manny Steward but Wlad couldn't get them off in a fight). They didn't fade cause they are redundant, they faded because of the lack of truly experienced ex fighters who stayed to coach.
The shoulder block - again over 100yrs old but rarely employed. It recently resurfaced with the young Toney but more recently Bernard Hopkins and more efectively used today by Mayweather. You raise your back hand glove to your face for right side protection and roll ant clockwise with your left shoulder covering your chin. it enables you to counter punch with your back hand even if you're inadvertently caught sqaure or flat footed. There a handful of coaches who remember these moves and when today's fighters use them you can see how much more effective they become.

THTA'S JUST A HANDFUL OF DEFENSIVE MOVES INCORPORATED BY FRAZIER, HOLMES, NORTON, EVEN TUNNEY, DEMPSEY, MARCIANO, HARRY WILLS, SAM MCVEY, JOHNSON.
Don't tell me, Wlad is still too big and fit for these guys? I refer you to my earlier post which touched on this weight theory and the 200lbs rule.
If you like I'll chat about attacking moves that are also a dying art, not becasue they were ineffective but because a lot of HW today are too heavy (muscle or fat) and one dimensional to apply these techniques or more importantly not enough coaches were taught them so don't know them.

To say Wlad is super skilled or more skilled than the elders is folly.
He is the definition of one dimensional. Difference with Wlad is that the one dimension he uses (good jab, step back or block shot then counter with either back hand or straight shots as a counter) is effective, VERY EFFECTIVE in today's sklilless scene as th eopponents aren't experienced enough to have a plan B to negate it, hence why he's champ. He's also dedicated and comes in shape which further elevates him above todays level.
I at no point am hating on Wlad. I have watched all his fights. He is champ and a credit to this sport. But, and its a big BUT. People who have not read and truly studied both the past AND present boxing and trained in more than one gym simply will never truly realise how wrong they are until age grants them the wisdom to realise how wrong their current beliefs are. I'm an ex pro and a current pro referee so don't insult me with comments like I can't watch modern boxing. I'll not even rise to them.
I was the same myself in my 20's. The only sad thing is they now can post **** on here and will not be swayed by other wiser opinions, as they take offence at someone saying they are not as wise.
Humilty comes with experience.
Rant over.
:hi:

 

Come on you know the ESB rule: older generation fighters always beat newer generation fighters.

 

Fella, redundant point, you don't have to sit on either side of the camp. I just quoted support of Mayweather, Hopkins, Toney, etc in my post, they're hardly that old generattion. It just a question of stepping back looking at boxing as a whole, rather than asssuming. :bbb

 

A truly excellent post that will simply be ignored by people who have no idea, or debated against with the same old crap....."of course this fighter or that fighter looked good, but it wasn't against a big, fast modern heavyweight so it doesn't count" drivel.

I've pointed out the similarities in how Carnera fought and how Vitaly fights, and how Joe Louis would take either Klit apart using the same argument you've just provided many times only to here the same bunch of crap. Bigger doesn't always mean better and skills trump size.

 

glover,

I never said you wasn't into boxing.

Right, so Wlad lost to Sanders, Purity and Brewster in his mid 20's, was all over the place by Peter, and in your opinion he would have avenged those losses?

Well, you might be right. But it's irrelevant. Because if Brewster, Sanders and Ross Purity could knock him out, then Frazier and Foreman would have had a chance too.

What improvement of styles? There hasn't been a significant improvement.

Fighters of the past grew up in a tougher world, with less mod cons. They learnt their craft in the gym, and had many more fights. An average guy today would probably have a 40-50 fight career.

Roadwork has been an essential part of boxing since time began. I'm not talking about long distance running. I'm talking about 5-7 miles in boots and baseball shoes. Do you think no other boxer swam before Wlad?

How would he not have had a problem facing Frazier and Foreman? They'd have walked through him. Frazier would have walked up to him and pressured him and chopped him down with body shots. Brewster could do it, but Frazier and Foreman wouldn't have had a chance?

Your comments regarding Ali, are nothing short of ridiculous. He was a master boxer. He didn't fight, unless he really had to. He was a boxer not a fighter. Hit and not get hit. He footwork in the 60's was beautiful to watch.

Wlad had more real fights?

Ha! Name me Wlad's best wins?

Haye? Ha! Speed = hand speed, FOOT WORK, REFLEXES, TIMING etc.

 

Mildenburger caused Ali a few problems, yes.

But it was in 1966, and you're obviously not aware, that Ali had fought just ONE MONTH previously.

He was on his European tour.

He'd fought Brian London in a scheduled 15 rounder in August of 66, and then Mildenburger was just a month later in September.

He'd also fought a rematch with Henry Cooper in May, which was only 2 months after his fight with Chuvalo.

Mildenburger was Ali's FOURTH fight during a 6 month period, and they were all scheduled for 15 rounds.

What do you think would have happened if Ali had have rested, had a 2-3 month camp, and fought to his full capabilities?

 

From some of the asinine statements you've made in this thread, it's patently obvious that you have little or no knowledge of the era or its boxers, other than what might be gleaned from an hour or less, on Boxrec.

Yes, you would. It would result from

a) complete ignorance

or

b) Trolling.

Possibly. But not too many would agree. Most would see you as severely out of touch with reality.

:rofl:rofl:rofl

I see you as being near blind, and you wouldn't recognize a fact if it jumped up and bit you on the arse.

First of all, they're not my fighters.
And you didn't. 'point out' anything. You stated some delusional opinions without any supporting evidence.

Well, that explains your lack of evidence, then.

Again, more inane blather. Aside from your statement being complete shyte, you fail to offer a single reason why even you would believe it.

Liston's opponents were considerably better than Wlad's. That's not the least bit controversial. To maintain otherwise is embarrassing for you and indicates how unfamiliar you are with the era, and the sport in general.

Even Wlad would not claim to have faced better opposition than Liston. Wlad may well overtake Sonny in greatness terms, but his resume suffers from a lack of signature wins.

(BTW, you did not provide your list of Wlad's best five wins. You claimed to have done so, but a careful scan of the thread shows that you did not. This is hardly surprising.)

No, he sure as **** would not. I'd love to lay some bets with the bookie's you deal with. And BTW, Rudddock never fought Wlad.

This tells us all we need to know.

You never heard anyone describe Liston as frightening.

How many weeks have you followed the sport ?

BTW, Tyson, who is actually a very well informed student of the sport and its history, would be more than amused at most of the shyte you've posted here. He has a far different take on Liston.

Which, from the looks of things, counts for much.

No, lad, you haven't. You've just offered up stupid statements like "they were bums" and offered no evidence.

This is just further evidence of your total lack of familiarity with the man and his era.

:rofl

This is the single funniest line you've posted so far.

You don't even have a passing familiarity with the facts.

You don't actually know what a fact is.

That's just a repeat of what you babbled earlier. It's empty of any explanation.

As I said earlier, you didn't.


I see you gave up on the Ali Holyfield thread.

As I mentioned earlier, you have to be either clueless about the sport, or trolling.

From a careful read of your posts in both these threads, I think the preponderance of evidence points to trolling.

Decent effort !