Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by SergioJ91, Aug 13, 2022.
Are these serious opinions?
All except the last couple of sentences. I'd favour Vitali to beat Usyk.
Dempsey via first round knockout?
Right because his win over Anthony is the same as Ali's win over Frazier right?
His win over Anthony is the same as Holmes win over Shavers right?
Or Foremans win over Frazier?
Get a grip for real. Ali stops Anthony. Holmes stops Anthony and Foreman murders Anthony.
What bone breaking punchers has Usky beaten again?
What fast heavyweights has he beaten again?
Tell me who he ever faced thst had a jab similar to a Holmes?
Aye. I rate him as the greatest, certainly greatest heavyweight. Prime Dempsey had no weaknesses in the ring, none whatsoever. He was an absolute technician and probably the hardest puncher ever. Usyk has no chance against Dempsey. He is the standard bearer that all heavyweights should aspire to be. Tyson tried but lacked the conviction. Only Louis and Marciano come close, the rest would be mincemeat if they met prime Dempsey in the ring.
I refuse to allow amateurs and modern-era enthusiasts to besmirch and degrade the accomplishments of the boxers of old. They were all far superior athletes, punchers, and boxers compared to the shite served up today and to argue otherwise would be an insult to common sense.
I like your avatar.
The difference I'd say is that most modern CWs are as big/bigger than most pre 90s HWs.
"If we had a survey about whether Ali went life & death with Karl Mildenberger, I predict you would be the only one who might say this."
Most would say that Ali going 154-144 over 12 with Mildenberger wasn't going life and death but this forum are generally Ali sycophants. If you posted videos of the fight though I predict that I would not be "the only one" who said this.
"But it would be completely unfair to only let Usyk see Ali, & Ali gets no even video looks to study his opponent."
I'm talking about the 24 year old 1966 Ali who ACTUALLY EXISTED, not some fantasy character who was born born in late 90's. I maintain that Usyk would school and batter the real world Ali who fought Mildenberger.
I took half an inch off Milde's height because fighters are typically overbilled (usually by more than 0.5 inches) and Ali himself was half an inch overbilled. It's not essential though, I have no problem referring to fighters by their billed heights if that is the standard you want to go by.
I went by the Boxrec figures which listed and documented Ali's defeats, not some propaganda that intends to downplay Ali's vulnerabilities. I say "at least two" because I know that at minimum two of his eight losses were to southpaws, information on stances is not available for all of the opponents who beat him unfortunately.
So Ali was 6 punches ahead going into the 12th round having absorbed 141 (many very clean) and you're saying that he may have had many more gears to go through? Mildenberger was a good Euro level man from the 60's but by modern standards was very short, very stubby, very light, very chinny and very featherfisted, with 18% as many amateur bouts as Usyk and his best amateur achievement being winning the German championship at LHW. Levels and levels below Usyk, which is obvious from comparative film of both men.
"I maintain that Usyk would school and batter the real world Ali who fought Mildenberger."
Absolute rubbish. You think Ali whom the vast majority of boxing experts think is the best heavyweight ever would get schooled by a boxer who had three HW fights. Your argument has no merit, please knock it off.
Look, I am just going to respectfully disagree with you. I said that I think he would have a chance against anybody, and I still think he would have a chance against anybody. His toughest style is pressure fighters, but he has beaten plenty of them in his vast amateur, semi-pro and pro careers.
I watched Usyk's fight with Briedis, and he won it fairly handily, in my opinion.
You are arguing against something I didn't say, so again, I'm going to let you go, here, respectfully.
There are many who do not favor Ali, & while some are sycophants, it is unfair & inaccurate to label all who might favor a top ATG as such.
Some just see a tremendous fighter-likewise it would be wrong-in both senses-to smear you as a suck up brown noser needy character projecting your unfulfilled needs & desires upon Usyk.
I did not postulate some Ali that never existed.
I took pains to detail what would be fair & unfair H2H competition.
I was clearly not going with an alternative timeline or giving Ali traits he does not have.
Again, I am saying of course Ali would get to view film & read about Usyk-otherwise it would be a very unfair match. You would have to erase all Usyk's memory & knowledge of Ali.
The difference in punch stats listed-& I renew my call for you to link the punch stat listings, although sometimes they are inaccurate-is a completely biased way for anyone to decide if a fight is "life & death".
A guy could be getting outpunched greatly by a light fisted mover yet drop him a bunch of times & at the end finish him: nobody would say that this would qualify...
