If Ali retires after Manilla, is he still considered #1 all time?

I think Holmes suffered from more than a little conflict, beating on a helpless man who was once his mentor; he wasn't a cruel man by nature. I think he held back a few rounds out of respect - after the first one or two, he knew Ali had nothing left. His corner finally told him the kindest thing was to get Ali out of there - but he was dealing with a tough SOB who wouldn't go down. If he had one-punch KO power like a Foreman or Shavers, it would have been a different story, but Holmes tended to get other guys out of there by an accumulation of punches rather than a hard, clean shot (some exceptions, of course, but Ali had an ATG chin). If anything, the ref should have stepped in when Ali was helpless against the ropes, screaming with pain from the body punches he was absorbing.

 

Good Post.

 

Muhammad Ali never lost his title by a knockout, prime or post prime. Lennox Lewis, though talented was kayoed twice, by Hassim Rahman and Oliver McCall. I know Lewis redeemed himself in rematches, that kayo is still there head to head with a prime Ali. True Ali was very vulnerable when he returned from his layoff in 1970, but in his prime years as champion, 1964-1967, he would have defeated Hassim Rahman and Oliver McCall, the first time he would have fought them. Too much speed.

 

I still don't think Ali was far from his prime at the age of 28. Maybe he did slow and maybe he did lack stamina. But if he did, that's entirely his own fault for not preparing better. It seems like Ali is getting special treatment here because he's Ali. Lennox lost to Rahman because he didn't prepare effectively and flew into high altitude late. Ali didn't train hard enough for Frazier, same thing. I tend to think he adapted his tactics to nullify Frazier in subsequent fights.

Holy had beaten Tyson x2 and avenged his Moorer defeat going in. Lewis was only 3 years younger himself and it was 1 and 2 in the world.

Tyson had destroyed Golota going in

Comparing the Mercer fight to Norton 3 or Norton 2 for that matter I feel is disingenous. You could at a push give it to Mercer maybe, I think it'd be wrong. But Norton actually beat Ali and got robbed. I tend to agree you can give Ali a pass for gift decisions after Manilla because he's damaged goods, but not before.

He lost to and beat Ruiz though didn't he. Do you also not think the Lewis fights took something out of Holyfield? And Frazier lost to Foreman before Ali and FOTC took a load out of him. So is Frazier past prime? What about Liston who is believed to have lied about his real age? Do those 2 wins also not count?

Lennox would have happily faced Holyfield/Bowe/Moorer/Tyson earlier in his career but they all avoided him. Steward says Futch admitted to him that he avoided the Lewis fight because he thought Bowe would get hurt. So what did Lewis do? He fought all the best contenders like Rudduck, Golota who retired Bowe, Briggs who got the decision over Foreman, Tua who was the most devastating contender at the time.

 

Lennox was clearly fighting in a PED era though where boxers possess more speed because of greater muscularity.

That said I agree Ali outboxes Rahman/McCall - as Lennox also did. However I don't think Lennox ever loses to Frazier or Norton. No way Lennox is losing to Norton as much as I respect Norton's ability he's getting knocked out 10 times out of 10.

 

Ali had been back for only six months after more than 40 months off when he lost to the guy who had cleaned out the division. Lewis was active in his physical prime and got KO'd by someone whose best win was a decision over a washed up version of Ali's former sparring partner...

But all of this is really a waste of time. Even if we for arguments sake say that Lewis's three best wins were as good as Ali's three best wins and his prime/near prime losses were no worse than Ali's (and this altogether is a big stretch, I think) he is still way behind Ali in number of wins over ranked opposition and wins in fights for the undisputed title.

There just is no argument for Lewis here.

 

Yes and there's a good chance he'd still be alive.

 

Liston and Foreman were seen as invincible at the time Ali beat them. That can't be said of Holy and Tyson when Lewis beat them.

Vitaly is a win that has appreciated with time, though.

 

I agree

 

He would be much better, actually, because a lot of those later fights: Shaver, Young, Norton III, Lyle, where controversial. Lyle maintained that it was a quick stoppage for years, and a majority think Norton won #3.

 

It is like when Rocky Marciano knocked out Joe Louis on Oct 21 1951, in round 8, it was said that after the last knockdown, Marciano returned to his corner in tears. He was aked by Al Weill why? Marciano responded with, It's A Tough Thing When You Have To Destroy Your Idol. I feel Larry must have felt the same way, when he was beating on a old Ali, because Larry was Ali's sparring partner, and Ali taught him a lot. Larry has even said that he felt bad taking that fight.

 

Rahman and McCall would have been sparring partner s for the pre suspension Ali.

 

Sure, Ali probably would have been considered the Greatest after the Thrilla. It's not like the Norton, Spinks, or Shavers fights added to the legend. He proved all he needed to imo, even enough to overshadow masters like Louis and Holmes.

 

Larry has said more than once that he cried after the Ali fight.