Anthony Joshua vs Muhammad Ali who wins this super fight?

It's quite comical how a recurring argument for Joshua beating Ali relies on his size, strength, power and weight advantages. We have a large amount of examples to draw from where the fighter with all the physical disadvantages managed to beat the bigger, stronger, longer, more powerful man either through skill or will or any combination thereof. It's flawed logic and a poor argument.

Similarly hilarious how that argument has had examples of how Ali struggled with or lost to fighters smaller, weaker and lighter than himself......it is a self defeating, contradictory argument. Relies on physical characteristics and ignores differences in skill and other tangibles, not to mention intangibles. A great 215 pound man can beat a good or average 245 pound man, this isn't a lightweight taking on a middleweight scenario.

 

Can you explain how Ali would beat Joshua (however unlikely), in a way I can imagine?

 

I can't even... The level of ******ation and ignorance in this post... I mean... What the ****?

Answer the question you previously ducked, moron. Are you saying that a guy like Adrien Broner is better fighter than Sugar Ray Robnson given he has far less losses?

 

He would simply cut the ring off and the end.Just use the foreman play book bc thats where the fights going on the ropes. I made numerous posts on this in the thread. there is no magic needed ,no super hero powers b.s everyone wishes to think has to happen here...its pretty self explained through common sense and common opponents and who struggled with who and would really Ali get by such a SHW fast smart and bigger than Foreman. If i made a thread and did a MODERN Foreman of 250 6'6 vs Ali...do you really think they would favor Ali? Foreman STILL wouldn't have the skills of Joshua he would just have even more advantage than before than his 6'3 220 pound frame . Go to page 36 ..read all those posts if that cant convince you then i dont know what will.

 

I think the argument hinges on Joshua being at the requisite skill level whilst also holding the size/weight/physical edge where even a boxer of Ali's pedigree is at a clear disadvantage.
The other crucial point was Joshuas style in relation to that of Ali.

Roy Jones Jr was superman but even he knew not to challenge Lewis.

 

No, because Joshua is good, at best. Nice avoidance of what was written beforehand btw. So Ali struggles with some smaller men, yet it's impossible for Joshua? Yeah, ok. Great arguments that contradict results we can verify as showing the opposite.

 

I see that. But simply disagree with those physical advantages being so insurmountable all things considered.

 

I meant could you explain how Ali could beat Joshua. I know you got AJ as a big favourite but am interested in how Ali would manage it?

 

Nobody's saying he was some atg puncher dude. He wasn't featherfisted, that is irrefutable. A featherfist has little to no knockouts much less knockdowns and certainly not against a top 3 heavyweight of all time. His left hook was a great left hook. Period. He didn't really have any other punch.

You must not have been around boxing for long but you will come to realize (if you have any smarts about you) that boxrec holds little weight. They list Jack Dempsey as 187 in his fight against Willard but in reality he was only 180. Just an example and little **** adds up to make a difference. What it says on paper doesn't win fights.

If a fighter has 27 wins with 27 kos but 20 losses is he featherfisted?