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

Well I would never criticise Ali. But we were talking about nutrition and sport's science, and how it has moved on. So of course I think Ali would benefit with today's knowledge.

 

How? He had some of the best stamina and endurance of all time.

 

Sports science can certainly aid a fighter. But the result of a fight will always come down to a clash of styles.

Joshua and Wilder have got great physiques. But their physical attributes won't always be an advantage for them in every fight that they have.

Although there's been evolution in other sports, boxing stands alone as there is simply no gradual progression over time like there is in swimming and sprinting etc.

 

Evolution in people. Perhaps in other divisions it doesn't matter, but the heavyweight division stands alone in this regard, as it's not capped.

I'm confident that within the next few decades we will see a super heavyweight division, as that's the trajectory we're on.

 

Point to me a modern HW who has 2 or 5% better stamina and endurance than Ali?

Jesse Owens has nothing to do with boxing. Usain Bolt would lose to Dave Allen in a boxing ring

 

I have no idea how you would even prove that, but bigger heavyweights will have a lower punch output because it requires more energy the heavier you are.

Saying that David Tua vs Ike Ibeabuchi has the highest punch output by compubox with a combined 1800 punches during a 12 round fight.

 

The point really is, it is highly unlikely that Ali was running at 100% efficiency, or at 100% of what his genetics and age would allow, for want of a better way of putting it. So of course there is always room for slight improvements. Ali was great, but he wasn't superhuman.

In every single objectively measurable sport there is, world records are being beaten all the time. I doubt there are many WR from the 60s or 70s that still stand today. I doubt there is even one. Now it could be that boxing is a complete anomaly when it comes to sport, and things haven't moved on at all. I think that is unlikely though. But it is difficult to measure really, impossible actually. Which is why all these arguments exist.

For the record though I do think Ali would beat any current HW, but that's partly to down to boxing taking a slight dip, as well as Ali being quite special. And yes, that happens in sport as well, there are dips and peaks, but generally they go in an upwards trajectory with a few bumps along the way.

To deny this is to deny reality.

 

why would you need to prove that which is fact?

Open a biology book for once in your life you fat returd.

 

You are the delusional one.


This is what you wrote:

Where do I even start with this mess?


So what if Ali would be outweighed? Weight alone doesn't win fights. We've had numerous examples of that throughout the years. Also, a large portion of today's HW's are overweight. They're not as conditioned as Ali was.

Being bigger and heavier isn't always an advantage. Because it depends on your opponent and the stylistic match up that you're faced with. If you put a prime version of Mike Tyson in the ring with Deontay Wilder, Wilder's physical attributes would actually be a disadvantage for him. He would find it incredibly hard in trying to time a squat fighter who bobbed and weaved at speed. He would be punching down and he'd have to keep resetting himself.

A guy like Joshua looks awesome, but in a hard fight, his tank starts emptying because of the huge amount of muscle that his body has to carry around the ring.


Not all of today's fighters are faster and stronger, with longer reaches than the guys of the 60's and 70's.

Not all of today's fighters hit harder.

How on earth can you say that?

You are so ignorant.


There's nobody in today's HW division who was faster than Ali and Floyd Patterson.

There's HW's today who aren't as strong as what Foreman was.

There's HW's today who didn't hit as hard as the likes of Foreman and Shavers.

Not all of today's HW's had longer reaches than the guys of the 60's and 70's. Sonny Liston's reach was longer than Wlad's and Joshua's.


It may be a fact that athletes in certain sports get better over time, but it's not a fact that fighters get better over time.

Nobody could be stupid enough to think that.

Boxing doesn't keep progressing over time as each decade goes by.

The best boxers of today aren't head and shoulders above the best fighters of the 70's, 80's and 90's.

If boxing kept progressing over time, then that would mean that all of today's best fighters would be classed as the greatest fighters of all time. Yet that obviously isn't the case.

The majority of today's top 20 HW's wouldnt have beaten the likes of Ali, Foreman and Holmes.

The majority of today's top 20 MW's wouldn't have survived against the MW's of the early 90's.


A peak version of Ali would trouble any HW today.

He had great speed, great skills, great heart, great toughness, and an abundance of confidence.

If you think that he'd have had no chance at all due to his size and the progression of athletes in other sports, then I truly pity you.


You have been a member now for 5 years, yet you still share the same views now as what you did back then.

Your previous post is one of the worst posts that I've ever had the misfortune of reading.

You have just wasted 5 years of your life.


Go and educate yourself on the sport.

 

Again, being a huge HW isn't always an advantage.

The last thing boxing needs is another division.

 

You've hit the nail on the head: Boxing is a complete anomaly.

There has been progression since the M.O.Q. but there has been no gradual progression over each decade like there's been in other sports.

For a long time now, it just ebbs and flows.

The guys of the 00's weren't better than the guys of the 90's as a whole.

Today's guys aren't better than the guys of the 00's as a whole.

Each new decade doesn't produce fighters that are better than the ones from the previous decade.

There's guys who fought in the 70's and 80's who would cause havoc in today's divisions.

Although a sprinter from 50 years ago couldn't compete with the sprinters of today, there's fighters from over 50 years ago who could beat some of today's best fighters.

That wouldn't happen in many other sports.

 

Being a big, slow, c level fighter, is certainly no advantage. I'm not disputing that. But who cares if Ali can beat on some cumbersome lump. I think our interest is on how he performs against an elite 6ft 6inch plus fighter of today, that carries size, speed, unbelievable strength, and the boxing skills to put all that together.

I would have to disagree with not having another division. Things are perhaps ok now, by the divide in the HW division will only grow in terms of size.

 

Ali never went to jail and was upheld by a supreme court decision regarding his religious objection to a illegal war against a third world country.

 

put it another way, being a huge HW has its disadvantages that smaller ones with the all other attributes equal, dont.

 

I've got to admit, when you watch a great from the past on video, I tend to share that view they would wreak havoc today. But is that because we are comparing someone's greatest night, to the average bill you were probably served up on Saturday night, or is boxing really an anomaly?

If boxing really is a sporting anomaly, why is that?