Are Muhammad Ali and Larry Holmes the two most technically gifted Heavyweights ever?

How to define Ali's special form of movement is a bit difficult. It was certainly technical, but not textbook technique.

How he threw his punches, especially the jab and right cross, and put them together was definitely textbook, though, even if he could be a bit sloppy in fights he didn't take very seriously. But in his big fights they're always on point.

Incidentally, a former coach at my club, who went on to become coach for the Swedish national team, used Ali as example of good punching technique. Pointed out how well the whole movement lined up with the direction of the punch, with no wasted energy,

Then you have the high end stuff like the pull counter, check hook, rolling and countering etc that are certainly textbook, if perhaps more advanced.

Then he had the things that are not text book like holding his hands low, leaning back, crossing his feet etc. Not going to the body and holding on the inside instead of fighting can be seen as tactical choices rather than flaws, though.

 

It's all there if you look without bias.

On his movement, the swinging of his leg behind him whilst out of range, leaving him momentarily uncentred, but then the regain of good foot placement and leverage it opened up on his jab or right hand whilst on the move - certainly unorthodox and even incorrect technique used to gain additional leverage and angle to exploit the orthodox fighter as they move around his own movement.

Often there's fine technique in the unorthodox - the art is hit and not be hit and then when hit, minimise and counter, exploit or use to bait and set traps. There's a skill in itself of taking one to land two or three but the one you take is defused by headmovement, framing, sometimes, just seeing it and bracing to deal with using your superior chin/durability.

When I first consciously saw Ali hide behind his shoulder and roll/blade away when he threw the jab to the body, I realised that I was stunted by my own biases.

It's like those that say RJJ was all reflex and no technique - there's ample technique in studying someone's shoulder and chest movement and honining your reflex and counters to read and time them before they throw, adding power and leverage to your shot as you catch them unbraced to deal with your punch whilst setting up to throw their own.

This doesn't make them classical technicians in the Harold Johnson or Joe Louis sense of boxing, but denying technique when it's glaringly there, I don't see the point.

 

Yeah Super Mike had a couple of tricks up his sleeve....perhaps more so after prison.

 

Ali was not technically educated at all. He fought using his natural gifts. Not really a good technical boxer, couldn't punch hard, and you can find a mare's nest easier than an Ali body punch.

 

These are som good breakdowns on Ali and Holmes.

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

At least have the balls to name me.

 

Your correct that he didn't throw a proper uppercut. Technically it was a flaw but Ali was so fast that 99% of heavyweights couldn't exploit it. Joe Frazier was the one that could effectively do that. Eddie Futch spotted it but Joe had to get in there and make it happen. He paid to get in there.

 

Your right but don't worry about it. Some folks gets emotional when you say anything that is not glowing praise of Ali. Posting a video of Ali knocking down Coopmen is a bit embarrassing. I look good hitting a heavy bag.
I'll take Futch's expert analysis over emotion everyday.

 

Trying to work them up.

 

True. And he clinched an awful lot to be called “The Greatest” by so many.

As far as Technically ‘gifted’ I think he means talented. I mean… Manny Steward would know a lot about that subject and he says Wladimir was the most talented he trained. I would say from a Technical standpoint that Wlad, Lewis, Vitali and Usyk have showed they are/were above the rest as far as timing, technique, ring savvy and so forth.

Holmes was good yes. But a bit overrated on here imo. Is he a top 10 HW yeah. But not these H2H unbeatable boxer he’s made out to be by some.

 

I think Ali and Holmes got a lot of leverage from their builds having longer legs that allowed for more power in quick on the spot punches

that's part of why Bowe was such a devastating finisher as he had that going on and put it into pressing offense

but Tyson's uppercuts were on another level

 

Obviously Tyson hit miles harder than those two. Those two did get good power into uppercuts when they wanted to tho. Holmes was more consistent in his power, he was consistent in his intent to throw it hard every time whereas Ali often threw arm punches and didn't go for power near as often.

 

Wladimir Klitschko clinched over 200 times vs Povetkin but yet you won't ever bring that up of course.

Ali also never clinched in his prime days during the mid to late 60s.

Wladimir on the other hand had to alter his style and clinch like an octopus, because he was afraid to be hit on his glass chin.

 

Ali didn't become clinch happy until the 70s so ur right about that. Sanders n Brewster made Wlad hug happy but tbf it worked for him for 11 yrs. King of the jab,jab,jab,right,clinch.