Muhammad Ali at his best vs. Wladimir Klitschko at his best, who wins?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Canibus81, Apr 3, 2012.


  1. VG_Addict

    VG_Addict Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,752
    3,947
    Jun 13, 2012
    Are you seriously trying to say Wach, Pianeta, and Mormeck were good opponents, and they're only considered bad because Wlad is so good? Hell, Wlad's last opponent, Povetkin, went life and death with a blown up CW.

    Just stop before you embarrass yourself any further.
     
  2. Ripple633

    Ripple633 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,635
    1
    Jun 2, 2009
    Are you comparing Chris Arreola and David Haye to the likes of Joe Fraizer, Ken Norton, Lennox Lewis or Evander Holyfield? Joe Louis in his prime was 10X more skilled than any of the heavyweights today.

    Most heavyweights are obese, fat slobs with little to no skill, that's how Wladimir is able to dominate every single one of them. Wladimir never had to worry about facing a prime Larry Holmes or a prime Evander Holyfield.
     
  3. Ripple633

    Ripple633 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,635
    1
    Jun 2, 2009
    Byrd and Chambers although skilled were undersized heavyweights with little to no power. Chambers couldn't even reach Wladimir's head, that's how much of a size difference was between them.
     
  4. Entaowed

    Entaowed Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    6,837
    4,181
    Dec 16, 2012
    Elroy, you have some good points on those who devalue the Klitchkos & do not recognize any virtues of the modern era, but you are incredibly biased in the other direction. You also continually write "fact", which is ironically factually wrong. Some of your statements seem to me to be more or less correct, but they are BY DEFINITION opinions. You should cease & desist from the illogical conceit that unverifiable judgements like who would be better matched up are "facts". To address your points:

    1) I never said Ali was great due to how he handled a great athlete & non-fighter not being able to hit him. This is putting words in my mouth, otherwise known as the logical fallacy as a "Staw Man". I simply recounted a story in response to another poster. How can you disagree, presume to question my intelligence even, & make such a basic & obvious error?

    2) Likewise you set up another false argument when saying I claimed Foreman was "very skilled". He became very skilled at cutting off the ring, had a very good job, had some other skills but was limited in skill overall-not bereft of any ability-& one of the hardest puinchers ever with a good chin, great in his prime & 2nd career.

    3) Next, you are totally wrong on a couple related points. Do you not know that the it is common, historically the usual,to start careers below 200 lbs.? Especially when very young? C'mon man, & many greats were around or under 200 lbs. there whole career. What "blown up" means is not natural for their frame, & adding more muscle than one would naturally carry &/or could benefit them.

    3a) Frazier at 205 or so was described as sculpted, & while he could get a little under 200, it is not a beauty contest, 205-207 was his natural prime weight, somewhat more later. Many modern boxers are fit, many others have not remotely near a 6 pack, which anyway is often cosmetic-you can have it & poor endurance, skills, or power. Ali was very LEAN by any rational standards at his peak weight of 212, he would have had to lose muscle, be dehydrated &/or have the almost no body fat of a competitive body builder to be under 200!

    4) ANOTHER false claim is made when you seem to indicate I though fighting Berbick & Holmes as credits for Ali. Did you even PAY ATTENTION to what I said, or do you conflate all opposition together absent any discernment? In fact WHO anywhere has described those fights as good or showing anything more for Ali than his courage or chin when utterly washed up & showing significant symptoms of the disease that has long overtaken him? I talked about that Ali never should have been approved for those fights, never passed a physicall after Manilla...

    4a) Also did you not know that '80 & '81 were supposed to be AFTER the "Golden Era"?

    If you are intellectually honest you will relize you did not exercise care with with even observing what I claimed, & often are loose with, or just unaware of the facts.

    Let's move on to what others claimed too. Frazier was not "chinny", he had a very good chin. He was a swarmer who past his peak was beaten down by an ATG slugger when Joe left his his '67-'71 prime. In his prime things were rarely close, though Ringo had him in trouble in their 1st fight-but Frazier remained undefeated. He also did not have no skills, that is ridiculous. His movement, combinations, infighting, endurance won from very hard training & heart were skills. And he had excellent power & snap, with a matchless left hook.

    Saying Cleveland Williams would not hit very hard today seems to betray a great bias. Talk about his limitations, when he was literally & figuratively shot: but everyone agrees about his power, Foreman found it up with Lyle & Cooney as the rare numbing puncher. To believe otherwise likely necessitating a faith-based belief that you always need maximum muscle mass to have elite power. Wrong. There are many ways to skin a cat, as numerous fighters have shown. Extra weight & muscle CAN help, but there is a point of diminishing or worse returns. Shavers may well have hit the hardest EVER-though fools disagreeing cite his KOP record against certain opponents, not distinguishing boxing efficacy with pure power-& he was no more than 6' 210 in his prime.

    Whatever you believe would happen, BELIEVEING that the consensus opinion would favor Klitchko 4-1 against Ali is similarly-more actually-divorced from reality. ANY poll of virtually any group, including sportswriters, find Ali greater, & would H2H also.

    "Smoking the negro crack". Is this supposed to be cute or cool? Is sounds purely racist. This is trading on the denigrating stereotypes about blacks, also ugly & mocking. The commenter should apologize for good will & to be respected as decent. By the way, I happen to be white.
     