Meaning you omitted what I keep writing, the number of times Karl was dropped & that he was stopped.
It is like just showing all the strike outs of Babe Ruth & Mickey Mantle & concluding that they were poor major league players, instead of among the best hitters ever. Omitting all the value & team wins that they created, especially through home runs & walks.
If I created THAT thread, & linked videos, & had people give their usernames...
You may well not be the sole person who thought it was life & death.
BUT it would be not less than in the 90%s.
Only exception is if new users or alt identies got on to corrupt & cook the figures!
OH & by your own standards you should ALSO not vote for "life & death"...
Because the question would be & always was did Ali go life & death, not compared how good he was compared to his most dominant performances-which would render "life & death" meaningless.
Since it ONLY means a very hard fight where the victor was in grave danger of losing-usually many times, & usually being floored, usually repeatedly.
I am not saying you were dishonest with using a good source like Box Rec: but you have supplied no reason why this worse than all other sources record of amateur listings is more accurate than others.
I do not know which is best.
Fair enough on the height issue. Although usually rounded off numbers are more suspect, & I go with what is most plausible-if no other sources say lower, then, unlike with many others like Tyson & Frazier officially but very dubiously at only a 1/2" shorter than 6'...I will go with the listed figure.
I already agreed that Usyk was significantly better than Mildenberger.
I never said Ali had "many" more gears to go through-please stick to my words or what is reasonably implied...
But that he like Usyk can & did step it up against superior competition.
"At least two" is reasonable given some you have no info on-just not clear that Ali fought more than are recorded, or lost to more than 2.
But continually unaddressed is that what he did as a way smaller 14-18 year old-especially when he was overwhelmingly winning-offers little reason to doubt him.
There are also Ali haters & those biased against past fighters or those not say SHW proportions.
So if virtually everyone-90 some percent-agrees that the bout in question is not "life & death"...
And with alternate answers, at least say 3/4 swear it was not a close fight...
Will you accept that your perception & description of their fight was wrong?
"Again, I am saying of course Ali would get to view film & read about Usyk-otherwise it would be a very unfair match."
You're postulating a version of Ali that never existed and never could exist because time goes one way. Usyk has studied Ali extensively, whereas Ali could never study Usyk. What next? Does Ali get 2018 PED's? Even if Ali had a few months to study Usyk using whatever methods were available to him in the 60's that wouldn't come close to trumping what Usyk knows about Ali. The matchup is inherently grossly unfair.
Look up "Compuboxbeta" and search "Ali" or "Mildenberger" and check the stats for yourself. "Life and death" doesn't specify number of KD's or injuries or how close a fighter may have been to losing. Mildenberger apparently outlanded Ali in 6 of the 11 full rounds contested and finished the fight landing 144 punches to Ali's 154. It's not unreasonable to call that a "war" or "life and death", even though you deem it to be hyperbolic.
Boxrec lists the names of the fighters Ali lost to and the dates, it also lists its sources. If you have an alternative source which lists Ali fights that boxrec doesn't have then send the link to me. Last time I checked Ali had 88 confirmed amateur bouts, which is why I said he had 88 "confirmed amateur bouts". He could have had more but it's unverified.
Ali lost to those two confirmed amateur southpaws at 16 and 17, so you can remove 14/15 from your range. There were very few southpaw heavyweights back then in America and Ali managed to pick up at least 25% of his amateur losses against them, including one by KO. This is in my view significant, especially in light of his serious struggles with Mildenberger:
"I know the name Karl Mildenberger might not strike fear in to many men’s hearts but he was a rough one for me to figure.
I fought him in Germany in 1966. He was a southpaw and I had a lot of trouble getting untracked against his style. He could box pretty well and whacked me with a few good punches. I didn’t get him until the 12th round in what everyone figured would be an easy fight." - Ali
Ali was drubbing many of his inferior opponents back then but Mildenberger was one of his best, with a style Ali found difficult to deal with, hence his struggles.
The fact that you claim I'm unreasonable for stating that the Ali who struggled badly against 60's Euro champ southpaw Mildenberger would have virtually zero chance (Ali wasn't a big puncher, so he wouldn't even have the theoretical punchers chance that you could give the likes of Foreman) against 2018 Usyk just goes to highlight the extreme bias that exists in favour of fighters from 50-odd years ago.
Nah 6'3, 215-220 was about the average size of a 1980s heavyweight looking at Holmes record so they're a bit bigger than modern day cruisers and would hurt themselves trying to make 200
I almost said pre Holmes. Damn it.