ali vs the greats prime for prime

Also, to base a fighters' greatness using the stats of the users of ESB is a bad idea. As much as I love this site, as it relates to my favourite sport, the amount of complete dickheads on here knows no bounds.

The amount of threads I have seen proclaiming wlad klitschko as a top 10 ATG is proof enough.

 

In thinking about this over the years, I've always thought that Dempsey might give Ali the most trouble. IMO I doubt he would knockout Dempsey; it would be a matter of Ali boxing him and keeping him off of him as much as he can, and countering effectively throughout.
But Jack was fast, a whirlwind with a stiff punch from both sides. And Ali has shown he can be hit by left hooks.

Holmes could be another difficult matchup as well.
My $0.02

 

Jack Johson fought 20 or more rounds on many occasions, I would say he is well conditioned to outhustle or outwork any or at least hang with and not be outworked by any man.

 

Jack didnt throw a lot of punches. He was a reactive fighter first and foremost and was built for longer fights. Ali's high energy+combination throwing style is much more suited for a 12-15rounder.

 

I favour a Peak Ali ('65 Patterson to '67 Folley) against all other Peak Heavyweights.

 

Consider Johnsons opponents and the general style of his era. Punches were thrown sparsely giving Johnson the perfect opportunity to react, block with his glove and counter. His opponents often had shorter reach and had no notable speed advantages making this style perfect for him in his day.

Ali, however, would be throwing in combination and stepping back after throwing, his longer reach and unrivaled dancing speed would make Johnson an easy nights work choice IMO.

 

As far as credibility goes the average classic poster has more credibility than you when discussing a topic in the classic. So for you to say your opinion is the defined answer and the polls and threads in the classic are non credible in comparison to your opinion is rather ignorant.

If you consider the opinions of the classic forum to be non credible why waste your time here, your superior mind could have you taking Bert Sugars job when your old enough to buy a cigar.:hi:



:blurp

 

Good job at being defensive and take what I said out of context. What I meant it simply anybody can post a top 10 list here. I'm sure there are credible members of this forum and if they have him in their top 10 that is one thing.

And in regards to your first sentence you do not have any idea as to what I know about boxing or how long I have been following it, so it is you who are ignorant, as I have read your nonsense all over this board. You are a Lennox Lewis fanboy and that clouds your ability to see the truth of his career, which is fraudulent in many ways to say the least.

 

And those punches were thrown in smaller gloves, and set up more by more feints, so the consequences and difficulties in counterpunching were not easier, but merely different. Do you think they just stood in front of each other throwing one shot? They were probing for opportunities to land their leads, drawing and feinting.

Do you think Ali's style would work back exactly back then, carving circles for 25 rounds, throwing open handed flurries with small, thin gloves? He'd **** his hands up completely. And get countered, and have to deal people who could actually fight inside of a clinch and retaliate in kind to the pulling neck down **** he always got away with.

No all time great heavyweight is 'easy work' for another.

 

Thank you.

People on this forum act like Jack Johnson was some kind of flunk.

WTF???

 

I was assuming because the thread was focused on Ali, that all fights would be held when ever people considered his prime was. I debating the fight as though the two fought in 1965, where small gloves wouldn't be an issue and the fight would be 15 rounds.

 

I never once questioned what you know about boxing , simply pointed out to you your credibility when posting in the classic forum in response to you mockingthe credibility of the classic forum.

To call me a Lewis fan boy is a tad overstated and is an immediate discredit to yourself as you are now grouped with the trolls and idiots who want to come and claim that people are fan boys. If you had followed the classic forum closely you would see i often avoid pointless Lewis threads due to being tired of repeating myself to every new guy that comes along and has an aim to discredit him.

 

Mocking credibility? I was merely stating that if 10 people posted a top 10, we would have to know the credibility of those putting up the lists. I was not aware that everybody in the classic forum was an expert, thanks for letting me know.

And as far as the bold mentioned above, it's funny you say that, yet here you are. It is you who is the troll, and it's obvious at every post you have made that is directed toward me. You took what I said out of context, and when I explained to you what I meant, you still feel the need to step over it and not acknowledge what I said. That is a troll. I am simply stating my opinion of Lewis, and you felt the need to go on a rant about me being not credible and ignorant.

You must be the authority on who is credible and who is ignorant. Is that correct?

 

Again you are the one who brought up credibility.

Now you are "new" round here yet you said before you have read a lot of what i have wrote. I am thinking that you are not as new as you would have us believe.

If you really believed what you were saying you would use your main account.

 

I have no alts, you can ask Jab or anybody else that knows me. Jab and I have never seen eye to eye on Lennox Lewis but he can attest that alts are not my style, I don't have the time or the desire. You are making yourself sound more and more ignorant.

I have frequented this forum in the past and had never made an account but enjoyed some good reads as it gets a lot of attention. The other forums I frequent has slowed almost to a halt so I decided to create an account here and join in the fun.