Ali 1974 vs Joshua of today, who wins?

Joshua is a novice. Seriously....learn what good boxing is all about. You know complete squat about the subject.

 

You are a novice and Perry is a girls name.

 

If he had to put a version of Ali in against Joshua it would be the 1967 version, no doubt. I'd still have Joshua as a favorite, though.

 

Lol. Your are as much a novice as your hero. Issue is Joshua may improve. You have no hope.

 

Based on what? Williams was past his prime and not even actually medically fit what would be allowed today when he lost most of his mobility at that time period. No 210 pounder is out pointing Joshua ,there just not.

To beat him you have to HIT him. Klitchko was able to do this and keep a competitve fight bc hes one of the hardest punchers in history and the guy had the physical tools to keep joshua off him( until Joshua decided to attack). Only the Ali who fought foreman would be remotely believable in this match up.

Foreman is the closest thing to Joshua and style wise that we would have to go on here that Ali fought.....

 

Don't know what you think you are answering to. My bet would be on Joshua, but I'd give 1967 Ali the best chance of any Ali version. And that is based on the same thing that Ali himself, Dundee, Cus D'Amato, Patterson, Chuvalo and many others saw - he was faster and had better stamina pre-exile.

I'd actually say someone like Lyle was closer style-wise than Foreman. Probably Liston as well. Foreman didn't have the boxing skills Joshua has. Foreman's punches was wider and more telegraphed, and he wasn't much for combinations. Therefore he was also more susceptible to the rope-a-dope.

 

Ali said he was at his best after he came back....it doesnt really matter what the others said,looking better isnt actually being better. Ali in the 70's was smarter/stronger and more duarable even more accurate ,you cannot win without those qualities in this match.You are picking a less strong Ali who danced around more ( that doesnt win fights against elite fighters) in the 60's no one had the ability to take advantage of this they were all slow footed guys.

Joshua is a great ring cutter and look at all the guys Ali struggled with in the 60's ,he was EASILY hit then still,he did not have the tie up game or ring generalship he had in the 70's. Lyle was not as imposing as foreman neither fight like Joshua but going on physical abilities to smother you go with foreman not Lyle who was smaller than Foreman.

Also Foreman used the right hand stuff a jab tactic( joshua also uses this often),of course Joshua is more skilled than Foreman but the way Ali would be pressured and the tempo of the fight pace EQUALS Foreman and the problems Ali would have to deal with .

I cant even compare Liston here,hes not remotley like Joshua in every category.

 

Ali said on numerous occasions that he was better pre-exile. And many others did as well. And he was the same weight in the Norton and Frazier rematches that he was in 1967, so there's no reason to believe he was stronger. Ali himself said that he'd beat Foreman with more ease in 1964 than he did in 1974 (in an interview that I've posted here several times before).

Liston was somewhat smaller than Foreman, but used his jab more consistently and had better combinations and punching technique, so in that way he was more similar to Joshua. Lyle was practically the same size as George, didn't have the same power but better skills. It's true that Foreman was better at cutting off the ring, though.

You won't agree with me about this no matter how much we argue, so I'll stop here. Cheers!

 

I would also pick this version, but how would Joshua be the favorite?

 

No brilliant analysis - I just think his size advantages coupled with his power and relative speed and skill would be too great for Ali to overcome.

 

Land of the amateurs. So many as lost as anyone can be lost.

 

No, Kenny's a respectable hitter for sure as Bojak showed.

 

Insightful post. Such a great time in the heavyweight division. Norton took everything Holmes had over 15 too. I thought Ali hurt Frazier a few times but they fought a lot of rounds.

It's almost as if Norton's chin had a cut off point. You can almost say he had a superb chin up to a certain point, but that point you could call a breaking point. Against punchers below that point it was rock, above and it turned to glass. I wonder if it was mental (tightness etc) or purely physical.

 

Frazier was hurt many times during his bout with Ali in Manila. In fight two Ali hurt Joe badly in round 2. Several times also in fight one in 71.

Nortons main issue regarding punching power was his tendency to slap with an open glove. You see this often during his bout with Holmes especially during heated exchanges.

Norton was asked who hit harder Ali or Holmes. He picked Ali.

 

listen ali weighed on AVERAGE 205 in the 60's. He was not built into a 220 POUND FIGHTER,AND averaging HIS COMFORT WEIGHT WAS AROUND 210 THEN....THIS MAY NOT SEEM ALOT BUT WHEN YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AND ADD UP POUNDS IT MEANS ALOT.

Would you like me to post the video where he says hes better??lmao

thers no reasion to believe he was stronger???Really? so do you think Cooper and others who knocked ali down would do the same to the guy who took Frazier/Norton.and foreman punches? Ali of 64 would get knocked out had foreman came at him like that fights prove otherwise...as FOREMAN stated had Ali fought Frazier in the 60's he would have lost more than won bc of the exact things im posting here...Ali did lose to Frazier bc he was not used to such an aggressive style,against a smaller Ali with less ability to nutralize someone...well,yea Frazier would have an easier time wouldnt he...???.....


Do you really think a 190 pound Mildenberger could have buckled Ali of 74? Come on,you guys need to really think and study these fights and what a fighter is actually capable of and stop watching clips.