Did Ali have the easiest Heavyweight reign 65'-67'

Machen was ranked 4 in Feb 64, if I remember correctly (WBA).

 

Yes they were ranked. Liston champ. Clay was #1, Jones #2, Terrell #3, Machen #4.

 

Liston not long after the Miami fight. His purse was frozen initially pending the medical exam, eventually released when they found a paper cut on his shoulder. :hey

Clay was stripped around Autumn 1964 if i recall correctly, main reason being 'contract irregularities over future fights' (i.e. Liston rematch)

 

Well hospital officials termed him with acute scizophrenia, a paranoic and dangerous to the public and to himself (after being caught writing his wife a suicide note) so it was always going to be an uphill battle. His did well to get any sort of title tilt. It would be been nicer had it been Clay all the same, but I don't think he was wholly deserving.

 

If you want to pick apart any man's resume that way, you can.

"SRL fought the wrong fight in Montreal"

" Duran was weight drained and on laxatives for the rematch"

" Foreman ( in the jungle) was exhusted by the heat (and he was 'exposed')

" Frazier (Manila) was blind in one eye (and past it)"

" Tarver and Martinez both came to prominence with lucky punches"

"Tyson didn't train properly for Douglas"

And so on...


Ali took the title from Liston and made him his first defence.

He then fought Patterson, Terrell, Williams, Folley, Chuvalo, Cooper and Mildenberger during his reign.

He made NINE defences in under twenty-two months.

These included three former or current HW champions, two of them ATGs.



Easy ?

Compared to who ?

 

When Clay challenged Liston I think Terrell, Machen and Cleveland Williams were equally deserving, but Liston had already beaten two of them, and Clay had a loud mouth.

 

I think we're discussion the same point from different angles. Had Louis defended against the likes of, say, Roper and a partially blind Lewis every time out, we'd have a right to call the quality of his reign into question. But he faced good solid contenders as well, and a couple of great fighters too. and that's why he deserves credit for having one of the very best reigns in history.

Had Ali defended strictly against the likes of London and a fading Williams, then obviously you could claim his reign was easily navigated. But there were some also some good solid contenders, and even a great fighter or two, and the way he handled those fighters is part of the reason why he's got the reputation as one of the very best heavyweights to ever lace up the gloves.

Both fighters had quality victories against quality opponents, while maintaining a high level of activity and defending quite regularly in a very short period of time. And it boggles my mind when people question either of their reigns.

 

Agreed,

A vast amount of activity, coupled with impressive performances, and topped by wins over a few really good opponents here and there, is just as good as a short reign consisting of a select few elite wins.. Ali fought in 9 title bouts, in just 22 months, and convincingly defeated Liston, Patterson, Terrell and Folley... There is no rational argument that would bolster the claim of his title reign being weak or easy....