If Frazier could beat Ali....why can't Tyson? Just sayn....

You've selected a few results from ATGs to support how boxing should be run from the grassroots up....

Thats still "what if" and guessing the future though mate, divisions are needed in boxing and while we have HWs rountinely coming in at 17-18 stone we need a cruiserweight division in whatever form.

Have we stopped debating this seriously then?

 

That's all well and good, I know we're pondering hypotheticals here but there is more chance of hell freezing over than current top level fighters boxing more than 3 times a year for the reason that TV pays top fighters well and they have no need or want to do it anymore. Times have changed, they're fighting to live well not to live.

 

Are we seeing more of it these days or does it just look like these guys are more successful because they've picked up a version of the title at a new weight rather than had to fight their way up a division towards a single champion?

 

Tyson had speed and brillient combinations, but Frazier was a better pressure fighter and much stronger mentally. Ali just has too much character, will and mentality for Mike. Ali's mental strength and ability to absorb punishment is inhuman and it kind of weakens Tyson's punchers chance, because that's all he has IMO. No man can take the punishments Ali could. Tim Witherspoon has talked about the incredible amount of punishment Ali took to numb his body for fights in sparring sessions and he would deal with whatever Tyson threw.

Also the prime Ali was not an excessive holder, the older one was when he lost his legs and was fighting on toughness and pride so Tyson does have a chance with that version. The young Ali would tie a guy up briefly, push him off and keep on moving. He could move all night and he had the best set of legs the heavyweight division has ever seen. He would dodge Tyson’s bull rushes until they became futile lunges. Another important attribute that Ali had which would make the difference is, Ali could fight while completely tired and this is something we know Tyson definitely couldn't do. Ali was also capable of fighting the same once in a lifetime fight Buster Douglas fought...almost 8 out of 10 times.

 

I don't know...is the simple answer to that.

But either way it works doesn't it? Having 1 world title and cutting weight divisions has a lot of similar implications for competition. Do both and it probably makes things more unreasonable in an era where a loss is a sin but while you've got 4 people to work around I would still expect to see a lot of multi-division champs with the classic divisions. A number more in line with the achievement its supposed to be I might add.

 

It was rhetorical question mate. I didn't expect you to know and I don't know either...;O)

 

To look at this in a basic way, I think if the minimum jump in weight was 8lbs (fly > bantam or bantam > feather as in the way I outlined earlier) even with 4 world champions that would say SOMETHING about a fighter. It doesn't neccessarily say he's great, or even top level in his own era, of course not, but it says something. I don't think a 2 division world champion says much of anything these days without a further research into how he achieved it.

Koki Kameda 3 weight world champ anyone?

 

This is true, it's a double edged sword but in exchange for people getting lucrative income from this sport (a good thing) quality has suffered (a bad thing)

The sport seems to thrive when society isn't.

Gaz, I think the latter. The average Joe sees a trinket and buys into that fighter, or so the promoters seem to think judging by how they put their fighters into 'interim' fights and so on and pay the sanctioning fee. Someone knows it doesn't mean anything, so it can only mean one thing; hope people dot know enough and buy into it.

I was getting ratty above, but my point was so what if we only have a few of these awesome defining P4P moments...that's how it should be!!! We shouldn't label Pac a '20 weight world champ' but should've lauded him if he'd won two with exactly the same opposition he's had. If Floyd had won the World lightweight championship only and retired with a 34-10 ledgar, he could still be greater than he is today. Or he wouldn't be. Either way we'd know for sure. Calzaghe might've been super formidable still, but his bad hands and more regular schedule could see him drop a few, especially as he takes on some big light heavies (and beats some!)

I just feel with marketing now it's kinda' easy to manafactire a potential star. Back in the day, they'd be more likely tk be found out sooner or later. Now I spend most of my time Reading about 'World champs' like Andre Berto andtwo weight world champ' Linares and then people buy into it?!?

I know I shouldn't get annoyed with the way it is, but I feel like my sport o's suffering because of the confusion it causes the casual fan. The sport could prosper with a move back to it's roots (no jokes about barelnuckle boxing I don't mean that far ) and push it's way back into the public consciousness like it used to be. I think it's no secret that boxing has declined in popularity as it's become more and more plastic.

 

No worries Flea, I was only kidding. TBH the "extra" weights have never really bothered me, most have been around for over 50 years now. Its the bull**** belts and multiple world champs that really **** me off and are what I think has killed the sport for the casual sports fans.

As soon as you have multiple ways to the top you are just asking for fighters to avoid the toughest challenges, look for the easiest route to fame and fotune and that means tbhe fans miss out on a lot of top fights.

 

Hopefully the above 'Swiss Toni'-esque meltdown will finally give everyone the key to unlock why I don't rate Floyd Mayweather anywhere near the top 70 fighters of all time. I think hw falls into your criteria there Gaz.

How many weights would Manny have conquered? How many linear champs has he beat? Is it flyweight, feather, super feather and light welter? 2-weight world champ under the original 8 weight classes (as classified by the British board in 1905 I think??? McGovern and Dixon were 'featherweight' World champ at 118lbs (Bantam limit) and Bob Fitzsimmons beat Jak Dempsey for the 'middleweight' title at 154lbs, junior middleweight today.)

Weird thought? With 24-hour weigh in's, Fitz could probably make Welter today A man who once held the Heavyweight title Its no accident fighters from eras gone by regularly make our P4P lists, moreso than fighters from the last twenty years. We can't all be favouritist or nostalgic for eras we never lived in!!!

 

Yeah that and the fact that casual fans what a name, and a character at the top. When 'world champion' starts to mean 4 things, possibly 4X however many baubles the ABC's can dream up, it really confuses the issue.

The old way was transparent, and built characters/heroes far more easily.

 

Its the same issue as the question above isn't it? People will say that Mayweather was world champ from super feather to jr middleweight and that successfully jumping weights is commonplace these days but what has he actually achieved at these higher weights when put into the context of the "weight jumpers" of yesteryear?

 

Great thread BTW guys!:good

 

Yeah, glad we hijacked it :good

I expanded on that short post again reckon why skunk was grown in whizz or summat :rofl

 

I especially love how people have paid close attention to the thread title the past 2 pages.