Which 1970 s Heavyweight Is Far Too Overrated, IYO?

Liston was injured in the first and took a dive in the second, Terrell looked slow as hell and did nothing in their fight, Chuvalo was never a good fighter. Patterson was a good win but was also small as hell for the weightclass and it showed in the fight. It seems like when Ali stepped up in competition in the 70s suddenly he also started looking much worse as a fighter despite still being in his athletic prime.

 

Still mad about that sorry your arguments were awful and I thoroughly debunked you no need to hold a grudge.
And of those fighters who was better then anyone Lennox or Holmes beat?

 

I was not comparing Holmes and Ali's health as they aged, just that Holmes continued to fight using good fundamentals as he aged. Ali was well trained, and he had the amateur background and fundamentals too. Throughout his history as a fighter when a fight got tough he would forget some of the flash and go back to his basics. I think the reason Ali didn't look impressive in the 70s to a lot of people is because the competition got much better than it had been in the 60s.

I have always scored Holmes - Norton about 10-5 for Holmes. It never looked like a close fight to me and I've always questioned the scoring. Maybe the media and boxing organizations wanted Norton to be champ? At the time Holmes was an unknown while Norton had fought Ali and been in a few movies. Norton would have been easier for them to promote and would have made them more money. I've also never scored any of the Ali - Norton fights for Ali. I thought Norton won all of them.

 

So does that mean Wlad and Holmes who have close to the same amount of defenses as Louis while fighting in what I would argue are better eras and beating better fighters are just as good as Louis and better then all other heavyweights who don't have as many defenses?

Holmes best win is either Tim Witherspoon who ended being a very good fighter and a future champ, Norton who was still a very good fighter, or Ray Mercer who was a very good contender in the 80s one of the strongest eras in heavyweight boxing both are better then any of Louis's wins.

I would say he was very convincing in the first fight and while the second fight was closer it was still a clear Lewis victory and again Vitali, Tyson and Holyfield are still better win then ANYONE Louis beat.

My argument is that they beat better fighters while also being very dominant which I think is just as impressive as being slightly more dominant in a weaker era.

 

Then Louis, absolutely their wins are way better then his

 

Liston quite because he was losing in both, and Ali made Terrell look bad. Small as Patterson and Cooper were they could compete with the next generation.

Ali was never the same after the exile. Both Chuvalo and Patterson, who faced him in 1966 and 1972 tesifies to this. 60's Ali was the best version of him.

But it's not like struggled with everyone in the 70's either. He stopped Bonavena, Ellis and Quarry for example. It wasn't until the late 70's that he started to struggle with every top contender. But pleae don't tell me you think Ali vs Young or Shavers look anything like his prime self.

 

Wlad and Holmes don't have nearly as many defences for the undisputed as Louis. Don't even think of mentioning Wlad's WBO defnces for god's sake.

Wlad also missed pit on the best of hs era. Holmes missed out on a lot of the best during his time - Thomas, Page, Coetzee, Tate and Dokes for example. He beat Weaver and Witherspoon before they really got going and never rematched them. Both were tough fights also.

So Holmes did a far less thorough job of cleaning out. And why was his and Wlad's era stronger than Louis's? Actually, one of the most consistent performers in the early 80's, Berbick, did not impress against the ghost of Ali.

There is just nothing talking for Holmes.

I don't see the case fo why the versions of Holy and Tyson Lewis fought were that super good either.

 

I've adressed the point that the 70's era was much better already. The evidence for it just isn't there.

Ali was clearly diminished in the 70's, as Chuvalo and Patterson both testified to, but in the early 70's he defeated all the top guys besides Frazier and Norton quite easily anyway. And I hope you're not going to say that the Ali that faced Young and Shavers was as good as the 60's one.

I had Holmes-Norton razor close. 1 round separating I believe. I think he would have lost to 1973 Norton that night. In fact, I feel quite certain of it.

 

I don't see how the very limited success of Foreman and Holmes proves the 1970s are better than the 1990s anymore than Patterson beating Bonavena proves the 1950s are better than the 1970s. 70s heavyweights like Quarry and Bonavena lost to older fighters from prior eras.

 

Liston had a bad shoulder injury in 1 and looked terrible afterwards as well. I honestly feel like Liston is overrated AF but that's a totally different story.
They could compete with people their size they never beat anyone who could compare to a modern heavyweight in size and the fact that Ali struggled with Cooper (who was the same size as a light heavy weight) is honestly a very bad look for him.
Then that's on a failure on his part how come so many fighters take time off and look fine afterwards or still look great despite being older its also no coincidence that he started to look worse once the competition got better whereas in the 60s the competition was pretty weak.
Even in fights that he won he got hit way too much and relied on his chin to carry him through which obviously is not sustainable hence why he started to decline so rapidly compared to someone like Floyd who is able to maintain his form because he almost never gets hit cleanly.

 

I'm not a Holyfield guy. But Bonavena and Quarry are not proxys for Holyfield or Moorer. And Patterson was like 37 when he beat Bonavena.

 

I’m on the record more than once here that I think Lyle is placed on way too high a pedestal here because of his compelling life story and the fact that this place gravitates to big punchers, especially heavyweights.

 

Their actual debut to end of championship reigns were 12 1/2 years for Holmes and 18 (or even 20 if you add the 2 year retirement before fighting Holmes) for Ali bearing in mind Ali had 3 1/2 years off.

Holmes did however fight at a respectable level for years after that with 2 and 3 year retirements. He just never fell off the cliff like thousands of others. His ability to take a punch never went and he was never a hopeless pitiful sight in there either. Still seems good now - unreal. Foreman is in a similar boat.

 

Ali made Liston look terreible. You think Tyson was the same after his absence from boxing? Dempsey? Louis? And they knew they were coming back, Ali didn't. Also he was in his 30's for most of the 70's. And he didn't get hit much at all by most of the contenders he faced in the early 70's. But I'm willing to bet you haven't actualy watched the fights against Quarry, Ellis, MacFoster, Bugner etc.

In short Ali's resume shits all over Holmes. And Ali didn't have as many strugglies in his 60's prime that Holmes had with Norton, Snipes, Shavers and Weaver. So it's not like Holmes never hgot hit, even in his prime. And have a look at Lewis vs Bruno, Mercer and McCall if you want to talk about getting hit. And those were before he slowed down.

Look at The Ring ratings for 1963 and 1973 and tell me who Ali didn't beat on them and then try and find me something similar for Holmes or Lewis.

 

Floyd took years off and didn't lost a step when he came back so did Vitali when he took time off so there are some boxers who this does not apply to.
I did watch all of them and he got hit plenty in those fights especially by left hooks, he was a sucker for hooks and a good jab which is why Norton and Frazier gave him so much trouble(imo he never beat Norton). And a lot of those fights he won not through superior boxing skill but by outlasting his opponent which isn't something a excellent technician should be doing.
I never said Ali's resume is better then Holmes all I said is I think Holmes boxing skills were better then Ali's which based on how long he was able to be competitive with top fighters I think proves that point I admit that his resume is the best among all heavyweights I just think his actual skills are overrated.