It’s a joke isn’t it. Imagine actually thinking that Ali and the 70’s HW’s couldn’t even compete today. Did you see the current Ring ratings that I posted. Even though it’s an absolutely absurd statement, I could somewhat understand it if today’s division was stacked full of great fighters. But it’s not. All of this ‘modern athletes are superior’ is utterly absurd. Boxing just doesn’t progress like that. Did you see the comparisons that I did between the current MW’s and the ones from 1987 and 1992? And it’s not an anomaly, as I could literally post 20 other examples if I wanted to. Imagine thinking that Ray Leonard and Ray Robinson etc, couldn’t compete in today’s WW division. It’s mind boggling. I honestly worked out for myself as a 13 year old fan of the sport, that any great fighter could fight and have success in any era, where they would have simply won and lost, depending on who they fought and how they matched up stylistically. I learnt as a young kid that styles make fights. These guys are so ignorant that it’s staggering. The thing that gets me, is that if you use their logic, you’re effectively saying that even guys like Floyd and Manny wouldn’t be able to compete with the best fighters in 20 years. It’s absurd. If their logic was sound, then it would mean that today’s MW’s were the best MW’s of all time. It would mean that today’s SMW’s are the best SMW’s of all time. If boxing continuously progressed, then all of today’s guys would all be the best of all time. Yet when you realise that there’s literally a number of whole divisions that are inferior to some from decades ago, you know for sure that they arguments are utterly absurd. There’s many fighters from the past who were just superior than many of today. They just had more skill and ability. There’s many fighters of the past who would easily beat many guys of today. But they can’t see it, as they look at the recorded sprinting times etc. I read their comments and just shake my head. Anyway, it’s great to debate you. You have great knowledge. I always enjoy reading your posts.
Why are people saying that Prime Muhammad Ali is too small to beat Zhang as if we didn't recently witness Usyk take AJ's soul twice? Or as if we never saw David Haye beat Nikolai Valuev? Or as if we never saw a 212lbs Deontay Wilder spark out Tyson Fury (who was also knocked out by cruiserweight mind you)? You guys are taking this Size Uber Alles stuff way too far. Size doesn't matter if you can't hit anything.
That's kind of my point. It's not even like you need to be an Usyk level fighter to overcome a large size disparity at heavyweight. If Wilder and Haye could do it, Ali certainly could.
Didn't Andre the Giant and Big John Studd have a famous hit your opponent in the ass with a broomstick match in Wrestlemania?
Ali was the bigger man in the vast majority of his fights, he stunk up the joint with a lot of jabbing and grabbing Wlad style. Midgets Cooper and Frazier knocked him down, Zhang could do some serious damage.
Steve Cunningham isn't 6'7 and he had no problems knocking Fury out. Otto Wallin isn't 6'7 and he turned Fury's face into mince meat. Not trying to hate on Fury but just using him to illustrate how overrated modern SHW's can be in this regard. People say things like "boxing has evolved!!!! Or is boxing the only sport that hasn't changed in 60 years?!??" Which obfuscates the fact that sports get better on AVERAGE, but the best doesn't ever really change all that much. One in a billion talent is one in a billion talent regardless of era. The average basketballer in 1960 gets shits on by the average basketballer in 2020, but Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell would still be amazing today. Likewise, yes the average boxer from the 40's or 60's would get annihilated by the average boxer now, but the Ali's and SRR's of the world would still dominate today and there's little evidence to suggest otherwise. I'm not an old timer either, I was defending Zhang in another thread by saying it's not unlikely that he hits harder than Foreman due to his size and handspeed, but you'd have to do more than that to beat Ali. Why was nobody talking about him beating Ali after he lost to Hyrgovic?
Chris Arreola and Dillian Whyte became #1 contenders in this era. Boxers such as Stiverne, Peter, and Martin won belts. People really think Ali was so terrible as a boxer that he wouldn't even make it in the rankings today, let alone win a belt? He's worse than the boxers I mentioned? Those slow, sloppy cavemen could easily handle his hand and foot speed and they hit harder than all the sluggers who tested Ali's chin? Ali's head movement, footwork, and counters would be useless and Zheng just easily tracks him down and crushes him in 10/10 attempts, styles and experience be damned...? If you honestly believe that, then I may as well be typing in Swahili and nothing I write will get through to you. I know there are people who think size and modern training are the end all be all, but this is just embarrassingly hilarious. I wish Zhang nothing but the best, but if he suffers a humiliating loss to a much smaller opponent such as Usyk I'm definitely bumping this entertaining train wreck thread.
Such a dumb comment. Cant believe this shite logic is still used in 2023. Do you not realize Ali had very similar dimensions as Usyk.....Who is on the verge of unifying HW for first time in 20 years? Ali was even more muscular and filled out the frame better. Ali was 221lbs VS Nortion when he was the same age Usyk is now who weighed 220.9 againbst Dubois. Ali walked around 240lbs back then and that was in an era w/ 15 rounds where you had to be more cut for stamina. Hed def be 225-230 today.