I was thinking about this earlier after watching Ali vs Liston and Wlad vs Peters. It is no doubt in my mind that Ali had the better defense, footwork, athleticism, and speed but Wlad was bigger, longer, stronger, had a slightly better jab(not by much), and monstrous power. Wlad has never been in there with someone of the caliber like Ali but I could make an argument that Ali has never faced a physical specimen like Wlad. Wlad gets a lot of flack for dominating a weak Heavyweight era but I don't feel that can take anything away from his skills. If I was betting money on a potential bout between Ali and Wlad I would probably bet on Wlad off the simple fact that he is longer, stronger, and more powerful. People would point to Foreman vs Ali but I don't think that could be used as a measuring stick to Wlad vs Ali. Wlad was a much better boxer than Foreman and he was probably just as powerful. In a bout like this, I could see Wlad keeping Ali at the end of his jab and landing that right hand when Ali tried to sneak in on the inside. Ali would have his moments but in the end size, strength, strong jab, and power wins the day. 8-4 or 7-5 Wlad. This would be a beautiful chess match. God, I wish it would've happened.
It's hard to compare different eras imo. If you ask me the modern era has a big advantage and i would always pick the modern era fighter. It's like tennis for example. If you would put in the best from the 1960s or 1970s vs the best from the 2000s and later on the modern players would probably destroy them. It's very hard to compare.
I don't know about that because stylistically I think Foreman and Frazier would beat Wlad due to their pressure and power.
I'd have to favor 1964-1967 Ali over any version of Wlad simply because I'd favor that version of Ali over pretty much any Heavyweight in history. Look what he did to Liston, blinded in one round due to a substance being put on Liston's gloves and he still outboxed him, blinked out the chemicals and forced a stoppage. Early 1970s Ali though would struggle with Wlad much like he struggled against Frazier, Norton, and others, because he lost a lot of his footspeed by then and he had slowed down. How Ali beat Foreman in 1974 was a perfect storm and had a lot to do with it being in Africa. George did not have a good prepartion for that fight. If it was the normal Foreman who demolished Frazier so easily, I doubt Ali would have been able to beat Foreman or stop him like he did. Mid 1960s Ali had such unparallelled and smooth footwork for a Heavyweight, he could dance and dance and pump that jab all night. I think 1960s Ali was just too clever for Wlad and he had the speed to put that cleverness into action which would frustrate Wlad. I think if Wlad fought mid 1960s Ali, it would look a lot like how he struggled vs Tyson Fury. Sure Fury is much taller than Ali but has a similar style and it frustrated Wlad. I think Wlad's struggles vs Fury had more to do with Fury's movement and his boxing ability than his size. And 1960's Ali had faster feet and hands than Fury, so he'd be dealing with someone not as tall as Fury, but even quicker. That said, Wlad would definitely be a test for any version of Ali. I could see it being a real jabbing contest and Wlad having some early success, but over 12 or 15 rounds I think Wlad would tire faster than Ali would and Ali would just keep dancing, pumping that jab and making Wlad miss. The footwork difference between 1960s Ali and Wlad is a big factor. Ali, especially early 20s Prime Ali would be able to set traps for Wlad, would give him head movement, and Ali would be able to use upper body movement to avoid Wlad's jab. Now could Wlad feint a jab and set up a big right hand with Ali moving laterally, trying to time him? Maybe, but I just think Ali would win most rounds just by throwing more combinations, being more active, having better footwork, etc. But it would be a challenge for Ali to punch higher. Ali would have to adjust his normal jab height to be a little higher to hit Wlad in the face. But I think Ali could adjust to any situation or opponent and would be able to beat Wlad. But it woudl be a fascinating matchup for sure.
Wlad was very gifted. But he didn't have the mental strength that Ali had. I think Ali would have done a complete psyche job on him. I can envisage a fight where Wlad would have been ultra cautious.
On pondering the outcome of a fantasy fight, you pick a fighter based on styles and attributes, not on their birth certificate.
Wlad already beat a better version of Ali in David Haye. Same size, but faster and more dangerous with great power. (especially p4p for his size) David Haye>Ali.
Wlad was cautious because Fury has power combined with that movement. Ali at 6"2' 201-215? Not so much. You would have seen the younger fearless version of Wlad knocking out that little size bully in 3 rounds tops.
Ali would dub Wlad the “Robot” and would dance circles around Wlad, hitting him at will with his jab, while leaning away from Wlad’s punches and taunting him for the crowd. Wlad’s paper face, paper chin and paper heart would all give up in a mid to late rounds TKO.
lol you must be joking. David Haye with a broken toe that could barely move around the ring was better than Ali?
Ali had power combined with his movement. There were much better versions of Wlad than the ultra cautious version of him that fought Fury, but several of the the younger fearless versions of Wlad still got caught by lesser skilled fighters than Ali was and got knocked out.