  5. SP_Mauler

    SP_Mauler Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,152
    8
    Aug 31, 2012
    Elroy is a racist I agree
     
  6. SP_Mauler

    SP_Mauler Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,152
    8
    Aug 31, 2012
    "Smoking the negro crack" Racist.

    Sharpen the pitchforks
     
  7. Loudon

    Loudon Loyal Member Full Member

    41,955
    11,295
    Mar 7, 2012
    SP,

    How's things?

    Me and you have been here many times.

    This guy has to be Tommo.

    I can't remember his name before that. But he came back as Tommo, because he got banned for being disrespectful to the fighters of the 70's, calling them bums etc.

    Do you remember?
     
  8. SP_Mauler

    SP_Mauler Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,152
    8
    Aug 31, 2012
    I saw it..rofl busted..

    Last edited by Elroy; Today at 04:14 AM.

     
  9. SP_Mauler

    SP_Mauler Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,152
    8
    Aug 31, 2012
    Yea same routine everytime,go check out his Tua in classic under his alt SKS..apparently when Tua was 8yo he was sparring with 24yos......sometime he is funny but most of the time its annoying..i had to poke in with that racist comment though
     
  10. SP_Mauler

    SP_Mauler Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,152
    8
    Aug 31, 2012
    :roll:
    whatever dude it just cracked me up
     
  11. Loudon

    Loudon Loyal Member Full Member

    41,955
    11,295
    Mar 7, 2012
    :lol: :good
     
  12. dinovelvet

    dinovelvet Antifanboi Full Member

    63,290
    26,809
    Jul 21, 2012
    Enough is enough. The joke is over.

    As somebody said in the past, Elroy, MerchantsGhost, Tommo etc etc is a nasty little troll. And not even a funny one at that.
    Don't feed the troll.
     
  13. Entaowed

    Entaowed Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    6,837
    4,181
    Dec 16, 2012
    You are welcome Elroy. Also yes, I said ANOTHER poster was racist, not you. Though your arguments & tone, in general & towards me, sound like Merchant's Ghost. Are you he?

    Natural HW...What it is has changed, so you need to look at a fighter in his era. But even if I granted that, it need not be ALWAYS if they were light when very young &/or early in their career, & natural growth & maturation had their weight increase.

    SOME modern HWs are lean, others have been described fairly as muscular but overweight. Many today are more athletic. But some like Ali had great natural athleticism, some of the big guys today are slow & awkward.

    KOs do not equal power. Speed, combinations, skill, work rate, finishing ability, accuracy all contribute to KOs. So we need to look at film + take testomony by 1st hand observers & especially those they fought. The Big Cat hit really hard.

    I do not see the evidence that Frazier was chinny, though he did not have an a + chin. But also an unsupported premise is this:

    "No bookie in their right mind would even give Ali a 1 in 4 chance against Wlad, that's a fact there".

    There are two things wrong with this statement. First, there is no evidence prsented for it. ALL surveys of top fight guys & fans will likely show that Ali is favored, legacy AND H2H. I await any other indication.

    Also nobody in their right MIND would do otherwise? That is extreme & unwarranted. This is another example of a (pretty radical) OPINION, not a fact Sir.
     
  14. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,057
    Oct 25, 2006
    Elroy,

    If you want to call me champion of the nutbags that's fine, but be aware that the poll is lopsidedly in Ali's favour. You could make this poll on any forum you wish to name, and it would still be lopsided in Ali's favour.
    So either the majority are complete nutbags, or maybe there is something more to it?

    If find it incredible that you state "you will not find too many punchbags today." Seriously? What are guys like Arreola or Wach if not punchbags? Wach's claim to fame is shipping shots for 12 rounds against Wlad. Not a punchbag?
    Even when this blatantly obvious fact is beyond denial, you still spin it around by saying 'yeah, but at least he's BIG.' As if that means something. You''re still so infatuated with bulk that you cannot see the wood for the trees.

    Then you cite Thompson, forgetting (or conveniently omitting) the fact that Thompson was in his late thirties when he fought Wlad, is not a knockout puncher, and possesses average skills. He is not particularly good at anything. This is your pick as one of Wlad's best opponents.

    I have no bias or prejudice, despite what you may think. I am a boxing fan and would love nothing better than to see good, skilled heavyweights going at it. Shave the Klits off the top, and what is left?
    There is not a whole lot there, and it's not for nothing that this era has been talked about as one of the worst of all time. Nobody was saying that to this extent in any other era.

    I feel duty bound to defend the fighters of the past, because you feel nothing to trash their legacies, their skills, and anything else about an era where heavyweight boxing was relevant and thriving.
    As it stands, it's a division that is crying out for talent, for some excitement.

    I know it's cool and edgy to 'be different' and claim that Ali, Frazier, Norton etc. had no skill, no chin etc. etc.
    But however you want to slice it, these men are significant players in boxing history. Legends.
    Who is going to be talking about Haye, Chambers, Thompson etc. in 10 years, let alone 40? Nobody.
     
  15. hussleman

    hussleman Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,976
    18
    Jun 14, 2006
    The best Wlad opponet would make the top 15 Ali opponet list. Real talk. If Wlad had fought in Ali's era he would be a bum.