People who think Ali would be able to compete with the tall-superheavyweights

You can watch many Ali fights and will clearly see his wonderful defense of hitting and not getting hit in action. He was the hardest to hit heavyweight off all time. Frazier was the only one who had a stylistic advantage over Ali. Joshua fights nothing like Frazier. Norton beat Ali because he capitalized on Ali's jab and had excellent parrying ability. Joshua does not.

 

Mate you're talking to a troll. Remember the James Smith poster? Same guy. He also posts under Ali Myths & Legends along with loads of other accounts.

He created the Smith character just to big up Joshua so Wlads win would look spectacular. The guy is a waste of your time.

 

Let me help you out.

Ray Mercer was smaller than Muhammad Ali, and only heavier because he wasn't as conditioned.

By your definition, he wasn't a big HW.

In fact: He was a small HW.

For large parts of the fight, he out boxed Lennox, with many people thinking that he won.

Whether he got the decision or not doesn't even matter. Because it's a fact that Ray Mercer troubled Lennox Lewis. Yet according to you, Ali wouldn't even have been competitive.

Now do you get it?

Your opinions are complete horse manure.

 

One can determine those that know very little by how quickly they gravitate to the EASY variables such as size. If Ali were to lose to the huge hwts today, and he wouldn't, it would not be because they were bigger.

 

Nobody has said he was untouchable.

I've already agreed with you that I could envisage a scenario where Joshua could have beaten him.

My argument is where you've said he'd have had zero chance, and he couldn't even have competed against today's guys.

That's horse manure.

Anyway, Dino has just informed me that you're James Smith. So I'm out. Because you're not even looking for an actual debate. So I'll let the others take it from here.

 

Thanks pal.

I wish I'd have known this 2 pages ago. Ha!

That's me out then.

I'll go and annoy Bailey on the Joe C thread instead.

 

Terrell had to go 15 round distances. Today's hwts need only be concerned about a 12 round distance. Fighters today can bulk up while those of the past needed great cardiovascular ability.

 

You need to watch Ali before he went to Canada and took two years off. He was light years ahead of what qualifies as a heavyweight today. He did NOT "get hit often and hurt often." If you only watch post Canada Ali then you see an Ali that did not have the foot speed that he previously had. (Before Canada he moved like a welterweight and he weighed about 200 lbs.) He fought at about 225 post Canada. Still he was able to beat the likes of Frasier and Forman who are all better than Joshua. Remember you have only seen him against today's ragtag bunch of heavyweights.

 

Sports science has progressed, and with it our understanding about to get athletes to their absolute peak. This is a well known fact, and can be applied to any sport that requires athletism and physical conditioning.

I haven't directly said how Ali would do in today's boxing, as it simply isn't an even playing field.

 

Yes, sports science has progressed.

The fighters haven't though.

Not in the same way.

Why isn't it an even playing field?

For all of the advancements in sports science, many of today's top fighters would struggle to fight 4-5 times per year, over 15 rounds.

At the end of the day, a left hook will always be a left hook. It doesn't matter if it's 2017 or 1967.

Skills determine the outcome of the fight.

 

I don't think it's a case of them not being able to fight 4 or 5 times a year, but again, more to do with our knowledge of the sport and sports science; training camps, recovery time, risk of permanent injury/brain damage. Obviously there's the financial side of it as well, promoting the fights.

I agree that skills are skills, regardless of whether it's 1960 or 2017, but the factors
around the science, as well as evolution (people are bigger, stronger, faster) and this is a natural occurrence. To say that an elite heavyweight (AJ/Vlad) are slow wouldn't be accurate.

Please, don't take my word for it, the information regarding how we've changed, even in the last 50 years has been studied and well documented.

P.s my earlier comment about Briggs was not suggesting Wilder would beat Louis, but was simply on Briggs' comment regarding sports science.

 

Get over it.

Ali was an over rated fraud, he was never the GOAT.

Lewis runs a train through him.

A lot of corrupt UDs went his way too, he was no where near the GOAT.

Get over it you puddy cat.

 

Okay.

Thanks a lot for the info.

We're really lucky to have you here.

 

I respect the results of the studies. But they are looking at things in general over time. They are looking at the human population and athletes from other sports. That's fine. But in boxing, we can't generalise like that. It has to be looked at on an individual basis. Nobody can say that based on the studies that you've noted, that the guys of yesteryear couldn't compete with the modern guys of today.

The fairest, most objective thing to do, is to analyse the specific styles and the attributes of the fighters you're discussing at the time. It can't be done any other way.

You can note that athletes today are faster in general. But sports science etc has zero effect on a fighters speed of hand and foot. Just because times have been consistently broken in sports like sprinting and swimming, it doesn't mean that today's guys are generally faster than the fighters of yesteryear. I'm also certain that in some cases, the fighters of yesteryear would be stronger than some of today's guys. And many of them would be tougher due to the harsher environments they had to endure.

I like Briggs, but I think he's talking absolute nonsense. Now if he was to put forward his opinion of why he thinks Wilder would have won based upon the specific styles of each fighter with a breakdown etc, then I could respect it. But I'm not going to respect anyone who picks Wilder, just solely based on generalised studies, the majority of which are from the results of completely different sports.

 

If Evander Holyfield could compete with the superheavies, Muhammed Ali could have as well.