ALI vs ATGs at HEAVYWEIGHT

I agree that Lewis would be a tough for Ali..even the 1964 version IMO..however..based on styles,the only thing Lewis had over Ali was power...the reach is nearly even...

That said..I just don't see how a prime Lewis would get to a prime Ali..knowing what I've seen of their respective primes..simply did'nt have the feet to catch up..and as good as Lewis's jab was,Ali's in his prime was better...No way Ali KOs Lewis tho'..Lennox had a much better chin than given credit for here..

The way I see it..Ali pitches a near-shutout in compubox numbers..UD.Lewis IMO has a puncher's chance here..given the fact Ali did everything else better than Lewis.

IMO again..the gusy who'd have agreat chance of beating Muhammad Ali are guys like prime Tyson...lots of speed to stay cut the ring on him...enough movement to say in the pocket...and enough offensive power output to slow him down..or hurt him..none of which,are Lewis's forte'.

I know the old-timers get a lot of love on these boards..but the reality tho' is that,at his absolute peak,there is no HW,alive or dead I would favour over Ali..He was a special talent at his peak..Not invincible..but certainly hard to beat.


Lewis gets underrated here..mainly because of his two KO losses..he was a formidable fighter when he's on...Quite capable of beating a lot of those so-called HW ATGs..His size alone would guarantee it...add his skills and you have a great top 10 HW ATG.

Holla.

 

TBH im a HUGE Ali man, im also a very big fan of Lennox Lewis. To me to pick a winner here would be akin to Sophies choice.

But over a series of fights, i dont think its unreasonable for Lewis to win 3 outta 10. Sorry but thats the best way i can put it.

 

Yes, the Langford, Jeffries, Ketchel etc that Johnson beat were better than Holyfield AT THE TIME HE FACED LEWIS.

Can't believe you couldn't realize that.



And yes, I am going to say things that aren't 100% true about fighters I like... because I'm a fan - and all fans are bias.


Just like you are - "iron chin Lewis" and "Lewis could beat Ali".




As for the Holy-Lewis debate...


If BERT SUGAR (who knows a **** load more about boxing than both you and I combined) ranks Lewis at 17th and Holyfield at 11th.... you should realize that Holyfield is a MUCH greater Heavyweight.

I know it's just another opinion - but it's Bert Sugar's opinion - and therefore superior to most.

 

Lets end it:


Holyfield > Lewis at Heavyweight and Holyfield > Lewis P4P

 

He didn't adapt too well to Norton. Or Frazier. Marginally effective against both, no effective aggression, sporadic ring generalship at best. Yet Foreman blew them both away

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R0ro_Rq26I[/ame]

www.youtube.com

 

If you think Holyfield is a better heavyweight than Lewis, the question isn't why is that. The question is what is clouding your mind to make you believe that, in the face of two head to head fights that show the opposite of what you believe...

www.youtube.com/eslubin

 

Their 1999 fights don't prove much, Lewis was Peak, Holyfield was Old.

 

I can't think of any ATG's HVY's I'd take over Ali but, on the other hand, I think most of them have a live shot at beating him. In 15 rounds, Frazier, Marciano, Holmes, have very live shots; Dempsey, if he came along in Ali's day and was at his best, would have been tough. Tunney and Johnson should not be underrated as opponents for Ali. If Ali had come along in Jeffries day and fought Jim at Jim's best, 20 or 25 rounds, I'd call that one 50/50. Louis will always have a fair chance. I think Ali's a bit wrong for Sullivan or Tyson, but they'd have a chance. Ali on an off night vs. Lewis or Holyfield on a good night is interesting an match-up. Ali strikes me as just wrong for Foreman or Liston.

 

Well I always thought they said that about Holyfield for the Tyson fight, too. So I guess we should throw out that fight, and the Moorer rematch, since they fall into the old range. Maybe to be extra fair we should edit off the last 15 yrs of his career & focus on the 1st 10... Actually, maybe we should just isolate out on the Bowe rematch as the real Holyfield and throw everything else out

On second thought, maybe we should just ban boxing since a man fighting a man apparently doesn't tell us anything

www.youtube.com/eslubin

 

Actually, it makes sense.
Yes, he was past his best when he beat Tyson, like Ali was past his best when he beat Foreman (1974) and Frazier (1975). There's no need to "throw out" anything.

It shouldn't be controversial to say Holyfield was on the decline from about 1993/'94 onwards. His "prime" had started around 1987, he engaged in several very gruelling fights, and he turned 30 in 1992, so there's nothing unusual there.

 

@McGrain

I know you are a MUCH smarter and more knowledgeable poster than that McJackAss fool.


Yes, the Jeffries that fought Johnson was better than the Holyfield that fought Lewis. Reports of the pre-fight training camps say that Jeffries was in the best shape of his career, whereas Holyfield was far off his prime.


Holyfield's prime was between 1896 and 1991/1992.

Lewis fought him in 1999.


The Langford, Jeffries and Ketchel that fought Johnson were definitely better than the Holyfield that fought Lewis. Evander, by that point, had went through 3 wars with Bowe, heart complications started to become a real issue, etc.


Ketchel was only 23 coming into the Johnson fight, coming into the fight with a record of 48-3.

Langford was also only 23, coming into the fight with a respectable 32-4.

 

I know you like to play around a lot but this can't be serious right?

 

And you are telling me this?Just where did I write on this thread what you wrote in this contri?I write that the difference in the fight would be Ali's jab,elusiveness,workrate and stamina.I never dismissed Lewis' abilities(btw,I love the "contemptuously" part.Nice touch:good).But he had serious weaknesses that,I believe,Ali would be able to exploit.