How would Ali be ranked if he were only judged on his 1st career?

For some, yes. But then there would be those, as there in fact is, that would call his wins over Liston into question or even discard them fully and dimisses the rest of his opposition as poor. And of course the poor showings against Cooper and Jones would always be highlighted, as they are as it is.

 

He might be like the mythical Mike Tyson because he was never whupped. The irony is Mike was whupped in his prime.

 

This is what I suspect happens. Fighters like Sal Sanchez grow in stature forever because they never had a downside on their mountain. Even look at how Ike Ibeabuchi is still talked about.

Ali achieved so much in his return to the ring that it’s hard to imagine him having an even bigger status based only on the strength of 1960-67, but he’d still be overstated if anything.

 

Ike was undefeated before he went to the hoosegow.

 

Would be the biggest what if but with the emergence of Frazier and Foreman most would probably feel they would beat Ali, Foreman was the favourite while Ali was active

 

This content is protected

IF we take this list as the correct parameter, then Mohammad Ali would not be ATG HW Top 5.
The list would be:
1. Louis
2. Holmes
3. Lewis
4. Marciano
5. Foreman
P.S. If Ali only had a "first career" then he wouldn't have beaten Foreman, and it can be counted on that Foreman wouldn't have lost to Young
P.S.S. Ali's "only second career" IMHO is worth more than Ali's only first career, and he would be ATG HW Top 5

 

He would still have nine title defenses, so that compares favorably with champions like Jeffries, Dempsey, Marciao, and Lewis.

I can see no reason why you couldn't have him in your top five, albeit you might just as easily chose to put him outside it.

 

It's my fault (I'm drunk ) that I didn't supplement my post with the source where I got the list from, and now I'm going to correct that immediately; although I'm not in the habit of changing a post that's already been quoted. Now I will

This content is protected

 

Foreman’s legacy skyrockets while Liston’s tumbles.

 

I regard his greatness fully established during his "first career." I believe he was a better fighter then than when he returned. His "second career" merely served to establish his resourcefulness and willingness and ability to absorb punishment in order to win, i. e., to fill in the blanks, if you will. I believe that those qualities were already there in 1967. He just hadn't yet had the need to draw upon them. In any event, I personally was already convinced he was "the Greatest" as a result of his performance in the Terrell fight.

Since I don't follow present-day boxing very closely, I can't speak to how he compares with modern-day heavyweights, that is the generation including and after the reign of Lennox Lewis.

 

Depends on the individual rating him and what matters to them personally. Depending on what you care about you could make the case Ali retiring in 67 would have helped or hurt him. I don't consider Ali the HW GOAT but the majority probably do and they probably wouldn't without the 2nd career so I guess it would hurt him. He'd still have a GOAT case but it would be based on him being the most dominant undefeated HW. Hed have a stronger case than Marciano.

If Ali walked away undefeated he'd have 9 title defenses but his resume was otherwise almost empty. He had 1 1 12 rounder before he got the title against a 50 year old Archie Moore. He struggled to win a 10 rounder against Doug Jones. With 21 title defenses that doesn't matter in the slighest but with 9 and Ali being undefeated the conversation would gravitate to "who did he beat?".

Another thing is without Ali Foreman and Fraziers resume would noticeably improve. I already have Foreman as the GOAT and think Ali got lucky but Ali still found a way to pull the upset. If Ali retired in 67 that would have never happened and Foreman would be considered the greatest by more people. Foreman would have a lot more title defenses then his 5 given he remained elite for another 20 years the sky is really the limit in terms of longevity based accomplishments. Frazier(who also had 9 title defenses)would not regain the belt after losing to Foreman but his career was shortened quite a bit from his wars with Ali and his resume would probably look a lot better without the trilogy.

A content Foreman likely doesn't fight in the 90s and embarass that generation by beating Moorer and almost beating prime Holyfield. Those 2 fights really take the sails out of people who'd otherwise be saying the sport had evolved and precludes Lewis/Holyfield/Tyson etc from being seriously considered for GOAT. If Ali doesn't fight in the 70s the 90s might be considered the golden age of HW. I don't think Ali was better than Foreman but he was the common demominator in the 5 or 6 best HW fights of that decade. If you take those fights away you take a lot of nostaglia for the decade away with it.

Also Rocky never gets made because the Ali v Wepner fight never happens.