Is there anyone who could school 67 Ali?

The Billy Conn “trumps all” card gets so overplayed against Louis, doesn’t it?

So overweighted and devoid of accurate context - by extension, Louis wouldn’t/shouldn’t have enjoyed the outstanding successes that he did in FACT enjoy otherwise.

Of course, there’s the other small FACT that Louis did actually catch up, KO Conn and win the fight - a FACT that is washed away by the other myth that it was Billy who brought about his own demise due to being too cocky.

Nothing at all to do with the patient, methodical approach of the “he can run but he can’t hide” Bomber.

One fight does not make a great fighter - nor did one fight pull the pin on a fighter who is great otherwise.

Accurate gauging is built on a reasonable sampling against varied opposition, a mosaic of performances within an acceptable range for prime years.

 

Lol white bomber is nutting himself reading this guy’s posts.

 

People use the if Henry Cooper knocked down Ali so could Fighter A as if it was the holy grail for reasons a fighter would beat Ali. What you say about the Conn reasoning is perfect in this case as well.

 

Thanks Greg. You've captured the irony of perception vs reality regarding the fight.

 

Beautifully phrased as usual.

 

Prime Ali is said to be 1967, which year is prime SRL? I imagine it's not pre-Duran 1, so early 80's.

How many athletic records still stand from the 60's/70's? Do any at all? I don't know or care about basketball or NFL.

Boxing is also an individual sport, I don't know if valid comparisons can be made with team events. Ali would have to fight PED-enhanced athletes from the future with an additional 50+ years of knowledge, radically different styles and an extensive knowledge of his style. It's not a matter of fitting into a system. Over that time period if you pick the fighter who he matches up with least well or a type of fighter he never fought (say a 6'5+ athletic one-punch KO artist with a GOAT jab and left hook) then he might well get schooled/destroyed.

 

Are illegal. A clean athlete is going to be at a disadvantage against a dirty one.

 

Illegal on paper but in practice it's rampant. And Ali himself was busted for PED's, albeit far more scientifically primitive ones.

 

To say you have been giving your own agenda-driven version of the truth in this thread would be
an understatement. If,as I suspect, you referring to a comparatively elderly Muhammad Ali using diuretics
for his fight against Larry Holmes then you have reached a new low.

 

Bob Beaman's Olympic record from 1968 still stands...although Derek Chisora reckons he could beat it.

 

So "It was ok for Ali to take PED's because he was a shot fighter at the time" and "It was ok for Ali to take those PED's because they weren't particularly powerful"

If Ali was willing to break the rules in that fight with that substance then perhaps he broke the rules in other fights with other substances. Not that I'm against boxers who use PED's as I expect all of them do to a lesser or greater extent.

These fantasy matchups are inevitably going to pit boxers with relatively primitive PED's against boxers with super-advanced PED's who can (to take one example of increased performance) throw 50% more punches other things being equal. The guy who complained that it's "unfair" isn't being realistic. It's not "fair" that (for example) southpaw heavyweights barely existed back then or that every top level boxer can and in most cases probably has studied Ali extensively. He is at inevitable structural disadvantages in these time-disparate matchups that he never was in his own time and that cannot be helped.

"agenda-driven version of the truth"

The real agenda is pretending that an American cult figure from the 60's/70's is some kind of Marvel/DC superhero would beat or at least be competitive with every boxer in the future, forever. That is a quasi-religious viewpoint, it's not logical or based in observable evidence.

 

Absolutely not. Ali was in a class of his own. That's my opinion anyway

 

Ali was not just shot he was a very sick man. He should have retired after Ali-Frazier III he was already showing signs of Parkinsons syndrome back then. In his prime he was practically unbeatable

 

No boxer, not matter how great, is "practically unbeatable". This is the religious/DC superhero viewpoint I was talking about.