How would Ali beat Vlad?

Ali's power was underrated ... he sure stopped and floored a lot of people nobody else did.. His record shows 61% knockout rate. Better than half his opponents stopped. No, he was not a one punch ko artists.. But he sure laid a lot of damage on them.. And you say, Wlad's weakness are his chin and stamina ... that's tells it all.. Ali, has proved both beyond a shadow of a doubt..

 

Many of you here, want to say Kitschkos are the greatest. Ok, let's call them the greatest, but one small problem, to be a great boxer, you need to have:
1) Cleaned out the division in your era (Wladmir never avenged some of his defeats. Vitali lost to an aging Lewis, never faced Tyson (not his fault though), never faced Bowe, Holyfield nor any other heavyweight who was considered as a legitimate threat)
2) Klitschko's always had the height advantage over 90% of their opponents. To be frank, I can easily say that not even 2 opponents have been of 1) the same height as Klitschkos or 2) Heavier than Klitschko's- We will decide this when Tyson fury gets ready to fight
3) No aggression – A young George Foreman gobbled up opponents and knocked them out faster, a young Mike tyson literally knockout out his opponents even before the opponent could lay a punch. How many such victories does Wladmir have? How many times did Wladmir finish off an opponent by attacking?

 

That was my point of ali having the weight advantage ..you convienently left out Alis weight when fighting most of his opponents.....


if they were in shape?These guys are 6'4 and plus that Wlad has fought,they are Naturally big boned huge guys not skinny 200 pounders like folley or 180 pounders like Cooper...do you really think cooper would last with any of the guys who Wlad fought you mentioned?you simply don't know what you are talking about.:yep

 

klitchko has been outweighed many times...weight is more important than height,if they made a super HW division you would see that.!Even so you cannot ignore his skills set ,being aggressive will almost always make a short fight,only overly aggressive fightwers run into him and ends in clinchin..this is not winning the fight ,to truly stand I front of him and k.o him is easier said than done..foreman didn't gobble up guys who could actually box,go watch the J.young fight then picture if he was 6'6 and could punch.


Facing Tyson would have no relevance here...him knocking out n obvious washed away fighter would do nothing for him,he should win that fight,though a prime Tyson would be my best bet on beating him stylistically not to many after him.

 

REALITY CHECK.

Vlad has NEVER faced a fighter who deserves to be mentioned in the same book as any version of Ali from 1963 until 1978.

He has beaten whatever was put in front of him ( more or less ) which is all he can do, but if Ali was fighting today those guys would be no more than cannon fodder, or his sparring partners to prepare for Vlad, Vitali or Lennox Lewis.

 

I made a list on an earlier post that showed men that were heavier and taller than Ali
.
If I gave any respect/ value to your opinion I would re-post it ,but I don't ,so I won't.

 

Ha Ha I actually agree with you for once Foxy!!!

 

That's the point- Ali's combined average, while the highest up to that point, is still the fight night weight of a typical Cruiserweight today. Suggest the Cruiserweight version of Holyfield or anyone labeled "Cruiserweight" is competitive or would beat Ali now, and you get accused of blasphemy. Put those same Cruiserweight-sized fighters on grainy film from 40 years ago, then change the label of the weight class to "Heavyweight". All the sudden, the rose-tinted romanticism gets ramped up through the roof because those sized fighters could land on, hurt, and occasionally beat Ali, and carried the right label.

Being smaller doesn't mean Cruiserweight-sized fighters can't fight- heck, it's one of the deepest divisions today. What it means is that if it were that easier to have the same level of success in the unlimited class for the same length of time, that's exactly where the higher prestige and bigger purses would (and sometimes does) take them.

Keep in mind that Cruiserweight literally could not have existed in Ali's time because there weren't enough bigger boxers in the talent pool to justify having both a Heavyweight and Cruiserweight division.

