A pet peeve of mine is how many or even most posters automatically pick their favorite fight in EVERY matchup to do better than EVERY other fighter. They seem to forget that styles make fights. Ali was a better overall fighter than Foreman, but Foreman matched up vastly better against Frazier than Ali did. Why is it so hard to apply that concept to hypothetical matchups? Instead, Ali is ubiquitously given credit for being the most likely to beat any fighter, even when there is little rational reason. So, take the below fighter,(and in all cases, prime v prime) and pick who you think would do better against them, Ali or Louis. Doesn't mean either always has to win, just who would be more likely to win. I'll put my picks in a follow up post. Holmes Rocky Wlad Vitali Holyfield Lennox Bowe Tyson
Holmes: Ali. Holmes chin, size and movement give him an advantage over Louis, while he and Ali are very similar. Rocky: Ali. Ali's chin and size gives him a slightly better advantage than Louis would have. Rocky has a great chin too, and would be more vulnerable to someone who could outpoint him than ko him Wlad: Louis. Louis has a track record against biggish level shws, Ali doesn't. Ali relied on movement and size, which, when deprived of size as Ali would be, historically failed against top level shws. Louis relied on power, which has had more impact historically against SHWs, especially against Wlad. Vitali. Louis. See above. Ali slightly better chance than Wlad because Vitali showed less vulnerability to power and more vulnerability to movement from smaller fighters. Holyfield. Ali, see Holmes and Rocky. Lennox. Louis, see Wlad. Bowe. Louis, see Wlad. Tyson. Ali, see Rocky.
Ali does better against all of them even though I think Louis was better than Ali. A peak Ali could chose a safety first fight, not get involved and box the pants off all of them if he so chose..(he wouldn't because the showman in him would come out) ..but if he "so chose" to box he could beat each on points and I don't think it outrageous to say so. Nobody could touch him if Ali didn't want touched. Louis is better than Ali because he looked better, was consistent, you can't fault his technique, temperament or tenacity. Joes even more dependable but in committing himself like he did so professionally Joe is having tougher fights with all of them.
Interesting. In a way, exactly the type of bad, matchup ignoring analysis that I hate, but you put an interesting spin on it at least.
Holmes: Louis. Louis had the jab to hang with Holmes and the power to cause problems for him. If Snipes bothered him with his right, I think Louis would do better. Rocky: Ali. Ali had the ability to box him a range and the durability to take the punches late rounds when his legs tired. Wlad: Ali. I feel Wlad has a problem against fast movers, because he likes to get set to throw (like Louis) and that he doesn't like speed either. Ali couldn't trouble him with power, whereas Louis could. However, in the battle of Louis / Wlad, I feel Wlad's excellent jab + ability to create space + size would handle Joe better than Mo. Vitali. Ali. I just can't see Louis standing in front of Vitali and throwing down all night without getting ground down by Vits. Ali has the option of sticking and moving. Holyfield. Louis. Louis has the firepower and skills to get rid of Holyfield, who could never resist a brawl. Ali might have problems with the versatile Holyfield's technical approach. Lennox. Louis, he's got the power to crack that chin. For some reason I see Ali having trouble with Lennox's size + skill. Bowe. Tossup. Probably Ali by a hair, since I don't rate Bowe's footwork much. Tyson. Ali, not a good idea to get into a firefight with Iron Mike, and that's what Louis would do.
Holmes. Ali out boxes Larry, wins on points. Louis knocks Larry down four times but gets stopped late. So Ali does better Rocky: Ali outpoints Rocky. Louis gets stopped by Rocky late. Ali does better. Wlad, Louis knocks Wlad out but gets off the floor to win. Ali stops him late so Louis does better on paper even though Ali wins totally unscathed. Vitali, Both stop Vitali on cuts. Equal. Holyfield, Louis knocks Holyfield out round 5 but wins with a closed eye. Ali stops him later so Louis does better on paper but Ali is more unscathed. Lennox. Louis knocks Lennox out like McCall did. Ali wins on points. Louis does better. Bowe gets knocked out by Louis early. Ali stops Bowe late. Louis does better. Tyson knocks out Louis but Ali stops Tyson. Ali does better.
Holmes - Ali Rocky - Louis Wlad - Louis Vitali - Ali Holyfield - Ali Lennox - Ali Bowe - Louis Tyson - Louis
Holmes - Louis Rocky - Louis Wlad - Louis Vitali - Louis Holyfield - Ali Lennox - Louis Bowe - Louis Tyson - Ali
I tend to give the nod to Louis when getting the other guy out of there might prove critical, and I tend to give the not to Ali when matching fire is likely to be a risky strategy.
Holmes - Ali Rocky - Louis Wlad - Louis Vitali - Can't separate them Holyfield - Louis Lennox - Ali Bowe - Louis Tyson - Ali
Ali does better than Louis in all of them bc he has ADAPTABILITY. the fighters themselves show who has a better shot bc Louis matches poorly with Ali at least Ali of the early 70's.....Louis HIMSELF says is weakness was crowders or guys with mobile footwork...doesnt Ali adapt to BOTH styles? Sorry but this is common sense here. Louis did well with stationary guys standing in front of him ,i wont even bring up fights he actually lost. And how does Louis do better with Holmes than Ali himself a guy who trained under the Ali pedigree of fight structure? Makes No sense.....did everyone forget Ali had a chin too? @2:20 about he says this.... This content is protected
