CMV: I think Usyk beats any version of Ali

I asked you a question first dude. You replied to my question with a question, and now you're angry I won't answer your question.

 

Tell me you've never boxed without telling me you've never boxed.

 

I'm not angry, but your evasiveness and unwillingness to engage with the stats just makes it clear you don’t really understand the bigger picture here.

 

Southpaw can't land overhand left on fighter who gets nailed by orthodox left hooks isn't a rule in boxing.

I'd beat you in a boxing match.

 

Usyk wouldn't struggle with Cooney.

 

We are talking attributes of style, not quality. This isn't a How would Mildenberger do a Against Ali thread.

Usyk is far superior quality to Karl but with a similar attribute, thus the point.

I feel your being intentionally dense but don't really care given the source. Carry on.

 

I think stylistically Usyk is a very hard fight for Ali.
The same could be said in reverse Usyk would never had faced a fighter like prime Ali, who was quicker of hand and foot, had a rock solid chin and if need be could fight at a sustained pace long into the fight.
I’m Ali’s biggest fan but the biggest compliment I can give Usyk is that I’m not 100% sure on this one but would favour Ali.
Despite their losses Fury, Joshua and Dubois put plenty of leather on Usyk if they could Ali with his speed and slickness certainly could.

 

What stats? You never posted any stats. I'm the one who posted stats. I asked a question and then you answered my question with a question. The one being evasive is you! Projection much?

 

I very much respect Usky but he's getting a bit overrated ... both Fury fights were exceptionally close. Ali's speed would;d make the difference ... competitive for sure but Ali was the naturally bigger, stronger, faster man ... I'm not saying Usky took anything but if Ali trained the same , no way.

 

The stats I’m referring to show that as fighters face heavier opponents, their KO rate tends to go down—Ali and Frazier are clear examples of this trend. Try to keep up with the discussion instead of turning this into a 'gotcha' moment. You’re cherry-picking obviously correct stats just to win an argument when it’s clear you’re wrong. It’s not a good look.

 

That's not what I said at all imbecile. I said a left straight and a left hook are totally different punches. A fighter being weak to left hooks doesn't automatically mean they're weak to left straights.

The only thing you'd beat me in is a "being an obtuse jackass" competition. But I'm a pretty good actor.

 

You referenced 2 boxers where your claim is supported and I referenced 4 boxers that debunk your claim, so how do the stats favor your case?

 

There are top boxing analysts that don't think Ali ever beat Norton in their trilogy.
The 3d fight was a robbery and the 2d could've been a draw. Ok I'll give the 2d bout to Ali. He's 1-2 vs. Norton, not 2-1. I think Norton himself said that Ali was bigger than boxing.

Ali is the biggest myth in boxing of the past 50-75 years. Bigger than the very short prime of Mike Tyson.
Nostalgia (and other less nice reasons) is very powerful.
Overall Ali was the best HW from mid 60s to mid 70s. An era of less than full CW sized to small HWs.

 

It's the same for many heavyweight Holmes, Tyson, Shavers, Foreman etc the only exception are Fighters like Wlad, Lennox and Louis

 

Who are the top boxing analysts who had Norton shutting out Ali in the trilogy? Harold Lederman was one of the judges for the third fight. He scored it for Ali. He became the HBO judge for years. CBS had a panel score the fight. Frazier had it 8-7 Norton. If Frazier scored it that close how can it be a robbery? If Ali is a "myth" what heavyweight has a better resume? Ali beat four Olympic Gold Medalists which shows the length of his career, two consensus top ten heavyweight atgs, a bubble top ten atg, and six members of the International Boxing Hall of Fame