"The Made Up Prime Ali"

"Prime Ali"= All the best parts of Ali over the course of his entire career, even though that particular combination never actually existed in reality.

 

Again, what do you mean by this?

What did 70s Ali have on the one that beat Cleveland Williams, aside from experience?

 

Would there need to be anything else besides experience for my statement to be accurate? Experience, and the ability to apply the lessons learned by it, is a huge enough benefit that my point stands even if you disagree with the rest of it.

Regardless, I also believe that older Ali was stronger and took a better shot.

 

Herc has no idea what he is talking about...typical. Ali's prime as an athlete would be prior to not being able to compete athletically for FOUR years. It's a testemant to the greatness of Ali that he was able to come back and perform as he did to rewin the championship but to say that somehow he was better a fighter after NOT FIGHTING FOR FOUR YEARS is just plain stupid and glaringly exhibits your huge shortcomings in terms of the fighters, what it takes to be a great fighter and boxing history. Your comments are so wrong, so biased and so lacking in historical merit that they are laughable.

 

Prime Tyson is almost a complete myth.
Prime Ali is just a bit of a myth.

 

Controversially I'm not convinced that 60's Ali was a better fighting machine than the 70's version.

I'm not saying it for definite because it flies in the face of what I've been told but was the Ali that beat Liston really better than the Ali that beat Foreman?

 

Before he fought Liston, Ali beat fighters who were rated at that time to qualify for his shot. You might not know this, or you might disregard them because there they were below 240lb but back then contenders records were not quite as manufactured as they are now. Moore, Lavorante, jones, Cooper and Miteff were good names with good recent wins.

So that's Before Liston (B.L) then we have After Liston (A.L). Floyd Patterson was featured in the ratings pretty much his whole career and was the next best fighter after Liston of that era. Terrell was a solid guy with wins over Machen, Williams, Chuvalo and Folley who were top men for his spell at the top. What do you have against Terrell, isn't he a 6'5" super heavyweight, or does that only matter if he's been filmed with modern cameras? There was also Folley who was a genuine career contender.

And why has Liston been separated like this? Is that so he can be discounted from who Ali could beat?

Wasn't Liston this first great "modern" heavyweight? If Sonny represents the cornerstone and beginning of an era that you might have more respect for why exclude him? Isn't this an opportunity to measure and contrast this larger powerhouse (supposedly more comparable to modern fighters when the argument suits) against the rest of the men Ali fought at that time like Terrell, Patterson, Cooper, Folley and mildenburger?

Why, the second time Ali beat Sonny, London and Williams actually lasted a bit longer than Sonny did.

Is the reason to exclude Sonny an effort to discount smaller or lighter men that fared no worse against Ali?

 

Nobody hits Ali easy
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/3c/6d/3f/3c6d3f5a569d077961c56547852fd287.gif

 

70's Ali was better than 60's Ali because many TVs had color by then.

 

Want to know when Ali's real peak was?

It was in the FOTC.

Pre-exile Ali does not go the distance with Frazier that night.

And Ali admitted as such in his truthful post fight interview.

 

Ooooooooohhhh! Get her!

My suspicion is that anyone who has the self-appointed name of Black Hercules is not averse to looking at ' guys with out (sic) their shirts on', themselves. It does suggest a certain 'appreciation' for the male physique.

Each to their own but there are probably other forums more suited to what you're looking for given that this one is missing the mark so badly for you, sweetheart.

 

C'mon. Better than the Ali that beat Liston in 64?
With the special hand speed, footwork, and dodging?

Not sure how anyone can think that a post 1970 Ali was ever better than the man who float like a butterfly and sting like a bee!

 

The Ali who beat Liston was a far greater fighter than the Ali who beat Foreman. Prime Ali was quicker both of hand and foot and far more elusive. Post exile Ali pushing 32 years of age was not anywhere near prime Ali. He was much more hittable, more easily timed. Ali stated himself that he could no longer move and fight for 15 rounds physically post exile and THIS is why he resorted to ropeadope and the mirage tactics that would low him to rest. Great boxers do not need to resort to constant laying on the ropes to win fights. Prime Ali would dance rings around the best Foreman and just like in 74 he would ko the puncher but this time do it mostly by accumulation of blows, physical damage rather than a complete physical breakdown from exhaustion.

 

The 70's Ali proved his abilities against better fighters. Putting on a heavy bad demo against the corpse of Cleveland Williams doesn't impress me as a great victory. Hanging in there and defeating the likes of Frazier and Foreman, and even Quarry and Norton does.

 

Better fighters were timing and hitting him. That is why he was hit more.

Being a skittish waterbug is no blueprint for being a great heavyweight. Sooner or later, better opposition makes you sit down and exchange. Better opposition prevents you from dancing from ringpost to ringpost.

I will agree that the pre-exile Ali presented better visuals. But post-exile Ali offered better victories.