IF ALI never existed ...who would be considered the greatest?

tyson didnt go into boxing because of muhammed ali u idiot he got into boxing coz of bobby stewart at spartfort correctional facility.

 

i agree, ali was and dundee were cheats as well and the decisions he got like frazier 2 and ken norton fights,

let alone the smells and ripped glove with henry cooper

 

i dont begrudge you your opinion or your criticism, whether i agree or not.

but its kinda disingenuous to act like he werent all that.

ok lets put it on you. who do you rate higher (heavyweights)?

 

It would have to be George Foreman


Like this first reply said, it is possible that he could have reigned till his 40's with no break.


Nobody would have ever made him look the way Ali made him look.

He would have been known as the greatest

 

Joe Louis.

Liston's standing might have improved a place or two.

 

I know that, you stupid horrible twat.

But he was motivated by Muhammad Ali, when he met him as a young kid.

You never know how things can turn out.

 

Yeah Ive got Joe at number 2 also.

 

Foreman, Holmes, or Louis. I would say with Louis. Its hard to say how Foreman and Holmes careers would have been different without Ali. I think that loss to Ali made Foreman come back to be a greater fighter and better person. It was a necessary loss for him.

 

Without Ali, Sonny Liston's next loss (even if he might have been picking less than great challengers) was not until about 1969.

This would have given him roughly a 7 year reign, which places him about equal with the likes of Sullivan, Corbett, Johnson etc. Given his modern perception, he is definitely going to be in the running for some people.

 

hard to imagine liston reigning till 1968 because he was past his prime when he won the title.

 

Let's look at this another way: Who would've beaten Liston in the 60s? I have the theory that he was undone by Ali. He hadn't had the time to at least try to redefine himself in a more palatable way to the unwilling masses. La Cosa Nostra was under fire for its shenanigans throughout the 40s and 50s in boxing and who knows, Liston might have been able to shake them loose within a few years. I think that at the very least, he would have been healthier between the ears.

Frazier wouldn't have beaten Liston -not even in '68 or '70. Remember, the man was dissipating by the mid-60s with alcohol and worse but he was still climbing the ranks before (and after) he ran into Leotis Martin's right hand -and he was well ahead on the cards when that happened. He was a freak of nature.

I think that a more mature Foreman may have taken him in '72 or 73 in a battle that would have been better than King Kong vs. Godzilla. But Foreman would have had a shorter reign and would not have beaten Holmes.

My guess is Liston after a long and violent reign of terror that may have lasted a decade.

 

Vey true.

Hence my comment that Liston's standing might have improved a place or two.

 

It's not your diction.

And OFFEND is not the appropriate term here.

Maybe AMUSES would better fit the bill.

No, he was a BOXER first and foremost. Had he NOT been a boxer first, he could never have become the Cultural phenomenon.

Gold medal in Rome, pulling off the biggest upset in boxing in years by stopping Liston, these came before the cultural phenomenon bit.



And this is the bit that amused: