Unpopular opinions

I think Ali, as good as he is, he's over-rated.

I think the Rumble in the Jungle was a bit of a farce because of the ropes being allowed to be so loose. I think Foreman would have won the rematch.

It's far less prevalent now than it was when I first starting hanging around boxing message sites, but I could never understand how Jim Jeffries was rated in the top 10 or in some cases top 5, with only 23 fights. I understand he might have had many more fights that were unrecorded, but still.

I don't think it's fair to compare heavyweights before 1960 with modern day heavyweights on a h2h basis. Legacy is fine, but not h2h. There's just too much size and weight differences to make it meaningful, especially considering the skill gap has dramatically decreased.

 

First decent post I think I've ever read of yours. I don't agree with it, but at least it's supportable. :good

 

Tokyo Douglas isn't The GOAT.....

 

I agree completely Choklab. :good
Joe was shot for Foreman II, progressively arthritic, nearly 25 pounds above his peak weight, wearing a contact lens which got knocked out, yet lasted longer on his feet than any defeated opponent of George's in his wins between Peralta II and Jimmy Young. That gets overlooked. Lyle got dropped twice in the fourth, while Pires, although never knocked off his feet, did not answer the bell for round five. Old, arthritic, overweight and blind Joe Frazier is the ONLY one of Foreman's defeated opponents between Peralta II and Young to answer the bell for round five w/out having yet been dropped in the match.

 

Prime, well trained Tyson was very much capable of beating Muhammad Ali.


Boxings talent pool got bigger in the modern world.

 

I'm loving some of these opinions, especially Vanboxingfan's, particularly about Foreman deserving a rematch.

I also agree that a prime and motivated Tyson would have had a good chance to beat Ali

 

Willie Pastrano would have beaten Bernard Hopkins

 

fighters from a 100 years ago wouldn't even be contenders these says

 

Not in the modern era.

Tysom is FAR from the baddest man on the planet. He isn't even the baddest man in the UK for christ sake.

 

De La Hoya-Quartey was a very bad decision and one of the most overrated fights ever. It wasn't a difficult fight to score like some of Oscar's other fights (Whitaker). Both guys were largely doing little, so it was easy to score. Rounds 6 and 12 were exciting. What about the other 10? Some good exchanges followed by a whole lot of nothing. Not a great chessmatch with a lot of traps being set, fighters falling for it, then paying....but two guys mostly posing at each other and doing nothing.

You have to be extremely, and I mean extremely, generous to give Oscar 6 rounds.

 

I don't know. I read an article where Shavers said he thought the decision was fair and Ali won a close fight.

I had Shavers winning 9-6 and I thought I was being somewhat generous to Ali.

 

Kell Brook has been #1 WW since Mayweather's 'retirement' and had the best chance of anyone of beating him whilst he was fighting.

 

This is like saying Galileo wasn't that smart because they didn't have computers in the 1500s.

 

The Cruiserweight division is a necessary division, and presently, a pretty solid one as well.

 

No, it's like saying Galileo wouldn't be a leading scientist today.