 

The heavyweights of the 70s were the real deal. Heavyweights of the 70s were many pounds lighter because they did a lot of roadwork, (Cutting wood, running 3-5 sometimes 10 miles etc) whereas modern boxers add lot of muscle because of less roadwork and more supplements. Olden heavyweights had less weight but more stamina and strength. For example, Ernie Shavers, Ron Lyle, Ken Norton, George Foreman all weighed below 230 pounds, but hit harder than any modern heavyweight. In fact, it is has been the opinion of more then one boxing expert, that Ernie Shavers and Foreman were two of the hardest punchers of all time. So degrading them is not right. Considering the fact that Ali faced most of the hardest hitting heavyweights – Frazier, Lyle, Liston, Foreman, Quarry, Shavers, Chuvalo, Terrell and Norton, I would any day rate him several ranks above Vitali or Wladmir Klitschko. Just because you knockout bums and bloated, over-the-hill heavyweights doesn't make you an all time great. Nikolai Valuev has equivalent number of wins compared to Wladmir, does that make him great. :bbb

 

Many claim the ERAS get better and better. On the contrary, boxing history has shown otherwise. The Era of Joe Louis was preceded by an Era of light heavyweights portraying themselves as Heavyweights. If you see the Post World War era (1945-1950) – Boxing had very few dominating heavyweights. In fact the only heavyweights that came to mind are a 185 pound Marciano, a 190-pound Ezzard Charles and a near -200 pound Walcott.

The next era (1951-1963) with only Floyd Patterson and Sonny Liston dominating the proceedings post 1956. Then came the golden era (1964): Look at the caliber of heavyweights: Joe Frazier, Muhammad Ali, Ken Norton, Jerry Quarry, George Foreman, Chuvalo, Terrell, Ron Lyle, Shavers, Holmes, Jimmy Ellis, Oscar Bonaevana and Buster Mathis.
This was followed by a worse era (1978-86): Holmes dominated the proceedings while the others Tex Randall Cobb, Jerry ****ey, and Trevor Berbick were the other known heavyweights.

The next era (1986-19998 was slightly better: Mike Tyson, Johan Botha, Lewis, Oliver Mccall, Roy Jones, Rid**** Bowe, Holyfield and a lot other shared the spotlight. Then, boxing stepped into a Decline: Holyfield and Tyson faded away badly and Lewis dominated the scene. The American promoter, Don King, heavily influenced the boxing organizations to ensure that the heavyweight championship of IBF, WBC, WBA, and IBO were not unified. As a result, we had separate champions for each division. The champions ranged anywhere from John Ruiz, Sultan Igbrahimov, Wladmir Klitschko, Vitali, Chris Byrd and Ross Puritty and a hell a lot others.

 

Excellent post. You've hit the nail on the head. These guys were conditioned to fight for 15 hard rounds and the depth was far greater in the division than it is now. I just wish we had a similar fighter now to really show what a great heavyweight really looks like.

 

Points going over Mcdolts head seems to be a common thing around here!:yep

 

"Boxers today are much bigger and stronger now than when I was boxing in my youth,they also train smarter" G.Foreman on Wlad klitchkos era


Ali LOST to Norton...he would not defeat Wlad by anything out side of luck.Ali Lost to Frazier..ali couldn't really do anything with Foreman up until the last two rounds when he became even more sloppier.To put it simply Wlads JAB is the only factor that needs to be included here!Take away alis jab and its game over.

Where did boxing lack a dominating champion?

Louis/Liston/Marciano/Ali/Holmes/Tyson/Lewis /klitchkos...?They were ALL the dominate champs of their respected eras.


Foreman also said Lennox lewis was the greatest Hw champion of all time before Wlads reighn,and calling Wlad nearly invincible in any era.


and no....boxers like ALL sports have bigger athletes in them now due to evolution of the next generation getiing bigger,not b/c the 70's guys trained harder that made them smaller that's twilight zone material right there.:nono

 

Well, Ali and Frazier were often fat and not in the best of shape.

Foreman gassed quickly.

Norton was in fine shape, and beat Ali 2 times on a fair score card...and his chin was even more questionable that Wlad's.

Had Norton vs Ali 1 been 15 rounds, I think Ali goes down, and possible out via TKO. Norton was putting a hurting on him.

Shavers was a glass cannon, who also had issues with cuts and stamina. Who did he KO? Ellis is about it.

Chavlao was tough but slow and not very skilled

Terell was decent, nothing more. He wasn't a puncher and was skinny

Lyle could hit, but he could also be out boxed and had a shaky chin.

The best thing about the 1970's was the fighters for the most part all fought each other. I view it as a good era as a very good one, just not a time where Wlad too would not hold the belt for a period of time.

 

You talking utter s.hite is even more common unfortunately!