Look let's be realistic here. Wlad/Vitali/Lewis would dominate any era of HW boxing

He never said that dude.. Quit making **** up, you are worse than my wife at twisting ****...

Robinson losing ONE fight to a fellow ATG that he fought MULTIPLE times, some in short periods are not as embarrassing as Lewis getting KTFO by Rahman, or Wlad getting blown out of the ring by Sanders or Vitali quitting on his stool against Byrd...

Robinson and Lamotta was a bad example.

Get what he was saying?atsch

 

Welcome to ESB where present day modern fighters stands no chance against the legends 20-30-40-50+ years ago. LOL

 

I'm not a nostalgic nuthugger. I'd give all three men a very good chance H2H against any fighter in history, and consider Lennox to be the ATG in this regard. But you can't say they'd dominate every era when their "domination" is interrupted by loses against sub-par opposition or marked by a generally poor standard of competitor, in the case of Vitali.

 

People wear rose coloured glasses for Muhammad Ali wayyy too much and they base it off his supposed "prime" which he looked amazing beating up a shot Cleveland Williams who had recently been shot by police had numerous amounts of his small intestine removed and was partially paralyzed. Anyone can look like a god fighting a man under those circumstances.

 

I never said that, but you're like a lot of posters on here who never allow for circumstances.

When you envisage two fighters from the past fighting in a fantasy fight, you access their skills and think of what would have happened had they both been at their best.

Some of the logic used on here is poor.

Just because Doug Jones was smaller than Lennox and caused Ali problems, that. does not automatically mean that Lennox would have easily beaten him. You have to weigh everything up, but you never seem to do that.

You've got an obsession with size and strength, but you can't see that a fighter like Wlad would also be at a disadvantage because of it.

 

WOW, thanks for pointing that out. People always defend losses of old fighters but don't give any slack to modern day fighters.

There's this huge bias where old timers are seen as these invincible fighters whereas modern day fighters are seen as mediocre and in a "weak era".

 

Totally true..

This is the post of the day.

Thanks for guiding me to the light about Ali.

 

No, it's called being objective. Evaluating the circumstances, and taking everything into consideration.

 

I don't think the majority could even get past wlads jab consistently

 

IMO Ali would get knocked out by the current wlad to big to smart to skilled !!!!

 

Like Haye and Ibragimov did.

 

I've never criticised Lennox's losses.

You're brain has told you that Doug Jones caused Ali some problems, therefore Lennox would have easily beaten him.

As I've mentioned, Doug Jones was a very fast fighter. Styles make fights. He was a lot faster than Lennox, with quicker feet and hand speed.

Also, Ali had only been a pro for 2 years, it was his 8th fight in a year, he was only 21, and he'd fought less than two months previously.

So a peak version of Ali, would not have been the same as the young version who fought Jones.

Again styles make fights. It's the oldest and truest saying in the sport.

Take someone like Wlad. Wlad has superior size and strength over a 180 pound Doug Jones. But he isn't mobile, he's got slow feet, and he doesn't throw quick combinations.

So Doug Jones may have presented more problems to Ali. Wlad might absolutely have crushed Jones, but you have to look from Ali's perspective.

People need to realize that being so big and powerful also has it's disadvantages too.